What is Necessary is Never Unwise: STAR TREK

After many movie and TV ideas that never panned out, including an Earth-Romulan war trilogy (which sounded kind of cool actually), it was decided the franchise would go back to the beginning with fresh young faces. Of course, this was the original idea for Star Trek VI, but after V bombed, they decided to have the original crew go out with a better bang. Sadly, the TNG crew never got the same opportunity.  The franchise had died.  But now, Star Trek is back and this time, it's for everyone...

Once Upon A Time...

WHAT I LIKED:
Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman do something quite brilliant here by acknowledging the original cannon of Trek, while also creating a whole new timeline of possibilities. This is a shiny, top tier production that was made with care. Like I felt about First Contact, everything seemed to come together for this one.  Basically, all the right choices were made.  The casting was flawless. The script perfectly captures these iconic characters.  J.J. Abrams was the right director for the job.  It all culminated into a fun, box-office smashing ride that brought new life back into the franchise. Okay, good call Paramount.

I also must mention the score by Michael Giacchino. Trek films have pretty much all had great scores by talented composers such as James Horner and Jerry Goldsmith. Giacchino easily fits in with these masters by giving us a rousing composition. At first, I was disappointed that there was no Alexander Courage tribute at the opening, which I'd become accustomed to, but my initial worries were gone literally seconds later. Music has always been such a strong part of Star Trek and once again, the right choices were made.

WHAT I DIDN'T LIKE:
Let's be clear: Stardates aren't years. I repeat: STARDATES AREN'T YEARS. That's why they're called Stardates. Yet, for the sake of "the general audience" the original continuity was dumbed down. So let's imagine the following scenario: a person watches this movie and loves it. Then, they go out and buy, say, Star Trek First Contact. Captain Picard says, "Captain's Log: Stardate 50893.5"  WHOA! So the Next Gen crew must live in...the year 50,893 AD! Why so far in the future from the original crew? Whatever. Then they watch Star Trek Generations and see that the crews are only separated by 78 years. Huh, so maybe they just have REALLY long life spans in the future. By now, this new "fan" has become exhausted trying to figure out how this future timeline works and completely gives up. He then tells all his friends not to watch the new Star Trek movie because the whole franchise isn't worth getting sucked into. The End. Thanks guys, you just destroyed everything by making stardates years. AKA: It's STUPID!

Also, let's talk about the Delta Vega convenience. It's "impressionistic for (again) a general audience" per Orci. Caring more about being cinematic than accurate is a problem for me. And sometimes these writers (and J.J.) fall into this trap. Obviously, a planet can't be THAT close to Vulcan and be safe from a black hole. Please.  Another thing that bothered me: I didn't like how, in the old timeline, the Federation (not to mention the Enterprise E) worked very hard for peace with Romulus...only to have it blow up a few years later. Geez, the universe doesn't do anything small anymore does it?

The Enterprise was built in Iowa???  Who knew!

How do you revamp Star Trek and make it a massive hit? You make it Star Wars.  Not saying it's a bad thing, but still.  Maybe future installments will bring back the morality plays and conundrums of old, but what we have here is a pure entertainment thrill-ride that hits all the right notes (in every sense of the word). These are heroes that represent the cream of the crop and they all get their moment to show that they are truly elite. Kudos to everyone involved for bringing Trek back to life.


STAR TREK is about bringing these iconic characters together, so let's see how INTO DARKNESS takes them apart...


Have a great day, courtesy of Starbase 133.