(I was going to post this in another thread, and then accidently lost the whole darn thing just before it saved. Feeling maybe that was a sign, I decided to make a thread.)
As a complete and total newb, I apologize in advance for all the things I don't know about Star Trek and probably never will. I'm posting to offer the perspective of the Completely New Fan, a perspective -- from what I've read -- many of you have heard from your coworkers and children and friends, but I'm wondering if there are others like me reading here in the last month. To start off, I want to make it clear I'm probably not even a casual Trek fan. I have watched a few of the movies, and I know enough to know who most of the main characters are in most of the series, but I would name the franchise at perhaps 12th on my list of scifi franchises. Not that I am derisive of the franchise, but up to this point it's never hit me in the right way at the right time. As for this movie, I had no interest in seeing it, whatsoever. It wasn't just that it was Star Trek. I've never liked anything made by J.J. Abrams, I find Orci/Kurtzman scripts to be ridiculous and annoying, and the previews looked far too Michael Bay for my tastes. It was a small miracle I ended up in the theater on opening weekend, popcorn and husband by my side, ready to be entertained.
Despite what my presence on this board might imply, I wasn't immediately enthralled with this movie. Sure, I enjoyed it. It was pretty and amusing, and lots of large things went "boom." There was something about it I really enjoyed, but I must admit I rolled my eyes when it was revealed that Chekov was yet ANOTHER young genius (Baby Einstein Count at 4), and rolled them again when Scotty added one more to the count. And the water pipe shenanigans got a well earned, "this episode was badly written" from my spouse; answered with "whoever wrote this episode should die." By the time Kirk got official command of the Enterprise, we could only giggle.
But then, something happened. The film percolated for a few days, and I went back and watched it again. And again. (And maybe a fourth time.) And I realized what really sold the movie for me. The plot is, of course, really pretty silly. But the characters are just really well done. They're well casted and the direction seems pretty impeccable (I don't think many dispute that anymore). Also -- and I kind of hate to say this about an Orci/Kurtzman script -- I think they're fairly well written.
I found myself invested in their struggles, believing them to be idiosyncratic unique individuals -- being both admirable and sometimes unlikable, but always accessible to the audience. That's harder to achieve than it sounds, and I suspect it's the reason for the 95% on Rotten Tomatoes. Having read here for a few weeks, I know there's a good chance someone will mock that assertion with an oversimplification ("driving fast and starting fights over your daddy issues.... ooooh, such original character development"), but I believe it's true, though much is not explicit. And, although I did enjoy some of the explicit character exploration (like the post Kobashi Maru debate and Pike's first discussion with Kirk), I also enjoyed what's left undiscussed, like Spock's out-of-character jettisoning of Kirk. In that instance, as we find out later in Spock's discussion with his father, we find that Spock was finding himself consumed with the uncomfortable emotional need for vengeance, and yet here he doesn't show it, and instead takes a fairly unreasonable stance against the man proposing the course of action Spock himself must have been tempted to take. That I find interesting.
So, yeah, Nero was underdeveloped, the plot had holes, and the coincidences were as numerous as the light flares. I can understand why someone who finds perfect plot cohesion and exploration of intellectual/scientific ideals to be imperative for a good story would hate it. But I love this movie because I cared about Kirk and Spock (and Uhura and Pike ...) and I found their character growth interesting. Or maybe, I was more concerned with the nature of these two men than I am about the nature of man in general.
As a complete and total newb, I apologize in advance for all the things I don't know about Star Trek and probably never will. I'm posting to offer the perspective of the Completely New Fan, a perspective -- from what I've read -- many of you have heard from your coworkers and children and friends, but I'm wondering if there are others like me reading here in the last month. To start off, I want to make it clear I'm probably not even a casual Trek fan. I have watched a few of the movies, and I know enough to know who most of the main characters are in most of the series, but I would name the franchise at perhaps 12th on my list of scifi franchises. Not that I am derisive of the franchise, but up to this point it's never hit me in the right way at the right time. As for this movie, I had no interest in seeing it, whatsoever. It wasn't just that it was Star Trek. I've never liked anything made by J.J. Abrams, I find Orci/Kurtzman scripts to be ridiculous and annoying, and the previews looked far too Michael Bay for my tastes. It was a small miracle I ended up in the theater on opening weekend, popcorn and husband by my side, ready to be entertained.
Despite what my presence on this board might imply, I wasn't immediately enthralled with this movie. Sure, I enjoyed it. It was pretty and amusing, and lots of large things went "boom." There was something about it I really enjoyed, but I must admit I rolled my eyes when it was revealed that Chekov was yet ANOTHER young genius (Baby Einstein Count at 4), and rolled them again when Scotty added one more to the count. And the water pipe shenanigans got a well earned, "this episode was badly written" from my spouse; answered with "whoever wrote this episode should die." By the time Kirk got official command of the Enterprise, we could only giggle.
But then, something happened. The film percolated for a few days, and I went back and watched it again. And again. (And maybe a fourth time.) And I realized what really sold the movie for me. The plot is, of course, really pretty silly. But the characters are just really well done. They're well casted and the direction seems pretty impeccable (I don't think many dispute that anymore). Also -- and I kind of hate to say this about an Orci/Kurtzman script -- I think they're fairly well written.
I found myself invested in their struggles, believing them to be idiosyncratic unique individuals -- being both admirable and sometimes unlikable, but always accessible to the audience. That's harder to achieve than it sounds, and I suspect it's the reason for the 95% on Rotten Tomatoes. Having read here for a few weeks, I know there's a good chance someone will mock that assertion with an oversimplification ("driving fast and starting fights over your daddy issues.... ooooh, such original character development"), but I believe it's true, though much is not explicit. And, although I did enjoy some of the explicit character exploration (like the post Kobashi Maru debate and Pike's first discussion with Kirk), I also enjoyed what's left undiscussed, like Spock's out-of-character jettisoning of Kirk. In that instance, as we find out later in Spock's discussion with his father, we find that Spock was finding himself consumed with the uncomfortable emotional need for vengeance, and yet here he doesn't show it, and instead takes a fairly unreasonable stance against the man proposing the course of action Spock himself must have been tempted to take. That I find interesting.
So, yeah, Nero was underdeveloped, the plot had holes, and the coincidences were as numerous as the light flares. I can understand why someone who finds perfect plot cohesion and exploration of intellectual/scientific ideals to be imperative for a good story would hate it. But I love this movie because I cared about Kirk and Spock (and Uhura and Pike ...) and I found their character growth interesting. Or maybe, I was more concerned with the nature of these two men than I am about the nature of man in general.
Last edited:
