So I saw the movie on May 16…the day before (?) nation-wide release. That’s a big deal for me…I never seen movies anywhere near opening day…plus I see very few movie in the theater these days.
Last year: Avengers, Batman, Hobbit (and a couple of kids movies).
Once I saw the movie I knew there were a number of things I liked, and a number of things I didn’t.
The things I didn’t I could immediately articulate, whereas the aspects I liked I couldn’t put into words.
And I didn’t want to knee-jerk and immediately post a negative rant.
So I decided I’d wait a week before posting any thots here on the forum.
Weeks have now turned into nearly a month, and my feelings about the movie have soured more than improved. So better than nothing, here goes:
First off, I aggree with everything Frakkintalos and Casilda say above.
Though I think unlike Talos I’m not as completely negative about it, but rather disappointed and philosophical about it
.
I’m not gonna say “It’s not Star Trek”. Let’s remember that Star Trek was kinda dead before ST 2009 came along. And these movies are an attempt to revive the franchise.
On the positive side, yes it was an enjoyable movie experience. Looked great, acting great, story tight and kept moving.
And am I glad it exists? Yes. Star Trek on the big screen. I’d rather have it than not have it.
Now here’s my objections. I wish the story hadn’t made such a clumsy attempt to rehash an old already revivied character: Khan.
Here’s what I had wished they had done instead: In order of preference. 1 being highest.
-
GIVE US A NEW STORY.
Star Trek 2009 did a very clever thing by rebooting and reintroducing Star Trek with a brand new time line. What that means is the door was open in the sequel for a brand new work of imagination …new villians, new situations, new anything.
So…AWESOME. Give us a brand new work of imagination. Carve out new territory.
They chose not to do that.
-
BASED IT AROUND ANOTHER STORYLINE FROM TOS.
Maybe the Gary Mitchell story from Where No Man Has Gone Before. Maybe something else.
Wrath of Khan did a clever thing reviving Khan as villian. Be clever and do that with A DIFFERENT character.
They chose not to do that.
-
KHAN DONE RIGHT. NOT SILLY. Okay, it’s a tough spot. Your actor leaves and you have B. Cumberbatch. A Brit. A very very white Brit. I guess it’s lose lose whether you instead did a Indian actor…to match the name Khan Noonian Singh. …Or do you go with a Hispanic actor to match with Riccardo Montelbaum. Probably weighing deep into politically incorrectness ether way. But… now with Cumberbatch, one can only say WTF?
Okay. So Khan …this brilliant, power-hungry dude from the past is gonna accept working as a secret agent for some douchey Admiral? I don’t buy it.
Don’t get me started on the silliness of Peter Weller’s Black Hat villian as the Evil Admiral…You can tell he’s evil cuz he’s got a black ship that’s like totally black…Oh, and the crew all has special batman villian type uniforms. Very nice.
Now let’s talk Kirk death scene.
These thots went thru my head as I watched this scene with my head tilted to one side.
Why should I care about this Kirk death scene when:
(a) You know that they’re not gonna kill of Kirk.
(b) We’ve seen this same seen before in Wrath of Khan.
© The movie completely telegraphs that Khan has blood that can heal the dying. So we know Kirk ain’t gonna die.
Top the scene off with the emotionally in control Spock yelling…completely out of place…KHANNNN!!
(time to feel nausea )
…on, and the Klingons completely interesting. Go back and learn something from Search From Spock as long as you’re stealing ideas.
So anyway. This movie was disappointing and missed opportunity.
And I’m upset about it.
…and I do feel a little bit of what Frakkintalos said earlier in this thread.
Before ya’ll get defensive, don’t assume all this means I not happy most people like the movie.
Good on ya. It was made for you guys. And, it was a very well made movie.
But let us who are upset up it have our say too.
I feel a lot of what Talos says here:
Perhaps. I am not above these things. Nor am I afraid to admit the foolishness of it. However, I cannot escape my feelings. Growing up I was mocked for my love of Star Trek. “Ha Ha, you have no friends and live in your mom’s basement. Geek. Nerd. Dork. Ha Ha.” Yeah, hilarious. Through GWC, I’ve met friends. They are well-educated, well-read, well-versed, and well-rounded people. I’ve watched the show I grew up loving with them and heard their critique and praise for it.
I’ve been trying to put my finger on what exactly is bothering me. I think I have. As I mentioned, I was mocked for my love of Star Trek and scifi. Now it is chic, geek chic. Yet, it still feels like mockery. “We” didn’t like it before, but now it’s cool. That is not true appreciation. That is not true admiration. That is not true understanding. That is still marginalizing.
Yeah. I’m with you my friend. I feel once again misunderstood, marginalized and pushed into the corner.
It feels familiar and not in a good way.
). Also, who designed the interior of the Enterprise to include huge, vertical, circular chasms with crossing walkways? Did the Starfleet Corps of Engineers never consider the possibility that any of their (admittedly) highly sophisticated starships might lose artificial gravity at some point? I know that the Enterprise has always been depicted as having sleek, smooth corridors, but now that I think about it, there really should be some sort of emergency harnesses (ala the ones used by the bridge crew) or at the very least, some handholds, to keep people from plummeting to their deaths in such a situation.
