The new Star Trek has an interesting dilemma. The film looks like a summer blockbuster. It’s definitely on the radar. On ground level, however, there’s a mixed bag. I’ve had quite a few people ask what my thoughts are on the whole thing.
“Is it worth seeing?”
“Will it suck?”
“Watching Star Trek is like punching myself in the face with rocks and pine branches.”
I haven’t seen Star Trek yet, so I can’t say. Andy’s not hopeful, but I will say I’m an ardent believer in J.J. Abram’s talent. From Alias to Lost to the underrated Mission Impossible: III, Abrams has shown himself adept at both crafting an immersive story, memorable characters and steady direction.
That said, it’s no surprise the early buzz on Star Trek has been gushingly positive. Paramount thinks they’ve got a winner as well– they recently screened the movie a month early for a theater full of highly critical Trek fans with emotionally questionable investment in the whole franchise. Against all odds, and excluding Star Trek: The Next Generation and starship Enterprise worshiping purists, most fans approved.
Ok, so hen-pecking fans are one thing. In the mean time, there’s the rest of the movie-going public– the non-fans who hear Star Trek and think of stodgy old folks, dry plotting, goofy special effects, nerds and thrift store costuming.
For these folks, here’s some reassurance the new Star Trek is not the old Star Trek — and is probably worth parting with some coin to see.
The largest, most notable review to date (pending Andy’s potential review in the coming weeks) has arrived today, courtesy of Variety magazine. The gushing continues:
“Star Trek” here joins the James Bond series as the long-term ’60s franchises that have been most successfully rebooted, although the current accomplishment is the more surprising since, after 10 films and a succession of TV series, “Star Trek” was widely thought to have exhausted itself. While respectfully handling the Roddenberry DNA, Abrams and longtime writing cohorts Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman have successfully transferred it to a trim new body that hums with youthful energy.
A wham-bang 12-minute action prologue both clears the palette of residual series expectations and sets the table for the kind of excitement that’s amply in store. Script brims with backstory and future-story…Star Trek” rockets along like a beautifully engineered vehicle you can’t help but admire for its design and performance. It shifts gears often but always smoothly, and accelerates again and yet again when you suspect it might be tempted to ease up for good. The series trappings remain, but this reincarnation is dynamic where the old one was often stodgy, stylish instead of a bit square….production and effects values are top-notch. Michael Giacchino’s score soars — occasionally a bit too much, perhaps — with real character and vigor.”
Is Star Trek worth seeing? From all I’ve heard,”YES”.
Buy into the hype (I am!) or prove it wrong May 8.