Back to Reviews

Reviews Comments: Set Phasers to dumb Star Trek film/book review by shinfernape

This movie was unabated disaster from the twisted visions of the terrible trio: J.J.Abrams, Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman. One of the worst visual experiences to have ever been witnessed, and a movie worthy of the mention of devil-man: Michael Bay.

No this movie displays a level of head-spinning nausea that even Michael Bay would be envious of. They use a lot of revolving camera shots which are so painfully close to many of the actors faces all the damn time. Heck there is even a hint of shaky cam to this loopy piece of film making. It absolutely floods the screen full of lighting and lens flare in particular. A lot of the intense scenes make some really annoying use of strobing too. All this combined with the fast-paced editing style makes it all feel far too jittery and manic.

The characters are usually far too serious but lacking in any real quirks other than their specific skill set. Case of point is Sulu, who is simply the designated Asian guy who knows some martial arts. Other than Simon Pegg, it doesn't feel like they tried to make their characters feel organic.

As for plot, well this was written by Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman pair of Transformers fame. That's right, they let tweedle dee and tweedle dumb right the damn story for this movie. So it is a given that the jokes fall flat and some of the lines that are meant to be serious end up cause some eyes to roll. Like how Spock Prime must say some convoluted nonsense about destiny and friendship that it felt completely unnecessary and paneery. These numb-skulls apparently took the plot of Star Wars: A New Hope and shamelessly slapped it onto this movie and slashed it with the alot of the LAST movie; Star Trek Nemesis. Speaking of Nemesis; Nero was quite a poor villain for a Trek movie, as he lacked the sophistry and complexity of past Trek villains like the Borg Queen or Khan. He's just angry and hits things. You can see the semblance to Nemesis in that its bold pointy-eared fellas, who live in this massive life-cleasing ship which is pretty dark.

This movie is bad enough for actual fans of Star Trek but as a film that stands on its own, it totally topples into a heap of crumbling trash. How is it that this prequel can totally forget what The Original Series was even about? Exploring the vast recesses beyond all the known frontiers.


  • lacusness
  • 12th Nov 11
Buddy, I deal with change quite well. Hence I actually like Star Trek Enterprise. Change keeps things fresh. I don't hate on things based on how much they change

Sulu ain't fencing with a foil. The just took the All Asians Know Martial Arts stereotype instead of actually make him use proper fencing.

Nero was angry. Khan was angry. The difference? Khan has style, finesse, composure. Epic quotes. Nero is just a tattooed angry ex-con.

It was a dumb movie, ok.
  • Tomwithnonumbers
  • 13th Nov 11
You know what else is fluid and engaging? The sea. It's also nauseating. Presumably by engaging you mean "moves around a lot at awkward angles for still scenes making me feel more involved by not giving me a very clear picture of the scene"?

I jest, but seriously, your dismissal is out of place. Factually the camera moved about a lot more and at a lot more unnatural angles than almost any other major film _ever_ released. I can understand that two people can have a different impression of the same thing, but to so casually dismiss the view of the other person and even imply that they are wrong and inferior because they hold that position, when the case is so extreme, strikes me as a little ill thought out. I think you got a little caught up in emotion of rebuking the rejection of a film which you obviously loved dearly (and yes that is, I'm afraid, a little reflection on the fourth word of your review, if you'll forgive me)

Equally you end up giving the impression that you're making the argument "No Sulu isn't a 1D character whose defining trait is martial arts, his defining trait is fencing." As such you didn't actually make a point. I feel you could easily be right but I missed the first part of the film, where presumably the characterisation occurred and it would be cool if you could tell me about so i can see things your way.

Also you (possibly unknowingly) told him off for daring to suggest that Simon Pegg acted well, although I take it from the tone of your comments that you probably actually agree with him.

I think we've already discussed the next line already and I hope that once you've had the chance to reread your comment you'll see that complaining about the plot being rubbish doesn't have much of a logical connection to the camera work being shoddy.

I believe you are right to suggest friendship and hope aren't trademarked by A New Hope, never the less the reviewer suggested said friendship and hope in this film was naff and I believe things can be naff regardless of trademark status.

Yes Nero is angry because his family is dead and he's gone insane. This is perfectly correct. I guess this does imply (being insane and angry because his family is dead) that he probably lacks the sophistry and complexity of other Star Trek villains. Whilst being angry because you're family is dead, is perfectly good motivation, I feel we can probably all agree that it isn't particularly surprising or complicated motivation. It's probably perfectly normal to be angry because your family is dead.

Now prequel! we get to an interesting subject (although too interesting again to relate to such a dismissive 'uh'). It's certainly set before the other Star Trek films, it's an origins story featuring younger version of the characters we know but in the flow of narrative it's after the original Star Trek and before but in a different branch of all the Star Trek films after that. Again it's an alternate universe unconnected (now) from the other films. So I feel case can be made for it being a prequel, sequel and reimagining all at the same time!
  • marcellX
  • 13th Nov 11
ok I get were you're going that fencing is not very related to Asians, but fencing really is a martial art.

If it's an alternate universe then it's not a prequel, the closest it can get is an alternate universe of a prequel, which it doesn't look like since like you said the narrative it's after the original.
  • Tomwithnonumbers
  • 14th Nov 11
Okay I'll explain that one a bit better.

Here is Old Star Trek Here is * Here is the rest of the Star Trek

'*' is where the people from Old Star Trek go back in time to the very beginning, before Old Star Trek, when Jim and his friends were just training and the Enterprise had just been built. So narratively people come from a sequel to the Old Star Trek (which is before the other movies) to a time where it is a prequel to the old star trek and then events happen in that prequel that branch off into a parallel universe. So it's a sequel in that it involves events that happen after the first films, it's a prequel in that it deals with events that happen before the first film, and it's an alternate universe in that now, in the prequel things have changed so the things that happened in the original will never occur

In order to post comments, you need to

Get Known