![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
locker_monsterI'll admit it. My family and I are Trekkers. We're not hardcore Star Trek geeks, but we've seen every movie and watched every show and for all the recent films, we've seen them together. So how could we not go see the new Star Trek movie opening weekend? And thankfully, it was better than I expected.
But can you say "Holy franchise reboot, Batman!" Though, I respect why they had to do it. Trek has 40 odd years of continuity to deal with and that's a lot of stuff to remember and keep track of. It's why comic books are always rebooting their titles: characters and plots can get stale after a really long time. So while the movie doesn't do a complete reboot, it does mess with continuity enough that you can get away with new things. But you can also argue, that since they did use time travel, the original continuity is still intact; it's just an alternative reality. They even bring up the concept of parallel worlds in the movie, so fans who don't like it can take comfort in the fact that everything still exists properly somewhere in the universe.
And boy, good thing time travel was involved. Before I saw the movie, the whole idea of the movie irked me. The assumption that Kirk and Spock and the rest of the crew knew each other before they served on the Enterprise just didn't seem right. Well, Kirk knowing Spock and McCoy beforehand is believable but not everyone else. But with history being changed and characters going on paths they hadn't before, it all makes sense in the end. Everyone ending up on the Enterprise isn't planned and that's more believable. But I wholly believe the Enterprise was built in space, not in Iowa, and no amount of time travel should change that.
I was a little worried that casting new people would make the movie sucked, but it didn't. The one I was worried about most was McCoy. Karl Urban? But he does an awesome job and he nailed McCoy's crankiness and reluctance to fly in space. They even explained how he got the nickname "Bones". I always believed it was because he was skinny. Nope, it's because the ex-wife left him only "his bones" in the divorce and I guess Kirk sort of latched onto that. Chris Pine also did not annoy me. I get why Kirk seems moodier in this movie; his history was changed, too by the time travelling Romulans. While I still believe Paul McGillion should have played Scotty, I can see why they hired Simon Pegg. Scotty in the movie, for whatever reason, is more of the comic relief guy, so makes it senses to hire a comedic guy. If they had gone with the traditional Scotty, Paul McGillion would have rocked the role. He's still in the movie, but it's a tiny little role that goes by so fast you wouldn't notice him unless you're looking for him. It's weird Chekov is suddenly this 17 year old genius, but admittedly, Chekov didn't have much to do in the original series, so the writers had to do something. Whiz kid? Why not. Uhura making out with Spock? Um, okay. Sulu fighting off Romulans with a collapsable katana? To quote the Futurama episode "Where No Fan Has Gone Before": "I find that offensive. Just because I am of Japanese ancestry, you assume I know karate. Have I ever lead you to believe I have studied karate?" Okay, that line's probably funnier within the context of the episode, but you get the idea. But the characters are there for the most part and any changes, well, you can shout "Time travel" and that's the end of the argument.
I'm not the hugest fan of JJ Abrams, actually I think he's overrated, but he just directed this, so the plot wasn't really up to him. So pissed off Romulan miners from the 24th century travel back to the 23rd century to get revenge on Ambassador Spock because they believe he allowed Romulus to be destroyed by a supernova. They want to destroy Vulcan and have him watch. But time travel, the tricky thing that it is, sends the Romulans too far into the past and their appearance totally messes up with history. Poor Vulcan and nearly all of the Vulcan race bite the dust, including Spock's mom. And thus, Kirk and crew have to stop the Romulans before they destroy Earth. Oh, and old Spock, or as they call him in the credits "Spock Prime", gets sucked back in time, too. He actually gets a nice scene with young Kirk and he meets Scotty, too. One could argue Spock Prime should have no memory of the old timeline due to changes in the past, but there are various theories of time travel out there, so we can overlook that. But having old Spock in the film sort of carries on the tradition of having the previous generation appear to launch the new generation.
But just how are fans suppose to quantify this new version of Trek? It's not the same continuity. Will we have to call all the previous Star Trek shows and movies "Roddenberry Trek" and this new stuff "Abrams Trek"? Doctor Who doesn't have this problem. It's just "Classic" and "New". Maybe "Classic Trek" and "New Trek"? It'll definitely make all the wikis sites a bit dizzy in the coming weeks. Should Chris Pine's Kirk be considered a completely different Kirk from Shanter's? And so on and so forth...
The movie had its funny moments too, with plenty of subtle nods to the previous continuity. They mention an "Admiral Archer" (huh, I guess Enterprise isn't affected at all by the reboot then; I bet fans wish it could be erased from history too. :-D) and how Scotty used Archer's prized beagle for a transporter experiment. No, not Porthos! There was even a Tribble. Annoyingly, JJ Abrams' "Slusho" from all his other stuff got a mention. But Spock got to say to Kirk "I have been and always shall be your friend." Nerdgasm!
I'm sure they'll make a whole bunch of new movies after this one, unless this movie totally bombed. Hopefully along the way they decide to make another Star Trek TV show now that there are new angles to explore.
But can you say "Holy franchise reboot, Batman!" Though, I respect why they had to do it. Trek has 40 odd years of continuity to deal with and that's a lot of stuff to remember and keep track of. It's why comic books are always rebooting their titles: characters and plots can get stale after a really long time. So while the movie doesn't do a complete reboot, it does mess with continuity enough that you can get away with new things. But you can also argue, that since they did use time travel, the original continuity is still intact; it's just an alternative reality. They even bring up the concept of parallel worlds in the movie, so fans who don't like it can take comfort in the fact that everything still exists properly somewhere in the universe.
And boy, good thing time travel was involved. Before I saw the movie, the whole idea of the movie irked me. The assumption that Kirk and Spock and the rest of the crew knew each other before they served on the Enterprise just didn't seem right. Well, Kirk knowing Spock and McCoy beforehand is believable but not everyone else. But with history being changed and characters going on paths they hadn't before, it all makes sense in the end. Everyone ending up on the Enterprise isn't planned and that's more believable. But I wholly believe the Enterprise was built in space, not in Iowa, and no amount of time travel should change that.
I was a little worried that casting new people would make the movie sucked, but it didn't. The one I was worried about most was McCoy. Karl Urban? But he does an awesome job and he nailed McCoy's crankiness and reluctance to fly in space. They even explained how he got the nickname "Bones". I always believed it was because he was skinny. Nope, it's because the ex-wife left him only "his bones" in the divorce and I guess Kirk sort of latched onto that. Chris Pine also did not annoy me. I get why Kirk seems moodier in this movie; his history was changed, too by the time travelling Romulans. While I still believe Paul McGillion should have played Scotty, I can see why they hired Simon Pegg. Scotty in the movie, for whatever reason, is more of the comic relief guy, so makes it senses to hire a comedic guy. If they had gone with the traditional Scotty, Paul McGillion would have rocked the role. He's still in the movie, but it's a tiny little role that goes by so fast you wouldn't notice him unless you're looking for him. It's weird Chekov is suddenly this 17 year old genius, but admittedly, Chekov didn't have much to do in the original series, so the writers had to do something. Whiz kid? Why not. Uhura making out with Spock? Um, okay. Sulu fighting off Romulans with a collapsable katana? To quote the Futurama episode "Where No Fan Has Gone Before": "I find that offensive. Just because I am of Japanese ancestry, you assume I know karate. Have I ever lead you to believe I have studied karate?" Okay, that line's probably funnier within the context of the episode, but you get the idea. But the characters are there for the most part and any changes, well, you can shout "Time travel" and that's the end of the argument.
I'm not the hugest fan of JJ Abrams, actually I think he's overrated, but he just directed this, so the plot wasn't really up to him. So pissed off Romulan miners from the 24th century travel back to the 23rd century to get revenge on Ambassador Spock because they believe he allowed Romulus to be destroyed by a supernova. They want to destroy Vulcan and have him watch. But time travel, the tricky thing that it is, sends the Romulans too far into the past and their appearance totally messes up with history. Poor Vulcan and nearly all of the Vulcan race bite the dust, including Spock's mom. And thus, Kirk and crew have to stop the Romulans before they destroy Earth. Oh, and old Spock, or as they call him in the credits "Spock Prime", gets sucked back in time, too. He actually gets a nice scene with young Kirk and he meets Scotty, too. One could argue Spock Prime should have no memory of the old timeline due to changes in the past, but there are various theories of time travel out there, so we can overlook that. But having old Spock in the film sort of carries on the tradition of having the previous generation appear to launch the new generation.
But just how are fans suppose to quantify this new version of Trek? It's not the same continuity. Will we have to call all the previous Star Trek shows and movies "Roddenberry Trek" and this new stuff "Abrams Trek"? Doctor Who doesn't have this problem. It's just "Classic" and "New". Maybe "Classic Trek" and "New Trek"? It'll definitely make all the wikis sites a bit dizzy in the coming weeks. Should Chris Pine's Kirk be considered a completely different Kirk from Shanter's? And so on and so forth...
The movie had its funny moments too, with plenty of subtle nods to the previous continuity. They mention an "Admiral Archer" (huh, I guess Enterprise isn't affected at all by the reboot then; I bet fans wish it could be erased from history too. :-D) and how Scotty used Archer's prized beagle for a transporter experiment. No, not Porthos! There was even a Tribble. Annoyingly, JJ Abrams' "Slusho" from all his other stuff got a mention. But Spock got to say to Kirk "I have been and always shall be your friend." Nerdgasm!
I'm sure they'll make a whole bunch of new movies after this one, unless this movie totally bombed. Hopefully along the way they decide to make another Star Trek TV show now that there are new angles to explore.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-05-09 11:01 pm (UTC)Like you, I had HUGE reservations about Karl Urban and Chris Pine. But, they were believable. And as far as mirror universes go, this one is far more fun that the evil federation empire one (and mirror universes are canon), so it's all good. I'm itching to see it again. My kid though, would kill me. He's not a Trek fan, and going to the movie with me (and doing the ST experience just a few months ago) is pushing his limits.
no subject
Date: 2009-05-10 02:05 am (UTC)Ah yes, but in the mirror universe, everyone has evil goatees and you can't go wrong with that. :-D I'm a big sucker for time travel and alternative reality stories and they use both elements pretty well in the movie. If you can justify it, then it's not a cheap story move.
I've been to the Experience, about four years ago. Went with my parents. Yeah, you either love Star Trek or you don't. I saw young kids in the theatre and I couldn't help but think, "Whoo, starting them early on the path to geekhood."