One of the best reviews I have seen so far

[Ptrope]

I believe that character interaction is in fact what makes a film a "Star Trek Film".

You may say it wasn't "smart enough", but two of the best-liked Star Trek films (TWoK and FC) weren't any smarter. Those were also full of plot holes, questionable science, not-too-original plotlines, and a little bad dialog -- but they were "fun" films that allowed the characters to interact in enjoyable ways, just like this film.

I'd say that Firefly or nuBSG are far more about the interactions of the characters than Star Trek, in any of its incarnations. Especially considering that TOS was, essentially, an anthology series with the unique twist that it retained its setting and main characters from week to week - there was very little continuity or growth among the characters (none of the latter, really, and very, very little of the former), so the character interaction that was there was secondary to the plot of the week.

"Smart" is not just the plot, but the characters, as well, which is where I think the film really failed - almost none of the characters were believable, either in their motivations, their interactions or their accomplishments. TWoK and FC had much more plausible characters, and it wasn't simply because we knew who they were going in - they were mostly consistent from beginning to end with their projected personalities and with their circumstances. OTOH, in JJTrek, Kirk's circumstances were laughably implausible, which also reflected unfortunately upon Pike. McCoy was a cartoon of De Kelley's performances but had none of his character. The 'romance' between Spock and Uhura came from nowhere and only seemed to exist to foil Kirk's advances, as well as to show that, for all his discipline as both a Vulcan and a Starfleet officer, Spock had no qualms whatsoever about allowing his personal life to interfere with the performance of his duty - you don't need to be Vulcan to know it's probably a bad idea for your fellow officer/girlfriend to come kiss you goodbye while you're on the transporter pad, and in front of the captain, to boot, even if he is freshly- (and implausibly-) minted.

Simply put, I couldn't buy these characters in their circumstances, not because they weren't the ones I'd lived with for decades, but because they all seemed simultaneously incompetent/hyper-competent and impossibly prone to luck as the better alternative to skill. This movie had more to do with magic than with science, in the end. And I love a good Harry Potter movie - I buy all the DVDs and watch them several times; I just don't expect to see Dumbledore Pike and Nero Voldemort, James T. Potter and Hermione Uhura in a Star Trek film.

 

[CaptainJon]

I've read better reviews then that, and I refer to ones that I disagree with. I loved the movie, but I read almost one hundred reviews, including negative, and while I disagreed with the negative reviews, at least those were well articulated and coherent. This felt like a mess!

 

[Tentacle]

*tsk tsk* his review is based on the new republic
at the risk of sounding elitist I doubt most people who liked the movie would actually read TNR and would enjoy a shallow movie.
And I would have to admit I would enjoy it too, wasnt for the fact that its named Star Trek. I expect something less shallow for a movie that bears the name.

But over all it is a good review, even thought it is a bit too sarcastic.
But he did defend it in this way

I know I've sounded relentlessly negative...but considering I'm outnumbered 96-1 in my opinion, I felt justified in emphasizing why I felt the way I do.

 

[Feofilakt]

*tsk tsk* his review is based on the new republic
at the risk of sounding elitist I doubt most people who liked the movie would actually read TNR and would enjoy a shallow movie.
And I would have to admit I would enjoy it too, wasnt for the fact that its named Star Trek. I expect something less shallow for a movie that bears the name.

But over all it is a good review, even thought it is a bit too sarcastic.
But he did defend it in this way

I know I've sounded relentlessly negative...but considering I'm outnumbered 96-1 in my opinion, I felt justified in emphasizing why I felt the way I do.

Oh, right. I always take the readership of TNR for granted

 

[Tentacle]

well havent you heard, the whole point of the reboot was for people that cant understand TNR to understand Star Trek

That is why this review will go over most people's heads.

 

[Feofilakt]

well havent you heard, the whole point of the reboot was for people that cant understand TNR to understand Star Trek

That is why this review will go over most people's heads.

Point taken, what was I thinking?

I do notice a different kind of fan in the STXI advocates, one very much distinct from how I remember most trekkies in the past.

Discussions at stardestroyer.net come to mind. Urgings for a more warfare focused and action packed Star Trek proposed by the minions of Star Wars and Warhammer 40k, with trekkies defending the material with the claims that Trek wasn't about that. I guess they were wrong.

 

[Thrawn]

Yep. Star Trek never deals with warfare and action. Never ever ever.

(Balance Of Terror, Doomsday Machine, Best of Both Worlds, TWOK, TUC, DS9 6-7, ENT 3-4)

Oh wait never mind.

 

[Feofilakt]

Yep. Star Trek never deals with warfare and action. Never ever ever.

(Balance Of Terror, Doomsday Machine, Best of Both Worlds, TWOK, TUC, DS9 6-7, ENT 3-4)

Oh wait never mind.

It is never the totality, back into the cave you goblin.

 

[Thrawn]

Yep. Star Trek never deals with warfare and action. Never ever ever.

(Balance Of Terror, Doomsday Machine, Best of Both Worlds, TWOK, TUC, DS9 6-7, ENT 3-4)

Oh wait never mind.

It is never the totality, back into the cave you goblin.

I mean, I suppose we'll see with the next movie, but it certainly at least looks like Orci and Kurtzman are considering something a bit more towards your general preferences next film. In the recent Q&A on TrekMovie Orci responded that this one was just about getting everyone in place, and he was all for thorny moral dilemmas next time around.

Or, in other words, it's not the totality this time either, we just don't have the rest of it yet.

 

[Tentacle]

Yep. Star Trek never deals with warfare and action. Never ever ever.

(Balance Of Terror, Doomsday Machine, Best of Both Worlds, TWOK, TUC, DS9 6-7, ENT 3-4)

Oh wait never mind.

It is never the totality, back into the cave you goblin.

I mean, I suppose we'll see with the next movie, but it certainly at least looks like Orci and Kurtzman are considering something a bit more towards your general preferences next film. In the recent Q&A on TrekMovie Orci responded that this one was just about getting everyone in place, and he was all for thorny moral dilemmas next time around.

Or, in other words, it's not the totality this time either, we just don't have the rest of it yet.

That's what we all hope, but why would you change a wining money making formula? If this film is any indication, they will be very hard pressed to change anything.

 

[Thrawn]

Well, as an example, you can look at the Batman franchise. With all its style and grounding, ultimately the first movie's villain had a pretty silly plan (poison everyone!) and the only real moral difficulty came from his prior mentor status. The Dark Knight took that setup and made a much more complicated and darker story out of it, raising tons of thorny moral questions.

A better example, even, is Empire Strikes Back, which did exactly the same thing.

 

[Tentacle]

the dark night came about because, the previous version of adding a cock piece to batman's suit bombed big time. hence less money, thus the change.

 

[Thrawn]

the dark night came about because, the previous version of adding a cock piece to batman's suit bombed big time. hence less money, thus the change.

I know, but what I mean is, based on Batman Begins, there wasn't any particular need to go quite that dark or complicated. It was a MUCH edgier and riskier film.

 

[Tentacle]

well thats the thing batman begins made a profit, and the hollywood types just stick with the edgier darker formula, its not change its an escalation. only when something bombs change happens.

 

[Thrawn]

Well, regardless, like last time, I'd imagine Paramount will pretty much give Abrams free rein, so if the writers want to do it then they probably can.

 

[Aragorn]

The title of this thread is a bit misleading.

Considering the OP, you should've know this thread was only going in one direction.