This 'reboot' can get 'the boot'

Rating: 2/10 (10 May 2009)

Since I've been a Trekker for more than 33 years of my life, I think I do have the right to offer a negative opinion of this film, as it did not work for me on really any level. I've noticed the praise that has been lavished on the movie, both on Rottentomatoes.com and here in the IMDb.com user comments, but that does not change my perspective in the least.
After giving "Star Trek" a repeat viewing today (Friday was my first time), I can perceive that the talented JJ Abrams has now attempted to dumb down the Trek film franchise to a more conventional space action/adventure level. In essence, the special and unique qualities of Kirk, Spock and the other classic characters have been forfeited so they all can serve a script which is in the same fight/chase/shoot-'em-up popcorn category as "The Matrix," "Spider- Man," and yes, "Mission: Impossible" -- all of which were big money-makers because they delivered mindless entertainment.
Trek, for me, has been at its best when it gives MIND candy -- as opposed (or in addition) to EYE candy. Kirk and Spock could face a moral dilemma or they could tackle a space problem while their subsequent adventure gave us viewers intellectual ideas to chew on, and mind fodder that stayed with us long after we exited the theater/TV room.
In this new movie, we are treated to a storyline that features a vicious Romulan from the future named Nero bent on revenge. So, he travels back in time to try and destroy the planet Vulcan (and later, he targets Earth as well) with his evil, powerful "red matter" weapon that he stole from the Vulcans.
Such a kiddie-oriented, cartoonish plot is -- in my opinion -- more suited to an episode of "Lost in Space" than the thoughtful moral fabric of the Trek universe. And I believe the element of time travel in the movie serves to underscore how hackneyed and clichéd the story really is; we've seen time travel in Trek so many times that I'd be ready to call this movie "Back to the Future, Trek Redux 100."
As James T. Kirk, Chris Pine tries his best to portray an engaging, larger-than-life young captain-in-the-making but instead, Kirk comes off as a cocky, loud-mouthed egomaniac in this movie. The iconic William Shatner made Kirk an icon with equal components of dashing heroism and introspective self-doubt.
Pine's Kirk, however, is a simplistic, cardboard caricature that alternates between irritating moments of smugness (grinning while he eats an apple because he'll pass an academy test -- one in which he cheated to win) and shrill moments when he is battling and yelling at his chief nemesis, Spock. As scripted by Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman, Kirk has none of the charisma or personal conflict that embodies the very soul of our favorite starship captain.
Spock, as embodied by Zachary Quinto, may be even more ineffective. I found Quinto's line reading to be expressionless, flavorless and flat. Granted, Quinto is trying to personify an emotionless Vulcan, but to me, he's little more than a mannequin whose stiffness makes Spock a yawn-inducing presence and a thoroughly unlikable version of the fresh and believable innovation personified for so long by Leonard Nimoy.
To serve this story, Spock is called upon to arbitrarily throw Kirk off the Enterprise in an escape pod (just because Kirk beat up two security guards), make out with his fellow bridge officer Lt. Uhura in the turbolift (seems she had Ponn Farr pills to trigger Vulcan liplock techniques), as well as yell, scream and use violence while responding to Kirk's attempts to make him angry. Such moments further suggest to me that Orci, Kurtzman and Abrams mostly cared about "packaging" Star Trek (AND Spock) into an action yarn that suited their version of a money-making machine that would satisfy non-Trekkers ... NOT the people who have adored Spock for nearly 40 years (as I have).
This conventionalization of the Star Trek universe is also evidenced in the movie's fight scenes, which, to me, are headache-inducing and edited to be nothing more than a fast- moving blur. When Kirk and Sulu parachute down to take out an enemy "drill" on the planet Vulcan, a couple of Romulan thugs come out to welcome them and give us a few sword- fighting/fist-cuffing mighty blows for our heroic Kirk/Sulu action tandem. Unfortunately, the sequence, for me, showed a chaotic mix of jumbled camera angles, all of which negated the sense of personal combat intended for the audience.
Nimoy himself may be symbolic of this entire enterprise (pun intended). At the prunish age of 77 (his age during principal photography), Nimoy returns as Spock once again in a supporting capacity. Only this time, Nimoy's too-old Spock looks (and sounds) more like the personification of walking death with defective Vulcan dentures and practically shows how the filmmakers are trying to tell us what the "old" Star Trek represents in modern times: it's dying, it's outmoded and it's time to reboot it with a NEW approach and NEW ideas.
Abrams, Orci and Kurtzman do just that with high production values, convincing optical effects, flashy alien sets as well as the hunkier versions of our familiar Trek heroes. But the movie cannot win in the areas of character, intelligence and heart, the items which mean so much to me. This movie may break some box office records and may lead to a couple of sequels, but it cannot convince me that Trek — REAL Trek — is dead, gone and soon to be forgotten.
Thanks, guys, for killing Star Trek under the guise of "reviving" Star Trek.