Review. Star Trek (2009) (Spoilerish)

You know if you go to this with an open mind, and can resist scrutinizing the movie against the established franchise (which isn’t a problem if you aren’t a Trek fan, so you may be in a better position than a Trekky to judge this film.) then this is actually a really enjoyable action romp. (Or is that trek?) This is a new film from a long and established franchise that has spanned decades, was on life support for about most of Voyagers run, and eventually flat lined when Enterprises low ratings (composed of three slightly nerdy single men, an ash tray and a dog) meant Paramount wasn't going to just sign cheques away no questions asked; to anything with "Trek" in the title. It's been rebooted and repackaged for a contemporary audience, in the mold of a FX laden adventure film. It doesn’t really ponder the human condition any more than it really has too (and it doesn’t have much of that either) which could be problematic to those who may have (justified) presuppositions as to what defines the franchise. I think the scene when Spock and Kirk debate the fate of the lead baddy at the end, will be most problematic to fan consensus (after all Trek has had many different writers) on what was Gene Roddenberry's (the creator of Star Trek) take on his shows philosophy and on its greater take on the human condition.

One thing it does do well and takes from the original series, which is chosen as it is the most recognisable part of the franchise to people new to Trek, is to recreate the great characterisation of the original crew. Particular stand outs are Chris Pine as Kirk. He fortunately doesn't try to impersonate Bill Shatner in the role, but delivers us a cocky but still likable lead. Kirk in the original was a seat of the pants guy (and doesn't believe in the no win scenario like this Kirk) but this was tempered by his experience and command role, this Kirk through the events in the movie has had differing circumstances, where he has had the lifestyle of a drifter and a rebel who has been through the school of hard knocks, and perhaps because of the tough knocks he's had we sympathise with him despite him being cocky. So he doesn't come across as a swaggering, priggish cock. Zachery Quinto is also excellent as Spock, he almost feels and looks like a young Leonard Nimoy, one of the best bits of casting I've seen. He also plays the role with subtle differences to the original. This one has more trouble bottling up his human half, (and this dichotomy of his half human status is most of the human element of the show.) and tolerating a certain young future captain. His "up yours" to the Vulcan council is a great scene (especially in regard to his mum. Freud would have a field day), and this leads too some harrowing scenes between the two on the bridge. The other bridge crew each get at least a look in (unlike much of the original) Karl Urban is superb as Dr. "Bones" Mccoy, as the cynical but thoroughly decent ships medic, Zoe Saldana adds a zesty bite to her role as Uhura, and doesn't come across as just background eye candy. Simon Pegg is comedy relief as chief engineer Scotty. The scenes of Kirks birth are played well and give the film an emotional and poignant punch at the beginning of the film to drive the rest of it along. We care about these people, and what's happening to them.
The film has been designed to appeal to a wide audience not just the trekky niche. This will inevitably mean it will appeal more to the non trekky elements, than the fan base, so someone who has never seen the show can enjoy it purely on its own merits, rather than needing a framework in the context of the franchise, which is more the case for the Next Generation films. In fact you could probably drop all the Trek references , and change the names of the ship and the planets /aliens and it would still work as a film. This means that it has quite a different feel to the older films. It's not a bad feel, but for me it was most noticeable in the scenery and visuals of the films. The warehouse shots of the Enterprise engine room and the abandoned base feel grungey and industrial, which don't seem to fit into the shiny Star Trek universe to well. But besides this, for the fans, there are subtle nods to all the shows in there. The people writing it obviously have a deep respect for the 60's show, and the action scenes are as tightly paced and exciting as the best of the episodes were.

The film has only two really majorish flaws with it. The first is that the execution of the plot can sometimes be a bit dodgy, with obvious holes in logic. Apparently federation planets don't have any surface defences whatsoever to fight back against a baddy Romulan ship that just sits there. Why is this mining ship of all things like the most powerful and biggest thing ever built? Where are these guys mining at? Mordor? All sci-fi mining ships are always grotty and rusty (in space??!!) The matter that makes black holes (literally a hole. So the laws of physics must have been rebooted as well.) I mean come on! But if you take all this with a pinch of salt you should be OK. The second, and more serious flaw is the main baddy Nero. He just never gets the characterisation he deserves as main villain. Eric Bana is a great actor, he was chilling, idiosyncratic and charming as the lead in Chopper but his talents are wasted here, and we get none of these on display. Just him standing about in the gloom glaring in the middle distance at everything and everyone, and I never felt we knew him or what motivated him. The other Romulans are really only there to be baddys to get shot.

But if you take it for what it is, a well paced action film with a bit of pathos here and there. It's a well spent two hours. Whether the more dedicated trekkie can make the leap, or whether it is the right direction for trek films in general (I thought a sort of high concept, ideas driven reboot like the new Batman films would have been nice) is another matter entirely.