This is a spoiler free posting. It's about generalities, and impressions. Safely read away, even if you haven't seen the movie yet. If you are one of those fans who think canon is gospel and changing Star Trek in any way is heresy. Just stop reading here, because the rest of what I have to say is just going to piss you off.
I love Star Trek. Yes, I'm one of those people who know Spock's blood type (T - negative) and Kirk's beverage of choice (Saurian Brandy), though I don't own a Starfleet uniform and have never worn pointed ears in public (college level theatrical makeup classes don't count). One of the things that has added to the richness of Star Trek over the years has been its efforts to be self consistent. Fans have loving embraced this consistency dubbed "canon". That which occurs on screen is canon, they which does not, isn't. Between all the series and movies, Star Trek's incarnations have had a collective 30 years on the air and 10 movies prior to this one, over a span of 45 years. That provides a very rich tapestry. But like a sailing ship throwing a sail into the water to use as a sea anchor, that rich tapestry of canon has become a boat anchor of uncompromising weight, hamstringing storytelling (sorry about the mixed metaphor). Every successful long term franchise has periodically had to "reset" itself, to keep it fresh, relevant and its storytelling flexible. Superman, Batman, Dr. Who, James Bond... all these have done it, some of them multiple times. Star Trek was long overdue.
I've known they needed to start over with Star Trek for at least 10 years. I've been a strong proponent for a reset. Had it been left to me, I would have gone back to zero and completely ignored canon. Non-fan J.J. Abrams, working with big fan writers Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman did something far more clever. They acknowledged the existing canon, then side-stepped it by inverting a common plot device for which fans have criticized the series'. Interestingly enough, they accomplished this while canonizing previously non-canonical, but commonly fan accepted details (Uhura's first name, McCoy's reason for joining Starfleet).
Most importantly to fans, is it Star Trek? Meaning, does it have the right tone and feeling? Does it respect the material, the ideals and the characters of the original series? If you can accept that canon has become a boat anchor and that 1960's ideas of what 23rd century technology will look like are dated -- a very much relieved yes! Star Trek has always at it's heart been about two things, about the relationship of its lead characters (the whole is greater than the sum of its parts); and the morality play, teaching a lesson couched as entertainment. This movie is more about the former, showing the foundation of the relationships we grew to love over three seasons and 6 movies. Largely strangers at the start of the film, this is a tight knit crew that at the end have every reason to deeply trust each other. The morality play aspect of classic Star Trek is given a bit of short shift in this initial outing of the franchise reboot. But faint echoes of it are still there, when Kirk is faced with a moral dilemma and chooses to take the high road. In total, the new caretakers of Star Trek have got the words and they've got the music. The tempo has changed, and the lyrics have been updated, but the music is still familiar, comfortable and loved. Equally important, is it any good? A resounding yes! This reset is exciting, fun and fast. I'm looking forward to the next adventure, much more so than I have the last few Trek outings.
Sidebar: This Enterprise feels much larger than it's predecessor. And while not canonical (there's that word again), a VR experience on the official movie website puts this Enterprise's length at 2500 feet with a crew complement of 1100, versus the original's (also non-canoncial) length of 948 feet with a canonical crew complement of 430. To put things in perspective, the contemporary nuclear aircraft carrier U.S.S. Enterprise has a length of 1123 feet and a crew complement of 3500.
The casting and performances in this movie will be endlessly discussed all over the web. Suffice to say that I'm satisfied with the results. The characters are recognizable, the portrayals respectful, but not mimicry. All the beloved are given their moments. Every one of them is shown to be an exceptional individual that belongs on the bridge of the Federation's flagship. Perhaps most surprisingly of all, faced with appearing on screen with Leonard Nimoy, Zachary Quinto acquits himself quite well. The emotions are pitch perfect.
The movie is not without it's faults - mostly in the art direction. The bright bridge set results in frequent and annoying lens flares. The engine room... well... suffice to say I expect to see a new set in the next outing. Plot-wise a couple of promotions occur in the movie with too convenient ease. The score is largely undistinguished as music to sit and listen to, but serves the action well. The costumes are all beautifully designed, but the shipboard uniforms are largely ill-fitting (though I love the subtle pattern of Starfleet logos).
Most importantly, it's a fun movie, and at the end, our familiar family of characters has been established. And the galaxy is filled with endless possibilities. If this crew has the courage and endurance to give us the 25 years of entertainment the original crew gave us (1966 - 1991), sign me up for the ride.
Comments [0]