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.

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

  3. Fair enough, and I withdraw that comment. Although I know plenty of people who have been “suckered in,” I don’t know you. That was an unfair assessment I projected on to you, and I apologize.
    I have only one question for you: do you think Gene Roddenberry would have liked this movie? Because to me, this film doesn’t represent what Roddenberry always tried to do with “Star Trek.”

  4. LOL. As the originator of the “suckered in” comment (which I withdrew above), let me say that the truth lies somewhere in between these two extremes. As is often the case, the truth is a shade of grey, not black or white.
    And I think it’s the attitude from people who loved the movie (even Trek fans), acting like I must be a delusional fanboi who counts dilithium crystals in the warp core that pushes me to the other extreme, and I make “suckered in” comments.
    Extremism begets extremism, I suppose.

  5. I can’t speak for “everyone” complaining about the black hole / alternate reality issue.
    As for me, I understand the concept — it’s just that I HATE it. I understand (theoretically) how an alternate universe could be created.
    But I don’t want “Star Trek” to be in an alternate universe. There were countless more stories to be told in the “primary” ST universe of the last 40 years.
    Now, with this “reboot,” it’s overwhelmingly likely that the on-screen franchise will never again visit the “original” universe. And that makes me said.
    (It also makes me glad that there are some amazing writers out there creating new ST novels, which I hope and pray will continue in the “original” universe!)

  6. Awesome point. Kirk and crew went back in time to 1986 to save Earth.
    If Spock went back in time, he could save his two most beloved planets — Vulcan, his native world, and Romulus, where he’s lived for decades.
    Why would he just “roll over,” as you put it, and leave those two races and planets destroyed?
    Lazy, lazy writing. As I said on my blog, Abrams and his writers wanted the best of both worlds (pardon the TNG pun!)
    They wanted to use the characters and the starship we all know and love, but not be beholden to the history thereof.
    Cheap writing gimmick.

  9. I also had severe issues with this movie, and I can’t imagine Gene Roddenberry would in any way be pleased with it (not that I’m in any place to speak for him, just my impression). After all, he used to complain that the studio wanted to turn Star Trek into something primarily about space battles… well now that’s what it is. I might have even been able to put up with that if I felt they even bothered trying to write a decent script, but this movie had plot holes you could fly a starship through.
    I’ve come to realize, though, that people who enjoy it aren’t missing these huge problems… they just don’t care. I don’t say that as a criticism, it’s just that different people value different things. If the primary thing you liked about Star Trek was the fantasy of spaceships and aliens and cool characters, then you’ll probably like this movie. But if what you liked most was that it attempted to tackle difficult issues (not always well, but attempted nonetheless) and generally tried to straddle the line between sci-fi fun and relatively believable science, then there’s no way you’re going to enjoy the new Star Trek.
    I wish I could say I liked the movie, but the fact is I hated it. Not because of some attachment to canon – I could get over the idea of a reboot – but because I felt like they took a generally intelligent franchise and dumbed it down to lowest common denominator Hollywood standards, product placement and all.

  10. I’m not sure, but I think Gene would have loved this movie. It was fun, it was clever, and it wasn’t ever boring.
    But what I think he would have loved most of all is that it brings Star Trek – and everything we in the Star Trek family have ever done – to a new generation of potential Trekkies.

  11. I feel fortunate that I know enough about Star Trek to enjoy most of the TOS classic lines and moments referenced in the film, but not so much as would make me feel “cheated” by the changes to canon. I’m also grateful that I am ignorant enough about physics find that black holes, parallel worlds, and alternate histories are a perfectly cromulent way to weave a sci-fi plot.
    So I had a great time watching the movie, as did my Mother, who requested to be treated to see it on Mother’s day instead of going to another dreaded brunch. (it was very hard for my sister and I not to high five each other across the table when she said this.)
    Today at the library I work for, two Indian women,a mother and daughter in full sari attire , came in. As I was was charging their items out, the daughter asks me if I have seen the new Star Trek film. I reply that yes, I have and I thought it was very good and would recommend it. She asks if it is gory or racy or weird? I say I didn’t think it was IMHO. Good she replies, I prefer my science fiction to be more down to earth. Then she looks over at her mother, who sighs and says “Well fine, but, you know I’ll need coffee if we’re going to watch science fiction”
    Then they left, and I squeed a little.

  12. Yes, I’ve found myself getting rather reactionary because of the “OMG HOW COULD YOU CRITICIZE STAR TREK!” attitude I’m often faced with. I’ve learned to tone it down since first seeing the movie, but I think both sides would do well to moderate their views.

  14. The same thing can be said for Batman Returns and the new Superman movie. Those were all reboots just like the Star Trek movie. Why is the Star Trek cannon so sacred and every other movie can reboot or remake itself and be just fine? I think it’s because some people are afraid of change.
    I would love to see more original cannon Star Trek, but it just seems that those actors/actresses playing those parts are just too damn old. No offense Wil. Stewart, Spiner, Shatner and Nimoy are too old to play their parts anymore and well we still want Star Trek don’t we? I didn’t like the idea of a alternate timeline, but in the long run it’s going to make sense for the future of the franchise.
    As far as television goes, well this is where I agree with the original cannon being a part of the formula. Why not make a series that takes place AFTER Star Trek Nemesis or even later than that? Go ahead, not back again. You can’t watch something showing the past without a lack of tension in the storyline. We all know that the Enterprise can’t get destroyed if we are watching something from the past. It looses it’s mystery if we aren’t watching something moving forward.
    As far as something that Gene Roddenberry would have loved, well I think he would have absolutely LOVED it. It’s got a campy storyline with ridiculous action and it looks a lot like what he was trying to accomplish in the late 60’s.
    As far as the writing is concerned compared to TOS. Well Roddenberry wasn’t exactly a Thoreau when it came to writing, lets not give him too much credit. He was going to name the show “Wagon Train To The Stars” or some dumb shit like that. He wasn’t writing the next Walden, he was writing campy GREAT TV shows. This movie is just like that. At least in my humble opinion.

  15. I’ve just got home from seeing Star Trek. Wil, I can’t better what you said. It’s totally awesome!!!! I loved everything about it. My friend who I went with is not a Trekkie, or sci fi fan, even he liked it. There were several children around us who all seemed to enjoy the movie, and more importantly were all quiet! Star Trek is back for a new generation as well as it’s long time fans. I can’t wait to see what future movies or tv series spawn from this.

  17. I noticed the “Fascinating”. What Shatner thing did Pine do? I must have missed that…
    -Alicia (@AliciaWag)
    P.S. I *loved* the movie! 🙂

  18. Wil, that was a great review. I come from a long line of science fiction fans. I was born in the mid 70s, too late to appreciate TOS, but my Trek awareness really kicked in with Wrath of Khan, and it made me really happy that Abrams paid it such homage. The story has some holes, sure, but he updated the series and made it modern without losing the *spirit*. It’s been a longstanding frustration of mine that so many science fiction filmmakers sacrifice substance for style.
    I ended up seeing it three times in one week, not intentionally, but as the opportunity arose to go see it again and again, I found I didn’t mind a bit.

  19. From what I’ve read about Roddenberry, the camp, etc was more a product of the time than specifically what he was going for. To him, Star Trek was always more than just space ships and aliens and fun. If that’s all it was, he certainly wouldn’t have bothered with the first interracial kiss, or blatant Cold War episodes like “Balance of Terror.” Or, when making TNG, initially trying to challenge gender roles by having some male characters wear skirts (in the pilot but never again). No doubt, it was important to make a fun show, but Star Trek was/is supposed to aspire to much more than that.

  21. I wish I could echo the praise I see everywhere. I waited a little bit to see it because I was afraid of what I’d seen in trailers and spots I’d seen everywhere. I’ve found the pre release machine really annoying in that one spot would have been enough…any film that can stand on it’s own will generate enough buzz without the stream of trailers.
    Having said that, I worked up the nerve to suspend disbelief and give it the benefit of the doubt and fork over my $13 for a matinee IMAX show. IMAX sound was worth it. The production design and look of the effects wasn’t as consistent with the heart of ST I know…some of it felt kind of cartoony…most notably and over the top, in the swish pans of planets that ran in the closing.
    Much can be overlooked and I genuinely thought many of the performances were quite good including Chris Pine, Bruce Greenwood & Karl Urban.
    Where the thing fell apart to me was in it’s treatment of science. ST often tried to shoot for some level of a scientific thread that wasn’t obviously not entirely likely.
    use of black holes was just wrong! and use of Trek tech to the point of absurdity was also wrong…not to mention some relative distance problems that made no sense.
    ..and what’s up with Kirk getting his butt kicked even when he wins? I get that maybe he wasn’t naturally the ass kicking, lady killer we know him to become, but constantly having to climb back from a precipice got a bit tired.

  23. Seconded! That was my first thought on finishing the movie: I want this to be the introduction to a new TV series. Trek has always been better on the small screen rather than the big. Sometimes a good story overcame that tendency, such as with Wrath of Khan, Undiscovered Country, and First Contact, but mostly the movies were only okay, or downright bad (I’m looking at you, Final Frontier and Insurrection). A TV series is going to have some strike-outs as well (most of the first season of TNG, for example), but it has a lot more time to explore characters and plot ideas that don’t really need 2 hours to develop. And for those that do, you’ve got 2-part episodes, with the bonus that you can build up to them gradually in preceding shows.
    I heard something about CBS being able to negotiate a new contract soon for renewed rights to a Star Trek TV show. Maybe they will. I hope so.

  24. “Isn’t Nero a substandard CD burning software?”
    Yep. Also the name of a crazy-ass Roman emperor. The one who reportedly “fiddled while Rome burned.” There is a long-standing tradition of naming Romulan stuff after Roman stuff (Romulus and Remis were brothers who were said to have been raised together by a she-wolf. The former went on to found the city named after him, and they later served as namesakes for the homeworld of the Romulans and the planet’s primary moon, which features in the last TNG film, Nemesis). I believe Roman culture served as a baseline inspiration for the Romulan race, too, even if they only bear a cursory resemblance after many years of storytelling in the Trek universe.

  25. Spock didn’t intentionally go back in time. Read Star Trek Countdown for the full story, but both his and Nero’s ship got sucked into this black hole thing that transported them back in the past. And Nero stuck around to wait for Spock, so even if Spock was trying to save both worlds, Nero intercepted him and stranded him on the ice planet and took that away from him.

  26. The time-line in the film did not diverge from the original series at the point where Nero destroyed Vulcan. It diverged at the point where Nero and Spock’s ships were pulled through the singularity into a different time-stream.
    I’m pretty sure that the people who had lived the last twenty-something years in the time-line where George Kirk died at Jim’s birth wouldn’t be all that eager to destroy their own time-line, if they even could.

  27. I think it’s a slang word in Britain for “dick.” Pretty sure about that, but not committing myself to that exact definition of it, either.
    I’m not going to lie and say that I was happy about the idea of a new Star Trek movie when I first heard about it, and I was even unhappier when I heard that Abrams was at the helm. I swore up and down that I was boycotting it, talked trash to everyone I know about how horrible I thought it was going to be, and then after seeing the trailers, I just couldn’t deny my urge to want to see it after that. And I fucking loved it! Loved it so much that I’m seeing it again this weekend in IMAX. And there’s a pretty good possibility that I’ll see it about three or four more times before it’s out of the theaters.

  28. Me too! And so did my friends, and so did the people sitting around us. It was as if all of us had the same thought simultaneously “This guy’s so fucked!” because he was the red shirt. That was fun!

  29. Actually, I was kind of put more at ease to know that Budweiser is still around in the future, but that’s just me. It beats synthehol, doesn’t it? “Fuckin-A, there’s REAL beer in the future? Awesome!” was pretty much my thought process at that point in the movie. I personally prefer Lager (that would be Yuengling to the non-Pennsylvanians out there), but if there’s beer there period, it can’t be that bad of a place in my book!
    Yeah, I own the “Hey, look Wesley Crusher’s at the wedding!” version of Nemesis, and it still bothers me that he’s just there, but no one really acknowledges his presence. Lame! Especially after I was expecting him to be joining Riker and Troi on the Titan, which I’m really not sure if that’s considered canon or not now because of the way the movie was edited, or even if he’s a Traveler or not. Way to just leave Wesley dangling in the air, Stuart Baird! I still feel gypped, after almost 7 freaking years now! Well, I guess the only person who really has a right to feel truly gypped is Wil, but that’s besides the point. And honestly, I just found out only recently that the wedding scene was supposed to be taking place in Alaska and not the holodeck. WTF?!
    But yay, BEER in the future! Still awesome, at least IMO.

  31. Bah! Semantics as far as I’m concerned. I probably would have clapped if Uhura was ordering a Lager, but I’ll settle for Bud. If it gets me drunk, it’s good enough!

  32. Hey, there is a world of difference between Budweiser and beer. It’s a lot more than semantics!

  33. Fine, your blog, your rules. Just don’t forget who still has possession of the “It’s all Wil’s fault!” card, since that guy who purges memories really purged my memory of having used it in the first place. I only know because I read about it later. Now who’s in charge of semantics?

  34. You can be in charge of semantics; I’ll be in charge of beer.
    Hey, come to think of it, if I’m in charge of beer, you can be in charge of Budweiser, and we all win!

  35. Fair enough. Let me go and buy a shitload of stock in Budweiser, since I know it’s still there in the future, then 😛

  36. Interesting just how much money the movie took during the first week…. Star Trek always seems to do really well in times of “trouble”: in times when people need to look forward and see a brighter future…. so, on this basis, I think that the movie is a great success !!!! Perfect ? No… but respectful to the long term fans and satisfying to the newcomers… May the adventures continue….

  37. I love that the writers paid so much attention to canon that they bookmarked Memory Alpha.
    http://trekmovie.com/2008/01/28/more-fan-qa-with-roberto-orci/
    “Charles Trotter: I am a contributor and administrator at Memory Alpha (http://www.memory-alpha.org/). Did you guys use Memory Alpha when researching for the movie? And if so, can MA expect to receive a mention in the end credits?
    Roberto Orci: We absolutely used Memory Alpha during the entire process, and still reference it occasionally during production. It was great to be able to refer the less educated members of the team to your great site. THANK YOU! Will see what I can do about credits. Not a bad idea at all.”

  38. In the end, isn’t that all that really matters to an entertainer? Introducing your stories and your characters to new people? If only a few of the people who saw this movie without having ever been a fan of the Trek shows and movies left the theater with an interest in them, then it’s that many new fans who may watch the shows – coming into contact with all the ideas and messages that Gene wanted people to hear.
    Not to mention the fact that Star Trek itself is about exploring the new and undiscovered. Isn’t that what this movie was about?

  40. Right. Roddenberry wanted a show to tackle serious social issues. He didn’t just want a dumb “shoot ’em up,” which is what this movie was.
    I of course can’t speak for Roddenberry. And the fact that his widow recorded audio for the film, just prior to her death, maybe means that she believed he would have approved.
    But to me, this film lacked the most important part of “Star Trek” — a message. It was a dumb, flashy-effects, big-screen summer blockbuster. I’m glad JJ Abrams will get richer off this.
    But this wasn’t true Star Trek. And it’s not because it creates its own canon, though I’m not crazy about that either. But I could have lived with that if this movie actually SAID or STOOD FOR anything, or raised any philosophical or intellectual curiosity.

  41. It’s nice that they threw MA a bone, but I don’t see much evidence in the film that they used MA. They recreated the sets, the characters, the uniforms, the props….remember, the film is in an “alternate timeline,” so the prime universe canon doesn’t matter anyway!!
    I do feel sorry for the MA administrators, who now had to set up “alternate reality” pages for Kirk, Spock, and the rest of the crew, along with several other entries. It’s almost like they have to keep two sets of canon now!!

  42. But all of it was in keeping with the feel of the original (except building a starship on the ground, and I guess when you have reactionless thrusters you don’t care), which is clearly documented on MA.
    I know what you mean about double canon, though. Nightmare-ness. I was trying to think of a different fiction that has the same problem and the only things that come to mind are the Dresden Files and any Marvel Comics movie. Those’re a text-to-screen conversions though, and those ALWAYS have inconsistencies. Just have to track canon separately.

  43. I disagree. I thought this movie was about friendship, and not wasting your potential.
    And remember, not every episode of Star Trek was City on the Edge of Forever or Tapestry…

  44. I don’t even drink beer and I have to come down on the side of “please make the proper distinction” here. I mean, the line has to be drawn.

  46. I was reviewing this film for the BBC and I felt like I short changed them. I had twenty minutes between credits rolling and going on air… and I was still stunned. It was the least I’ve said in my entire life.
    It was phenomenal to witness the rebirth of it all. And the not even have to drag anyone to see it, based on how stunned I was (and the written review) as well as the trailer non-Trekkies were begging me to see it.
    It’s been over a week and I’m still blown away. And reasonably proud to be a geek 😉

  47. To surfsimply: I’m a 44-year-old nearly life-long “trekker” and I absolutely loved this movie. Not all of us “old” guys and gals want things to stay exactly the same; in fact, I would dare say that’s the antithesis of Star Trek.
    To the person who said Wil was suckered in (and to Wil, as affirmation): While Star Trek, TOS especially, was a lot about “messages” (interracial harmony, non-interference, etc.) this movie wasn’t necessarily about that. This movie was a re-introduction to Star Trek or, more accurately, an introduction to a parallel Star Trek universe. And yet, I feel it actually did succeed in retelling the message of infinite diversity in infinite combinations. But at its heart, it was the story of a “family” coming together. In that respect, it soared.
    To Wil himself: I thought your review was great. It captured the essence of how I felt coming out of the movie. My only regret is that, while I was in a packed house, there weren’t the cheers and applause you and others experienced. Folks did laugh or say things like “yeah!” or “all right” at the right times. Perhaps folks down here in the southeast are a little more reserved? Naaah. Me? I can’t wait to see what Pine’s Kirk, Quinto’s Spock and Urban’s McCoy (a friend has asked about the southern accent; thoughts?) do next! 😀

  48. Totally agree, Wil. Star Trek was awesome. I’m a bigger TNG fan than TOS (I certainly remember Wesley Crusher!)so I thought I was going to like the Star Trek movie but still feel a little left out of the mythology. But I was more than pleased to feel like I-as a marginal fan-was thought about and actually included in their target audience. I immensely enjoyed the film and can’t wait to buy the DVD.
    ————————————————————–
    My Star Trek review–mljblog.wordpress.com

  49. What *do* you drink? You remind me of a bourbon drinker for some reason.
    Speaking purely from the POV as a poor Educator, I’ve actually drank beer that’s worse than Budweiser. Natural Ice, Milwaukee’s Best, etc…so I’m really not that picky about it.
    Sure, if I had a case of Yuengling, I’d be drinking the hell out of it, but if I’m at a party and the only beer they have is Bud, I’m drinking Bud.

  50. Several of my friends have said that the new Chekhov is how Wesley should have been. (Yeah, yeah, I know, painful. But go with me on this one.) Your thoughts on it?
    And please don’t shoot me for it. Bullets tend to reflect off at funny angles from my armor plating.

Comments are closed.

Related Posts

Recent Posts