Star Trek 09 Ten Year Anniversary. Does It Hold Up?

Another thing I liked was they made Uhura into a really cool character. As much as I like the original and respect her importance in terms of civil rights, she really didn't get to do much. Even compared to the other supporting characters on the show. At first I thought it was weird that Spock and Uhura was a couple since they didn't really explore that idea on the old show but then I noticed they were going to have some fun with the alternate timeline stuff and really started to like it along with the other stuff like Vulcan being destroyed and Kirk's dad being killed and stuff like that.

Jason

 

I find the 2009 film the weakest of the three, but still rank it above most Trek films. The cadet-to-captain thing is ludicrous and should have been done another way, but put that aside and it’s an entertaining ride. The opening scene is as good as anything Trek has done.

 

I think we will sort of see it again when Tarantino does his Trek movie. At least I think we will see Pine back.


Jason

 

I think it holds up perfectly. It took a franchise that had gone dreadfully stale and wimpey and re-invigorated into something fun, bold and energetic.

Did they sacrifice some straightline logic in the story? You bet they did. Do I care at all? You bet I don't!

 

STID's only weakness is using Khan as a crutch. A few minor tweaks, let John Harrisman be his own person and not a pseudonym for Khan - though in a way the altered back story to Khan wasn't half bad, all things considered, get rid of the magic tribble and magic blood on that magic bus, and voila - a rock solid entry. "Beyond" is even better... but that's another argument.

Without ST09 there would be no STID or Beyond. It has pros and cons, and it did re-launch the franchise into delivering sequels that had more story meat compared to the initial outing. That cannot be denied, ditto for the casting. And to me should still be celebrated for what it did accomplish.

 

Absolutely holds up.


The J.J. films trilogy I rate this way:

1. Into Darkness
2. 2009
3. Beyond

 

That is still a shit hot trailer. This film really hasn't dated at all.

 

I'll agree the magic blood was pretty dumb, but I loved the fact Section 31 was so hard up for a war with the Klingons that they woke Khan up to help design their ships and help with tactics, since the 23rd century is more peaceful (almost has a Demolition Man vibe to it ) The John Harrison pseudonym makes sense, though. Starfleet can't just have Lt. Khan Noonien Singh heading up a secret warship project. That would probably raise some eyebrows

 

What's funny is the "magic blood" is probably the least fantastical element in the movie - using stem cell transplants scientists have already been able to reverse radiation damage in rodents. Just go with the idea that Kirk was cryogenically frozen before his brain could die and the transfusion delivered, which is essentially what Bones implied with the "barely dead" comment.

 

Yes, exactly. The sheer ridiculousness that a blood based therapy is somehow "magic" drives me nuts when I can do a brief search for blood therapies, blood doping by athletes, and the use of stem cells which are seeing more and more application as technology develops.

Transporters? Believable? Light speed? Believable. Making a perfect copy of a human in to an android? Completely acceptable. Psychic powers in humans? Not a problem. Traveling to a dimension where magic is real? A-OK. Omnipotent beings? Not even a raised eyebrow.

But, something that could actually be developed by science? Toss it out!!!

 

My ranking exactly.

 

Does a 2009 movie hold up in 2019? What a question.

Kor

 

It's a lot of fun which was exactly what it was supposed to be. I've re-watched it several times and will do so again.

 

Stumbled upon a podcast recorded by a couple of fans. I found it quite interesting, at the ten-year mark, as they are willing to do a bit of a retrospective in terms of themes in the 09 film that carry forward into the rest. It's over an hour long and covers an interesting range of topics, including one host who finds Nero as engaging of a villain as I do.

I definitely agree with all of their points, but it is a pretty enjoyable back and forth between two Star Trek fans, who can appreciate both the broad appeal of the 09 film, as well as the more Star Trek aspects.

Link is here.

 

It still holds up just like the classic movies. I still watch it at least once a month

 

They'll probably return to it when the characters are middle age and most of us have moved to other things. It'll end up like star wars.

 

An old Zachary Quinto Spock travelling back in time to reboot the timeline again would be kind of awesome, really.

 

I was very skeptical when it came out. I went to it twice opening weekend and on second viewing thought it was the best way Star Trek could be brought back from almost total oblivion. Much of the story in ST09 is ridiculous but seeing how they introduced each of the characters more than made up for it. Especially Bones. The crowd in the theater cheering when Nimoy first appears has never happened in any other ST film I've seen live. The only other Star Trek movie I rewatch as much as this one is Star Trek 2. 10 years went fast!

 

You nailed it!!! The movie strive to walk that fine line not to offend what was done in the past and made a fine adventure where I didn't need to see anything more from TNG timeline. What the movie did for me was appreciate the unique world created in 1966 where Star Trek could look beautiful and thrilling; Into Darkness visuals was even better and made it sexy and youthful once more. I feel Star Trek is the example of what Trek should look like visually and creating or expanding a universe where one is not rewriting whatever was done in the past but embracing how cool this world is. Star Trek did just that.