Movie Review: Star Trek (2009)

Star Trek (2009)

I would classify my relationship with Star Trek as casual. I recently watched some of the trailers of the old Star Trek films, and I was instantly filled with fond memories. I’ve seen most of them: I, IV-VI, and, after they couldn’t be bothered to number them, First Contact, and Nemesis. I never liked the first one, and First Contact is by far the best, but there is something uncannily fun about all the old ones. I even really like part V, widely considered the worst of the series, which opens with Kirk free-climbing El Capitan, and ending with a search for God (seeing as how they had already searched for, and found, Spock). So I’m not a Trekkie, or even a devoted fan, but I am familiar enough with the mythos to understand the significance and history of the relationships and characters that are on display in J.J. Abrams reboot of the Star Trek franchise.

I had very low expectations coming into this movie. For whatever reason, the way the trailer was edited together gave off all the signs of a bad movie: tripe dialogue, overacting, and senseless but pretty action scenes. Well I was fooled. There is actually a good movie behind it all. Not great, but good. The story is compelling and well-orchestrated. The acting is very strong. And the action is fast-paced, tightly choreographed, and unexpectedly inspired. We could lose the scene where Kirk drives an antique Corvette off of a cliff and not suffer any narrative deficiency, but all that really matters is that I had a really great time at the movies this week.

And now for a brief intermission:

3 Things Star Trek Taught Me About Black Holes (Which I’m Pretty Sure Are Wrong)

1. Black holes can, in fact, emit sound.
2. Black holes are visible to the naked eye. I was always told this was impossible because black holes consume everything, including light, making them invisible. I’m going to trust the spacemen from the future and guess that the present-day rocket scientists are wrong.
3. Black holes are somehow able to simultaneously destroy an entire planet, while providing a wormhole through which numerous spacecrafts can travel unharmed. Who knew?

One of the big questions everyone asks is how the new actors fill the familiar roles. The good news is that everybody is perfectly suited to their parts, and the performances are far better than I was expecting, especially Chris Pine, as James Kirk, who failed to sell me in the film’s trailer. He earned his keep. Kirk had character issues that left me unimpressed, but Pine's grasp of the role was very satisfying. Zachary Quinto, as Spock, was enjoyable, as was Carl Urban’s Dr. Leonard McCoy: my favorite character from the old movies. No one will ever own the role more than DeForest Kelley, but I was very pleased that a man best known for fighting Vikings took such care to get his role just right. No one is better suited to inheret the role of Scotty than Simon Peg; the man is hysterical in every scene. One of the great discoveries of the film is Anton Yelchin, playing Chekov. The kid is very funny, laying on a thick Russian accent, and I look forward to seeing more of him in future installments. Finally, I always love Bruce Greenwood’s work, and it was nice to see him here in a big role.

The characters all handle the dialogue really well. The film finds the perfect level of camp, enabling us to enjoy even the silliest moments. This is good. The only way to make a Star Trek movie well is to unabashedly embrace the camp that will forever be a part of the franchise’s legacy.

There are a handful of problems I had with the movie, although I refuse to complain about the science because where’s the fun in that. Many characters fall into one position or another unnaturally. Scotty, after being found abandoned on an ice planet, takes over the Enterprise’s engineering so suddenly and unquestioningly (we only just met the guy) that it leaves you befuddled, like a step was missing somewhere. He must be replacing somebody, but we never get to meet this other mystery officer. Kirk seems to always have horseshoes up his ass; no matter how offensive he becomes to everyone around him, he somehow still manages to find himself in positions of authority. This is also the major flaw of the film. For 90% of the movie’s running time, Kirk is completely unlikeable. He is offensively smug, he looks down on everybody, showing no respect to authority or his friends and shipmates, and over the course of the movie he never really earns enough respect from the crew, or us the audience, to justify this character hitch. We are left with a protagonist that we are supposed to care about, and we do simply because he is Kirk, but it never feels wholly authentic.

Abrams made a smart move, rewriting the rules using a trick he picked up from Lost: time travel. This way he can do whatever the hell he likes to the Star Trek mythos of his film and not commit sacrilege against the past films or offend the diehard fans, because that other universe remains untouched. Nothing that has already happened can be modified. Is it brilliant or a cheap attempt at self-protection?

The final verdict: don’t bother with Wolverine, this is the real start of the summer season. Abrams’ Star Trek is far from a masterpiece, but it is thrilling, action-packed entertainment that everone will enjoy, filled to the brim with all the nostalgia a fan could hope for, and free of franchise or character desecration. The next question is: how many sequels before they save the humpback whales or sing campfire songs in Yosemite National Park? My guess is four.

Professor P