Geek in Review: Star Trek Has Been Reborn, and it is SPECTACULAR

For this month's Geek in Review, it was only natural that I write a column about the new Star Trek movie. This was much easier said than done:

Since I saw Star Trek a little over a week ago, I’ve struggled to write an adequate review of the movie, and what it meant to me, as someone who was part of the first effort to make Star Trek relevant to the, uh, next generation of fans. I’ve started and abandoned a few thousand words, mostly because I can say everything I need to say in just six:

It was awesome. I loved it.

Seriously. Whenever I tried to write more than that, I felt like it was gilding the lilly, as they say. But I spent a lot of time thinking about the movie, talking about it with my friends, and I noticed that we kept talking about essentially the same thing. That's what I decided to write about:

Star Trek has meant too much to too many people for too long for those of us who love it to blindly accept that whoever makes it will treat it with the same love and respect that we believe it deserves. I think it was normal and natural for all of us to have reservations, especially about Star Trek.

It turns out, I think, that a lot of our fears, while well-founded, were unnecessary. JJ Abrams may not be one of us in the convention-going sense, but I think he has something in common with us, and I think it's a big reason why Star Trek made so many of us so very, very happy.

If you want to know what that is, head on over to the SG Newswire and find out. As always, the content of my column is SFW, but Suicide Girls is NSFW. You have been warned. Approach with the appropriate degree of caution, and enjoy.

PS – A comment at SG pointed me to this strip from PvP, which I think is a brilliant companion to this column.

PS2 – This press conference with JJ Abrams (mp3) is another, longer, companion to my column.

Discover more from WIL WHEATON dot NET

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

130 thoughts on “Geek in Review: Star Trek Has Been Reborn, and it is SPECTACULAR”

  1. I’ll wait to read the column until I’m home from work. I know up in IT they probably would just chuckle if they saw it show up on the logs, but….
    “Star Trek has meant too much to too many people for too long for those of us who love it to blindly accept that whoever makes it will treat it with the same love and respect that we believe it deserves. I think it was normal and natural for all of us to have reservations, especially about Star Trek.”
    Even for those of us who were largely casual about Star Trek, you couldn’t help but have reservations about the things you heard coming out regarding the movie as it went along. I was nothing but skeptical, and I was quite happy to find that the things I had reservations about they largely worked in as strengths of the movie. Can’t wait to see where they go with a sequel.

  5. I had not seen that one before… awesome. While I liked the movie quite a lot (obviously), I totally find the funny in things like this.

  6. I do have to say, based off of your recomendation Wil, I went and saw the film over the weekend.
    I kept an open mind. Forgot about the past and tried to enjoy the film on it’s own merits. Overall I had no problems with any of the ‘changes’ made to canonnicity (sp?)and accepted the alternate universe angle to explain them all. In the end what bugged me the most (outside of the brewery engine room, the overuse of lens flare and LETS PUT A THOUSAND LIGHTS ON THE BRIDGE SHINING INTO EVERYONES EYES) is that the film itself is not actually all that good.
    The bad guy? Weak.
    The plot? Been there, done that.
    Plot holes? Way too many that it stretch and then broke and credibility it had.
    4 days later I feel that Galaxy Quest was a better Star Trek film than this thing was.

  8. I think I was like everybody else who are fans of Star Trek. I thought that it was going to be an okay movie.. but it wouldnt be as good as the TOS films or TNG films. I went in not thinking it was going to be as good as Star Trek 6; The Undiscovered Country or Star Trek; Nemesis… but once it was over I was amazed. I was speechless… they modernized Star Trek a lot better than I thought they would. I loved the actors they picked, I loved that they had Leonard Nimoy in it, I thought the action kept you on the edge of your seat. I thought it was spectacular. Absolutely can’t wait until it comes out on DVD and I will add it in my Star Trek collection proudly. “Star Trek has been reborn, and it is SPECTACULAR!”

  9. The one thing I’d really like to add is that I thought this movie was an excellent pilot, and I’d love to see it turn into a TV series — rather than a series of movie sequels. I find that there’s so much more character depth in a TV series, just because there’s more time in which to develop it.
    I don’t know what the likelihood is of that happening, but I’ll just keep my fingers crossed on it.

  11. I loved the movie. But I decided that it takes place in a closely parallel dimension. Mostly to keep my annoying inner Trek Continuity Nerd voice quiet.
    “Alternate timeline” suggests negating everything that ever happened in “Trek prime”. I Can’t get onboard with that, so parallel dimension it is.
    I know, I know.

  13. No no no no no. Spock Prime explicitly says that the timeline we all know and love from 40 years of Star Trek still exists and is unaltered.
    I hope you’ll get a chance to read my column, because I talked about that quite a bit in it.

  14. You should seriously come with a warning at times! I read the SG review and it was all I could do to keep coffee from exploding from nose.
    I click the link in your last tweet.
    Explosion of coffee from nose all over my desk.
    I think I will be laughing all day now.

  15. Sometimes, old-school Trekkers griping about the new Star Trek movie reminds me of old-school Republicans griping about Obama.
    For example:
    They obsess about trivialities like lens flares and teleprompters.
    They’re mistrustful of change and prefer to live in the past, suggesting not-so-subtly that the old days were superior.
    They patronize fans of the new regime by suggesting we’re all gullible dumbasses that have been fooled by “flash” and “bling” and have no ability to critically analyze.
    They constantly reference their qualifications to rant, “I’ve been a Star Trek fan for 40 years….” — “I’ve been a taxpayer and Republican for 40 years…”
    So, what we have are conservative old farts talking about the “good old days” and how the new regime is ruining everything. Are old-school Trekkers the new Dittoheads?

  17. Loved the movie — only question now is how long to wait before running back to the theater to watch it again!
    I loved that Nimoy was in the film. I thought it was the perfect way to acknowledge those 40 years of history — which, after all, were what made Nimoy’s Spock the man he is. Those stories all happened, and now there’s room for new stories. I’m happy.
    Wil, good move on dealing with Abrahms’ oft-quoted Star Wars remark in your column. Definitely spot on.

  19. I think this answer from JJ Abrams in response to a Memory Alpha Q&A reveals a lot about why the movie was successful:
    “When rebooting a franchise, fans of the original tend to be alienated due to the attempt to draw new fans in. How did you address this when making this film? -Henshin86
    J.J. Abrams: The obvious challenge was that we wanted to make our own brand new thing, and at the same time embrace and honor what had come before. As a director who didn’t know and love the world of Star Trek by default, I ended up telling a story for people like myself that love fun movies but are not necessarily familiar with the archaic details of Star Trek canon. However, both of the writers are huge Star Trek fans; one is a massive fan. Because of this I knew that we would be safe and on solid ground. We all did our homework before shooting.”
    Source: http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Memory_Alpha:Ask_J.J._Abrams/Answers
    I think that’s a good combination: A director who knows the story he wants to tell, and what he as an audience member wants to see, combined with writers who are fans and know the source material. It keeps the story honest to its pedigree, but doesn’t necessarily get bogged down in the elaborate workings of all that has come before.

  20. All very well said. I had a LOT of reservations going into the movie, and I left feeling like I, as a fan, had been treated with respect. It felt like I was being introduced to old friends, for the first time. My only complaint, which will probably remain through multiple viewings, was the product placement. It’s the only thing that truly felt out of place.

  21. I was surprised how good the movie really was. The actors did a great job. This is a movie I would pay to see again.
    Since the new Star Trek movie is a hit. I’m hoping the studios might reboots another Next Generation movie! That would be great. Eight months ago, I was never a fan of Star Trek. I was more of a Star Wars fan. But thanks to your books Wil! And the detail you give behind the scenes while your on the set of TNG really captured my interest! Plus, Patrick Stewart is one of my favorite actors. I gave the show a chance. I rented the first 2 disks of season 1. After watching those episodes I was hooked. I finished watching the entire series in a 3 months. It really is a great show. All of you did a great job! I hope one of these days you and the rest of the TNG cast will do another film! Being a new Star Trek fan is fun, but I kick myself in the ass for not watching it while it was airing. I guess thats what reruns are for.

  22. Yeah, I hate product placement, but it’s just a fact of making and releasing movies right now. I sort of roll my eyes and wait for it to be over, and I’m always grateful that it’s not as blatant as the second season of Heroes when HRG gave Claire the car, and she goes, “OMG YOU GOT ME THE ROGUE?!”

  25. Yeah, that was kinda hard to bear. Though they did manage to tie that car into the online web-strips they did, which was kinda cool. But it still could have been done another way.

  26. You know, it suddenly occurred to me to ask – have you thought about writing screenplays at all? I think it’s safe to go ahead and consider you a “real writer” now, eh? I know screenplays aren’t exactly in the vein of your typical autobiographical vein, but you seem to have a lot of passion for bringing characters to life when you get the chance to do acting roles, so it leads to the question…
    Can you, as a writer, supply the other side of that equation? Creating a role via screenplay that other actors get excited about bringing to life?
    (For whatever reason, I read your pvponline tweet and thought – hey, Wil loves Star Trek, Wil knows Star Trek… Wil is a writer. Why is he not doing Star Trek screenplays?)

  27. Though there may not be much that can top the Pepsi Ads of the future in Back to the Future Part II, or the Taco Bell proliferation of Demolition Man

  28. Thumbs up on your review, Wil, I was going into the movie with high expectations myself, and did walk out loving the movie as well. It should be interesting to hear and see how it progresses.
    One thing I have made of note, however, is all the talk people have had about the bridge layout. Do they not remember that it is almost identical to the layout from Star Trek V? There is another nod to that movie when Kirk bonked his head on the transport shuttle.
    There could have also been a nod to Enterprise as well – the Captain’s dog Scotty was talking about was a beagle. 😉

  30. Ah, Wil. So disappointed that Abrams flashy sci-fi effects and big explosions suckered you in.
    “Star Trek,” to me and many others, has always been about making people think. Roddenberry did it in the 60s, using the cover of a “space show” to make serious social commentary about racism, sexism, Cold War politics, and more.
    What, per se, was the message of this movie, other than oh Kirk is such a badass and Spock is going to tap Uhura’s ass?
    Oh, sure, there’s a vague sense of a message about Nero’s vengeance. But viewers who didn’t read the “Countdown” comic book lead-in don’t even understand that. (And Spock’s mindmeld with Kirk was the lamest “let’s get this plot exposition over with” gimmick I have EVER seen.)
    They had chances. They could have made a statement about torture when Nero had Pike — would have been topical, yes? They could have had Spock conflicted about which of his parents to save. They could have shown some institutional racism at Starfleet Academy directed at Spock — after all, he was the first Vulcan there, yes?
    What was the message of this movie? Oh wait, there WASN’T one. Except that Kirk likes the ladies and likes to drive fast, Chekov is a whiz kid, and Uhura looks good in miniskirts.
    MAYBE, the sequel will be better. Maybe the ridiculous plot holes (cadet-to-captain? come on!) and lack of message in this film are a necessary consequence of the nature of the movie. Needing to get all 7 characters onto the Enterprise, most of them fresh out of the Academy, I guess some things like common sense and realism had to be left behind.
    In 2 years, who knows. Maybe I’ll give the “Abramsverse” another chance. But thanks to this movie, my expectations will be greatly lowered.
    Wil, your point above about the “alternate universe” not replacing the “prime universe” is well taken. But in reality, what’s the difference? Abrams has clearly told us that there will be no more big-screen adventures for the “prime universe.”
    So yeah, the original ST universe of the last 40 years still exists out there, somewhere in the ether. What the hell good does that do for me??
    http://www.rzeszut.com/blog/2009/05/i-liked-star-trek-but-its-not-star-trek.html

  31. I don’t agree that the theory of parallel universes justifies the decisions to annihilate the Vulcan home planet. (In any time-line.) Branch points have occurred in the Star Trek universe a number of times, and in each an every case the Temporal Prime Directive has dictated that the Federation has always worked restore the time-line to the proper path.
    This movie does not create a “no win scenario” for solving what was done by Nero in the Star Trek universe. I find it ironic that this film showed Kirk’s legendary Kobayashi Maru accomplishment, and actually had the line, “I don’t believe in the no-win scenario,” then the movie as a whole simply rolls over and takes it when Nero destroys Vulcan.
    I wrote a review of this film that offers another perspective on what was done with this film, and the effect it has on the Star Trek universe. Feel free to check it out here:
    http://www.zacoryboatright.com/archives/143

  32. Let me be retarded here and ask how can the timeline be just fine when George Kirk is dead and Vulcan is destroyed at the end of the movie? Am I being stupid? I know it’s not impossible for me to the one of the dumbest people on this planet, but I might have to see the movie again if I missed something this astronomical.

  33. Timeline A: Nothing has changed.
    Timeline B: Vulcan is destroyed.
    Both timelines exist in parallel with each other.

  34. Hi Wil
    Saw the movie on Saturday night, loved it, came home to find “Nemesis” on TV in the full “Hey, there’s Wheaton!” cut.
    Cracking good action film, but jarred – like others – by the Nokia product placement. Loved a few of the epic touches, like the industrial scale of the engineering decks, but thought some of the supporting characters were a bit lazy and tokenish.
    Thumbs up, all told.
    While I’m here – hope you don’t mind the self-pluggage, but I’ve done one of my Condensed Movie scripts (book coming soon-ish – promise!) of the film and slapped it on my site.
    Contains:
    – Epic Spoilers
    – Swears throughout
    – Traces of LOLcat & TXT spk
    – Completely undecypherable British cultural references
    – Awful ‘Spock, Paper, Scissors’ pun
    Duck (Scary)
    http://tinyurl.com/spockpaperscissors

  35. I would say that the complaint some of us have about lens flares is more of a cheesy movie effect that is over used and ugly than saying it is a old school trekker complaint.

  36. Well, everyone is entitled to their own opinions about this movie, but I take issue with your suggestion that I was “suckered in,” which implies that I’m just too stupid to know what I saw and why I liked it. That’s pretty condescending and offensive.

  37. Gotcha, but the timeline the movies are going to stick with is timeline B with only 10,000 vulcans left in the universe, which is a cool ass idea if you ask me.
    Actually the timeline that is in the movie started when Nero came through the time warp wormhole, blackhole thingy and destroyed the USS Kelvin and shit like that. Isn’t Nero a substandard CD burning software?
    The movie was excellent and you as well as anyone have a TV given right to review this movie with impunity if you so desire. I am glad you liked it as much as the rest of us did though. I have been a fan of Star Trek ever since I saw that faithful evening of “Encounter At Farpoint”. I loved the introduction from Gene Roddenberry on the first night and I still remember the dark living room, with the 27 inch color TV (27 inches was big back then) and the anticipation reaching a fevered pitch. What great memories.
    I think my memories of this reboot might be in the same league once it takes off. I’m hoping we get a new TV show and a heck of a lot more movies from this reboot.
    Michael

  38. I don’t know if anyone has said this but when me and the wife watched it a second time we noticed that the guy who was in the Nav position on the Kelvin had a very very Wesley Crusher vibe going on. I said to my wife “uh did that guy look like..” and she said “Wesley”.. “yeah. haha”.

  39. Each and every time I read more of what you have written I find myself smiling that warm smile of sharing and knowing.
    Thanks for continuing to share your geek with us! You’re welcome at my gaming table anytime!

  40. Awww. I didn’t even make the teenager on the bridge connection. That must have felt awesome to experience. I feel warm and fuzzy.

  41. It’s really hard to be objective right now. So much could have gone so terribly wrong with this movie – even the most optimistic of us had every reason to expect abject disappointment. So, the fact that they were able to produce something watchable and fun makes it seem like Casablanca-quality compared to what it easily might have been.
    There were some elements I would have found profoundly silly in ANY movie. Do they ruin the whole thing? Probably not. But I’ll probably revisit that a little later on when the relief that it wasn’t Battlefield Earth-quality wears off.
    Geekery and nitpicking go hand in hand; always have. But the attitude that’s been created by the publicity around this movie is: If you don’t completely love everything about it, you’re just a 100-year-old stick in the mud who resents the fact that it was even made. And that’s just not an accurate picture.

  42. I’d provisionally agree with you (maybe that attitude comes from some who have seen it, but I don’t agree that it’s being fomented by the publicity department or the film makers), and offer a corollary: If you happen to enjoy it on its own merits and don’t want to nit-pick it to death, you’ve been “suckered in” and “fooled” by the film makers.

  43. Yeah, I’ve seen that one, too. And I certainly can’t claim to have read every interview by everybody involved in the film, so I may not have the big picture on what’s been said by whom.

  44. I have been Star Trek fan since I was 6 years old. I remember the first episode I ever saw- Tomorrow is Yesterday of the original series in 1985. I feel this movie is Star Trek. I agree 100% with you on your take of the movie. I went in not knowing what to expect, but JJ Abrams did the franchise justice. Sure, there are things you can nit-pick, but that can be said of any Star Trek movie. So, nit-pick away, but in my opinion Gene Roddenberry would be proud of this movie.

  45. aside from Nokia and Budweiser, I didn’t notice any glaringly obvious product placements. the movie was a fantastic sci-fi, and a fantastic action flick. i enjoyed the throw-backs to the original series, but I wasn’t bothered by a fresh start to these characters either. ***** five stars!
    PS
    Bones was awwwwwwwwesome.
    PPS
    I hope Scotty’s gremlin dies a horrible death.

  46. I decided to go into the film to enjoy what it WAS, not worry at all about what it may not have been, last Friday. I grew up with the original, back in the 60s and 70s, and had the same reservations about TNG at first, but age does something for one’s perspective, in that comparative adversarial views tend to dim a bit.
    Star Trek was FUN. Pure and simple.
    The main thing they got right that I did have twinges about was staying true to the original characters without becoming charicatures. They hit it, spot on. To me, that is MUCH more important than plot, special effects, or any other component to a prequel.
    Plot? All these gripes about the timeline/parallel universe issues are null- everyone seems to have forgotten about the black hole that created this alternate, and that such a thing could conceivably happen in any fiction, and has, fairly often.
    I seem to recall a lovely little book (tongue in cheek, since I can probably quote half of it by now) by Robert Heinlein called “The Number of the Beast”. Having read that a few times put me in a much better place to just accept what happened in Star Trek as par for the course.
    Loved it, will see it again, and will buy it when it comes to DVD.

  48. You have to go with the Doc Brown explanation of how these things work.
    —–(1955 *)————–(1985 A)——
    ——–\
    ———\—————–(1985 B)——
    Divergent timelines run parallel, as separate universes entirely. Theoretically.

  49. Ok that’s it. I’ve got to stop reading the blog comments here until after I see the movie. 🙁
    I have to stop assuming people will be nice enough to put a DAMN SPOILER WARNING in their comments.

  50. Oh, that’s been beat to a pulp: The Lost World: Jurassic Park’s last 20 minutes, with the Blockbuster that gets demolished and the city buses with ads all over them. The Mercedes Benz M-Class used in the film, like the Ford Explorer in the previous film. Hell, Westinghouse even got placement in there.

Comments are closed.

Related Posts

Recent Posts