The Original is Still the Best!

Rating: 6/10 (30 May 2009)

Firstly, the look of Star Trek is every bit as awesome (and more) as I could have expected – both the interior and exterior scenes are breathtaking. The look of the film helps build the bridge between our time and the 23rd Century deep rooting some fundamental likenesses, making the viewer feel more at home (which is a clever tool). Likewise is the re-vamped world of Star Fleet; the ships, the uniforms – all scenes showing suitable respect for the original without looking dated and merging perfectly with new and shinier glimpse of the future. The Enterprise is given a massive boost in scale, showing enormous shuttle bays, an engine room the size of a football pitch and bustling corridors of furious activity. Even the bad guys, namely the Romulans have had a re-branding and now look every bit the menacing, xenophobic warrior race they were always made out to be. This is before we get into the special effects and CGI which is absolutely flawless in every respect.
Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto are great respectively as Kirk and Spock, bringing new and edgy depth to probably the most well known science fiction characters ever created and really getting the best out of them, which is no easy task. The on-screen chemistry between the two works really well as you get a real feel for the characters deep bond and friendship for each other which was so well documented in Treks gone by. A favourable nod also to Karl Urban who plays Dr. Bones McCoy, taking real inspiration from DeForest Kelly's characterisation and manages to capture the essence of the character without running the risk of mimicking too much or making the performance cheesy. Also impressive is John Cho as Sulu who gets a real opportunity to shine and gets in on some of the action sequences, again bringing a freshness to the to the role and creating his own interpretation of the Enterprise helmsman without relaying too much on the original character. Zoe Saldana who plays the new Ohura brings some sex appeal and sass to the bridge of the Enterprise, but has little to do except be intergalactic eye candy. Then onto Anton Yelchin as Chekov who despite a lively performance is turned into little more than an annoying parody of the original ('Kiptin, therrre isa wessel apprrroaccchhhing' – you get the idea!) . the real losers in all of this are Simon Pegg and Eric Bana; Pegg gets relegated to the final third of the movie as Chief Engineer Scotty and despite being funny and charming never quite gets the opportunity to cement himself as more than just the comedy relief and Bana's performance is not going to get him into the history books as Trek's most fearsome baddie.
So that was the style, unfortunately the substance leaves a lot to be desired. The plot is a flimsy and lazy recycling of stuff we have seen umpteen times before, the story to is clumsy, putting all of it's faith into a clunky time travel scenario which has some major, major holes (black holes if you will!) which undermines the whole thing enough to leave it constantly playing catch up with itself. To the more experienced Trekkie and movie goer this comes across as nothing more than a blatant attempt to re-write the Trek universe and make it more malleable for future outings, without the writers having to be too beholding to what has come before. You can see the Vulcan logic in that, but sadly it comes across as little more than a big intergalactic middle finger and slap in the face to those that hold the trek universe dear to them.
It showed me what I have suspected for a very long time; JJ Abrams is a brilliant visionary, however he lacks the story telling skills necessary to compliment his brilliant ideas. He has gone on record and stated that he was not a fan of Star Trek before he became involved in the film and if I am absolutely honest, that shows in abundance. Star Trek is a franchise that has its own universe and 40 years of history to draw on, but like every universe it has its own rules and heritage. This film does not have that feel and as a result of this Abrams and the writers Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman have dropped a clanger, making it feel just a little bit cheap and shallow, lacking the depth and true exploration of the human condition which classic Trek is famous for. If the re-vamped Star Trek is going to be a long running franchise, I would advise all involved to take a leaf out of the books of Bryan Singer's 'X-Men', Christopher Nolan's 'The Dark Knight' and Zach Snyder's brilliant 'Watchmen', which have all been treated with shameless love and affection which shines through.
Despite the poor plot and story and that it runs dangerously close to cheesy in places, the film just about makes amends by keeping up an energetic pace, mixing the action and slower scenes well; there are also some very clever references back to the original series and movies, which is a bit of a treat for the Trekkies to pick out. As I mentioned before, there is just about enough here to like despite its very big flaws and if they can iron out the bugs I am keen to see what the inevitable sequels will hold. For the new generation of Trek newbie's (who I'm sure won't give a damn about my bleating on about plot, storyline and Trek heritage) I have no doubt that Star Trek will be the blockbuster of the year and encourage just as loyal a following as the originals. For me though its shortcomings sadly took enough gloss off for me to think it as nothing more than just above average.