SET PHASERS TO SPOILERS!
The Good: This movie was almost all of the good parts of the first Reboot!Trek. It moved fast, looked beautiful, and had tons of great one liners. Almost all our favorite characters got more development, and a lot of it was good. This movie felt very Avengers, in that the plot was secondary to the interaction between the characters and the cool fights and 'splody things. And they were quite cool! I enjoyed the ride quite a bit, and I'm certain that not only will it pay for a third movie, but the franchise will continue to bring in new fans. I loved Mr Cumberbatch in this, and I thought he played a great and compelling villain. I don't even mind the lens flares, gratuitous though they may be. I had moments where I felt genuinely like I was watching Enterprise crew react and be awesome at problems together, and that's a big part of what I'm looking for in my Trek movie.
The Bad: So here's the thing, I'm a huge Trek fan (I forget if we're Trekkies or Trekkers now) so I have...opinions. Some of them are going to be "nitpicky", but I'll try to keep it to the big points. Things like my dislike of the uniforms and the lack of named characters not human (or Vulcan) are dumb and will be saved for my Nerd Rant diary. (Note to Self - Start Nerd Rant Diary)
Revenge and Violence or The Confused Moral : The overall theme or idea here seems to be that revenge, and to an extent, violence, is wrong. We know this because of the ending montage where Kirk claims that violence and revenge "is just not who we are". We also know this because of the "main" bad guy, the Admiral Forgettable-Name, was out for violence at any price. I also want to say that it would have made a LOT more narrative sense if the Admiral was out for vengeance as well (possibly his wife was killed by Klingons?) but apparently he just wants war for war's sake. Kirk sets out on his quest initially for vengeance and the death of his foe, but is called back to his morality by Spock. Here, as in every iteration of Trek before, the stance is taken that revenge and violence is wrong.
Except that here, every single problem was solved by violence and seeking revenge.
Instead of allowing Uhura to diffuse the situation with the Klingons with her impressive language and diplomatic skills, Klingons are shown to be just too barbaric and blood thirsty to listen to reason. (Odd given where cannon goes, but I digress) Harrison/Khan has to come in and save them with violence. They are never given the chance to talk the Admiral down, or even see him waver, the only way to deal with him is violence. Khan can not be reasoned with, so his ship must be blown up. Because NO ONE thought to tell Khan (who's ship was still somewhat functional) that they still had his people on board, Kirk was forced to sacrifice his life to save the ship. Which then in turn meant that Spock, in a quest for vengeance had to track down and defeat Khan violently (again, why did no one use Carrot O'Popsicle People?).
Now, are we watching an action movie that we all expected to be more violent than the series? Yes, yes we are. I'm not disputing that. All the best Trek films are a little less philosophical and moresaving of whales killing Borg, though there are exceptions. We're here to see a blockbuster, and those have to have cool explosions and Kirk punching something really, really hard. But generally something diplomatic manages to go through, or the movie has some other theme in mind or the adversary has resisted all overtures of diplomacy for legitimate and believable reasons.
None of these things happened here, which in my opinion made this film much less than it could have been. The premise was interesting, at least one of the villains was compelling, but because they didn't explore what would happen if diplomacy was given a chance. (Khan as a permanent uneasy ally? Admiral talked down and brought on board the Enterprise to face Khan? Klingons as allies because they are awesome? Possibilities are endless!)
This meant that when they pulled that end moral out, I was super confused and wondered what film Kirk had been watching. The moral could have been "trying to rush war and advancement is a bad idea" and I would have bought that. Saying something about needing to proceed at our own pace and let things happen naturally would have been way more on point. The moral we did get felt off and very forced and confused the whole issue.
The Ugly: Spock screaming Khan's name. I know some people actually enjoyed this moment or at least thought it was funny, but to me it summed up what the real problem is with this movie - it wasn't inventive enough. What was so great about the first reboot was that while it preserved a lot of what was great about Trek, it took on a whole new story with beloved characters reacting to completely new circumstances. If I wanted a cheesy scream, I'll watch Wrath of Khan. What I wanted was for Spock to express his emotion in that same subtle and repressed way that Zachary Quinto had been beautifully channeling, but instead just got a rehash with a slightly different exterior. So much of the climax was just taken directly from the source material it felt like they were afraid to do anything new, while not staying true to the themes they set out to convey.
Except that here, every single problem was solved by violence and seeking revenge.
Instead of allowing Uhura to diffuse the situation with the Klingons with her impressive language and diplomatic skills, Klingons are shown to be just too barbaric and blood thirsty to listen to reason. (Odd given where cannon goes, but I digress) Harrison/Khan has to come in and save them with violence. They are never given the chance to talk the Admiral down, or even see him waver, the only way to deal with him is violence. Khan can not be reasoned with, so his ship must be blown up. Because NO ONE thought to tell Khan (who's ship was still somewhat functional) that they still had his people on board, Kirk was forced to sacrifice his life to save the ship. Which then in turn meant that Spock, in a quest for vengeance had to track down and defeat Khan violently (again, why did no one use Carrot O'Popsicle People?).
Now, are we watching an action movie that we all expected to be more violent than the series? Yes, yes we are. I'm not disputing that. All the best Trek films are a little less philosophical and more
None of these things happened here, which in my opinion made this film much less than it could have been. The premise was interesting, at least one of the villains was compelling, but because they didn't explore what would happen if diplomacy was given a chance. (Khan as a permanent uneasy ally? Admiral talked down and brought on board the Enterprise to face Khan? Klingons as allies because they are awesome? Possibilities are endless!)
This meant that when they pulled that end moral out, I was super confused and wondered what film Kirk had been watching. The moral could have been "trying to rush war and advancement is a bad idea" and I would have bought that. Saying something about needing to proceed at our own pace and let things happen naturally would have been way more on point. The moral we did get felt off and very forced and confused the whole issue.
The Ugly: Spock screaming Khan's name. I know some people actually enjoyed this moment or at least thought it was funny, but to me it summed up what the real problem is with this movie - it wasn't inventive enough. What was so great about the first reboot was that while it preserved a lot of what was great about Trek, it took on a whole new story with beloved characters reacting to completely new circumstances. If I wanted a cheesy scream, I'll watch Wrath of Khan. What I wanted was for Spock to express his emotion in that same subtle and repressed way that Zachary Quinto had been beautifully channeling, but instead just got a rehash with a slightly different exterior. So much of the climax was just taken directly from the source material it felt like they were afraid to do anything new, while not staying true to the themes they set out to convey.
Overall I felt okay about this movie. The good was really good, though the bad was pretty bad, it balanced out to be worth the $10.50 I payed for it. And you know, it used to be that every other Trek movie was terrible, so I'll take great alternating with good. I do hope that they take a few more risks and trust the audience to follow high minded ideals just a little more. That is, after all, why we're watching Star Trek and not Fast and the Furious V or even Iron Man 3.
P.S. I thought really, really hard about including a couple paragraphs about how sad I was about how Uhurha's character turned out to be whiny and needy and useless, but the review was already super long. So this note is to say I was sad, she was lame, the end.
No comments:
Post a Comment