Similar offers
Postage & Packaging: £1.25
Postage & Packaging: 0.00 GBP
Postage & Packaging: £0.00

Star Trek

Quote-start

Star Trek: Massively Overrated

Quote-end

2 Jun 28th, 2009 

107 Ciao members have rated this review on average: very helpful

Advantages:
Swift plot development; suitable for nearly all ages .

Disadvantages:
Terrible plot; unconvincing characters; indifferent acting .

Recommendable No:

Detailed rating:

Did you enjoy it?

Story

Characters / Performances

Special Effects

How does it compare to similar films?

MikeOCarroll

MikeOCarroll

About me:

25 years old, living near London Bridge and working in Croydon. Mostly skint. Enjoy writing but only...

Member since:24.05.2009

Reviews:8

Members who trust:23

Among the first of this year’s summer blockbusters has been J J Abram’s new Star Trek movie, which has been widely regarded as having successfully brought this iconic franchise into a new century and to a new generation.

The reviews have been overwhelmingly positive – Ann Hornaday in the Washington Post wrote a prayer of thanks to the ‘Lord of Star Trek’ for a movie that ‘has miraculously resurrected a wheezing but beloved and still relevant franchise’; the Daily Mail salutes ‘the most outstanding prequel of all time’; and the Times celebrates ‘a dazzling and beautiful rebirth’ of Star Trek. The reviewers on Ciao so far give the film a full 5 stars, and the Internet Movie Database (IMDb) gives it 8.4/10 from over 75,000 ratings.

Against this tidal wave of enthusiasm stands me. I don’t even have a sidekick to help me. I must alone, heroically save the world from its collective madness. How can this film be viewed as outstanding? Did we watch different versions? ‘Fun’ or ‘entertaining’ I might grant. ‘A good family film’ I could, at a stretch, agree with. ‘Funny’ I could allow on the grounds that humour is such an individual thing. But ‘outstanding’, ‘brilliant’ or ‘sensational’ – what planet are you guys on?

To me, this was a bad film. The plot was ridiculous and unconvincing, bordering on farce. The characters were shallow, clichéd and completely uninteresting. The acting was reasonable in the circumstances, and the special effects were impressive, but this can never compensate for a dismal plot and lifeless characters. Maybe I simply didn’t ‘get it’, but I would strongly advise against getting your hopes up regarding this film, you will probably be disappointed.
Star Trek

Star Trek is one of the most iconic entertainment franchises of all time. With six long-running television series spanning four decades, eleven feature films taking over $1 billion dollars between them at the box office, books, comics, games and other spin-offs, there can’t be many people in the western world who don’t have an opinion on Star Trek.

Created by Gene Roddenberry in the 1960s, Star Trek is set deep into the future and follows the multi-species crew of a ‘Starfleet’ spaceship (originally the USS Enterprise) whose mission is ‘to explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilizations; to boldly go where no man has gone before.’

In the many TV series, each episode normally involves an encounter with some strange planet, alien race or space phenomenon. The crew’s lives are frequently endangered, but few of the alien species turn out to be entirely bad. Indeed the story is often moralistic, with Star Trek covering issues as diverse as war and peace; racism and religion; authoritarianism and anarchy; and many, many more.

The plotlines have always been slightly daft and cheesy, with the characters’ solutions to their bizarre difficulties often being unconvincing, even within the fantastic boundaries of the Star Trek universe. For me, Star Trek has never been a great, suspenseful, intelligent programme but instead has been entertaining, light and easy viewing. I’ve always found it very watchable, but have never sought to take it with any level of seriousness. As such, I’ve never been overly impressed with attempts to take it to the big screen – it simply isn’t something that I’ve wanted to expend time and money on. Star Trek films such as ‘Generations’ and ‘First Contact’ have lived up to my expectations as essentially watchable and entertaining but lacking any real impact.

I suspect I’m not alone in finding myself bemused by the nerdy world of Star Trek conventions and seminars delivered in Vulcan. It is hard to believe that anybody could take Star Trek seriously. That said, there are many hobbies that I find unusual, and there are no doubt hobbies of mine that others find hard to understand. I’ve often been struck by the vitriol that some people seem to feel towards ‘Trekkies’ and the unique street-cred destroying properties that watching Star Trek seems to possess.

I am therefore neither a ‘Trekkie’ nor a Trekkie-hater. I often find Star Trek enjoyable, but I wouldn’t describe myself as a fan. I relate this so that you may have an idea of the mindset with which I approached the release of the new Star Trek film.
Star Trek (2009)

The film has a dramatic beginning as we follow the USS Kelvin in an encounter with a Romulan mining vessel captained by the deranged Nero (Eric Bana). First Officer of the Kelvin, George Kirk (Chris Hemsworth), realises that the ship’s crew can only be saved at the expense of his own life. Meanwhile, in her evacuation pod, his wife Winona (Jennifer Morrison) gives birth to an infant, named James Tiberius Kirk.

So far, so cheesy, but this plotline allows us quickly to anchor the film at a particular point in the Star Trek universe, as we realise that James Kirk will become the legendary Captain who explored the universe in the original television series. It is natural therefore that the film moves on to scenes of Spock’s childhood – Spock being Kirk’s loyal friend and sidekick. As a part-human, part-Vulcan, Spock is torn between the instincts of two very different cultures, and this struggle is an important thread that runs throughout the film, proving to be one of its better developed aspects.

We also follow the development of the youthful Kirk, who is a distastefully clichéd, selfish, wild child who impresses a Starfleet Captain, Christopher Pike (Bruce Greenwood) with his brawling skills in a bar fight and is unconvincingly persuaded to join Starfleet. This arrogant, rebellious, brilliant Kirk (played by Chris Pine) offers no surprises as a character, with utterly predictable and frankly boring successes and sexual conquests at the Starfleet Academy. This whole part of the film had me wondering if it was a deliberate spoof; the Academy and space cadet training reminding me of nothing so much as the film Starship Troopers (which I really did think was a deliberate spoof – but apparently wasn’t).

This part of the film stutters to a climax when the young adult Spock (Zachary Quinto) accuses Kirk of cheating in the notorious Kobayashi Maru test. As Kirk is tried in front of an assembly of the entire Academy, news arrives of a distress signal from the Vulcan galaxy. The trial is abandoned, and as the entire Starfleet is inexplicably deployed elsewhere, Captain Pike leads a crew of rookie cadets to meet this sudden menace. Will they succeed?

To take you further than this would risk spoiling the plot, but this development adequately demonstrates the sort of preposterous events and coincidences that run throughout the film. Why is the entire fleet except for cadets deployed elsewhere? Why can’t they be contacted, seeing as it only takes three minutes to travel across the apparently vast distance between Earth and the Vulcan homeland? And given that it only takes three minutes, why did the crazy Romulans not think to stop by and destroy the Academy before its cadets could manage to deploy themselves?

It may seem odd to question the realism of a science fiction movie, but the plot developments are so clunky that what should be moments of high drama and tension are instead moments where you have to keep from bursting out laughing at how ridiculous it all is. The obnoxiousness of Kirk as a character not only irritates in itself, but also makes his success aboard the USS Enterprise unconvincing, as any senior officer in his right mind would have locked him away to await court-martial.

Younger versions of familiar Star Trek characters are introduced along the way, so we meet Leonard “Bones” McCoy (Karl Urban), Pavel Andreievich Chekov (Anton Yelchin), and Hikaru Sulu (John Cho), who are hackneyed and uninspiring versions of their future selves. Montgomery “Scotty” Scott (Simon Pegg) is introduced in the most bizarre and absurd of fashions that includes a brief diversion to almost slapstick humour when a transportation onto the Enterprise doesn’t go entirely to plan.

Finally I mustn’t forget the rather forgettable Nyota Uhuru (Zoe Saldana). This attractive young version of the Enterprise’s linguistics officer leads an attempt to add romantic intrigue to the plot but this is so under-developed and clichéd that my eyes almost rolled right around my head. Even the “surprising” romantic development has no depth, explanation or indeed consequences. This side plot would have been better if it were cut from the film altogether.
Taking Stock

Given the positive criticism and feedback I had read and heard about this film, I approached it with fairly high expectations. I was told that it was ‘not what you would expect from Star Trek’ and so I expected something that was altogether better developed than the previous Star Trek films.

To say that my expectations were disappointed would be an understatement. The other Star Trek films were at least fun and watchable, this one just about managed to keep my interest. The plot and the characters simply weren’t anywhere near good enough to sustain a good movie, and everything else flows from there.

It is difficult, for example, to assess the acting of such shallow characters. Chris Pine’s Kirk was one-dimensional, but that was as much the fault of the scriptwriter and director as that of the actor. The same can be said of the characters played by Greenwood, Urban, Yelchin, Cho and Saldana. There were a couple of performances that managed to rise above this fray; Simon Pegg was lively as the upbeat and slightly crazy Scotty, and Zachary Quinto put in by far the best performance as the uptight and troubled Spock, convincingly depicting his character’s change from rigid coolness to emotional distress and finally somewhere in-between.

The special effects were impressive, with plenty of large explosions, starship fights, transportations and other visually striking pieces. But the producers of summer blockbusters have long laboured under the illusion that awesome special effects can make a good film, and somebody really ought to tell them otherwise. It doesn’t matter how pretty the explosions are, how well rendered the destruction is, if the storyline and characters are weak then the film will disappoint the viewer. I was disappointed.
Where does this leave Star Trek?

I find it difficult to pinpoint the cause of this film’s success. The truth, probably, is that most cinema goers have very different tastes to what I do. If you like your characters to be simple, your plot developments to be essentially predictable, and your bangs to be big and colourful, then you will enjoy this film.

The film’s success must also have something to do with timing. The time was right for a Star Trek comeback, and the nostalgia factor has no doubt led to many people leaving their critical senses at the popcorn stand. This factor is surely enhanced by the appearance in the film of Leonard Nimoy, who played Spock in the original television series. Nostalgia drive to warp speed, captain.

The film wasn’t truly terrible. I wasn’t twiddling my thumbs or stamping my feet with boredom. It is good for all the family, suitable for all but the youngest viewers. The 12A certificate seems a little unnecessary, probably a result of occasional sexual references (the violence certainly isn’t at all graphic). If it comes on TV and you haven’t seen it yet, then it will kill a couple of hours for you. But if you’re thinking about seeing it at the cinema, don’t, and if when it is released on DVD your local rental shop doesn’t have enough copies to satisfy (your) demand, then consider yourself lucky that you haven’t wasted a fiver on it, because it really isn’t worth it.

Live long and prosper.
 

How helpful would this review be to a person making a buying decision? Rating guidelines

exceptional

very helpful

helpful

somewhat helpful

not helpful

off topic

Products you might be interested in »

Galaxy Quest (DVD) I Am Legend (DVD)

I Am Legend (DVD)

Production Year: 2007 - Science Fiction - Director: Francis Lawrence - Original Language: English - Classification: 15 years and over - Starring: Alice Braga, Charlie Tahan, Dash Mihok, Will Smith, Salli Richardson, Willow Smith

User reviews (82)

Buy now for only £ 0.25

Alien Quadrilogy (Box Set) (DVD)

Alien Quadrilogy (Box Set) (DVD)

(+) Original and director's cut edition, flawless transfer, every extra you could want
(-) None

User reviews (8)

Buy now for only £ 8.29

Get Backers Vol.2 (DVD)

Get Backers Vol.2 (DVD)

Production Year: 2002 - Science Fiction - Director: Kazuhiro Furuhashi, Keitaro Motonaga - Classification: 12 years and over

Rate it now

Buy now for only £ 4.54

Aliens (Special Edition) (DVD)

Aliens (Special Edition) (DVD)

(+) Great story, and sooo atmospheric
(-) none, not even to this day.

User reviews (57)

Buy now for only £ 2.14

Independence Day (DVD)

Independence Day (DVD)

(+) Huge huge special effects and amazing explosions
(-) I love America...just a bit too much!

User reviews (62)

Buy now for only £ 3.93

Comments about this review »

M.Newcastle 03.10.2009 16:29

Great review. I really enjoyed the film, and am so relieved that I saw it as I now work with a little autistic boy who is obssessed! x

Templar19 24.09.2009 19:44

The herd instinct is strong in the average film critic! Fantastic review.

leg3nd10 26.08.2009 12:24

I have to disagree. I think that the recent Star Trek film was brilliant. Hope they make another one.

Related offers for Star Trek »

Amazon UK 721 Ratings

Amazon UK

Find "Star Trek" New and Used on Amazon. Free UK Delivery on orders over £25.

 Visit Shop  >
Amazon UK


More reviews »

Star Trek - review by Timbo3107

Advantages: New crew.
Disadvantages: Nero is underused.

Star Trek - review by Timbo3107 Timbo3107 02.06.2009 · Read review
Ciao members have rated this review on average: very helpful
Review of Star Trek

Star Trek - review by Annallon

Advantages: Very good effects, cast, dialogue, packed with action
Disadvantages: Scenes copied from Star Wars, and may seem too cliché with some of the cheesy scenes

Star Trek - review by Annallon Annallon 23.07.2009 (23.07.2009) · Read review
Ciao members have rated this review on average: very helpful
Review of Star Trek

Star Trek - review by eve6kicksass

Advantages: A Marvel in Sci-Fi Entertainment, the best Trek yet
Disadvantages: Trekkies will have thier own nitpicks, but I'm not a trekkie

Star Trek - review by eve6kicksass eve6kicksass 09.05.2009 (09.05.2009) · Read review
Ciao members have rated this review on average: very helpful
Review of Star Trek

Star Trek - review by Fiver29

Advantages: Okay if you don't think too hard about it
Disadvantages: Plot holes and poor acting

Star Trek - review by Fiver29 Fiver29 02.09.2009 · Read review
Ciao members have rated this review on average: very helpful
Review of Star Trek

Star Trek - review by thedevilinme

Advantages: Big screen treat
Disadvantages: Not for DVD

Star Trek - review by thedevilinme thedevilinme 25.11.2009 (25.11.2009) · Read review
Ciao members have rated this review on average: very helpful
Review of Star Trek



Are you the manufacturer / provider of Star Trek? Click here