Star Trek's Recent Activity - Spout

Film:Star Trek

Mon, 27 Jul 2009 23:01:02 GMT

Title: Star Trek
Year: 2009
Director: J.J. Abrams
Plot: Mission Impossible III director and Alias creator J.J. Abrams resurrects the classic science fiction franchise created by Gene Roddenberry with this feature film that embraces the rich history of the influential television and film series while also exploring some uncharted territory. Heroes star Zachary Quinto assumes the role of the Federation Starfleet lieutenant and Vulcan made famous in the original series by Leonard Nemoy (who also appears in an older incarnation of his original role), with Anton Yelchin stepping into the role of U.S.S. Enterprise navigator Pavel Checkov, Zoe Saldana assuming the role of communications officer Uhura, Simon Pegg keeping the ship in top shape as chief engineer Montgomery Scott, and Erica Bana tormenting the benevolent space explorers as the villainous Nero. Harold and Kumar Go to White Castle co-star John Cho also boards the Enterprise as staff psychiatrist Hikaru Sulu, with Chris Pine and Karl Urban assuming the legendary roles of Captain Kirk and Leonard "Bones" McCoy, respectively. ~ Jason Buchanan, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 83
Number of Lists: 16
Number of blog posts: 22
Number of discussion threads: 8
SpoutRating: 4

Spout Post: Star Trek - J.J.Abrams Bold New Universe

Tue, 06 Oct 2009 20:30:46 GMT

Post By: apope
Post To: apope Blog
Post Date: 10/6/2009 4:30:46 PM
Body: Star Trek(2009) J.J.Abrams vision of the Star Trek universe is both unique and faithful. It brings a youthful energy to a familiar cast of characters. It was dangerous territory. The Star Trek franchise can be credited with the most diehard fans around. Not the usual blood, sweat, and tears fans found in the sports world for example; but fans that immerse themselves in the fictional universe and all the details it has to offer. Crossing facts or redefining characters can result in your product being labeled a pariah, banished from the Star Trek lexicon. It takes a bold new approach sometimes to put to question what details really matter. J.J.Abrams Star Trek is a prequel that points the crew of the enterprise in a new direction using a familiar plot device to fans of the franchise, Time Travel. Through a careful incision, Abrams changed the course of history and opened up a new universe of possibilities. The film opens to the moment Abram’s makes his mark and inserts the villain Nero (Eric Bana) into an unsuspecting universe. Just as the viewer is knocked off balance by the stunning visual effects and quick pace, so too is Nero knocked off balance and left looking for his own justice. It is this same insertion of misfortune that results in the new cast donning the mantle of crew of the Enterprise to seek out and address this threat. Little time is wasted reviewing the who’s who of the Star Trek familiars. For most, even if their exploits are unfamiliar, the names and personalities of these icons has permeated pop culture. Kirk (Chris Pine) the brash and fearless captain, Spock ( Zachary Quinto )the cold and logical science officer, Scotty ( Simon Pegg )the dutiful engineer, we have heard the names before and for the most part understand their place. It is here that Abram’s Star Trek shows it can be more. Abram’s and writers Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman take their own knowledge of the Star Trek franchise and layered the movie with references to the past. They skillfully dropped homage’s to the character’s and the original series. From Sulu’s sword fighting prowess in “The Naked Time” to Kirk’s weakness for green women like in “Whom Gods Destroy” there are plenty of ties to its predecessor. As well, they leave their mark on the franchise by providing new insights into familiar characters like the origin of the nickname “Bones” for Dr.McCoy ( Karl Urban ). Abrams’ chose to focus on the emerging friendship between Kirk and Spock ( given a slight nudge by the original Spock, Leonard Nimoy ). One that, even though the universe is profoundly altered, seems destined to occur. Through the new faces, modernized effects, and faster pace, Abrams delivers a space adventure that can stand on its own. The balance between loyalty and innovation is delicately walked and results in an excellent film that stays true to it’s namesake. Star Trek was an ambitious project and Abrams boldly led it into a new world.

Spout Post: Bullets of Summer: Movie Edition

Mon, 27 Jul 2009 23:01:02 GMT

Post By: ShaunHuston
Post To: ShaunHuston filmblog
Post Date: 7/27/2009 7:01:02 PM
Body: Picking up more pieces from this summer of non-blogging. Now, summer films. Star Trek. Like, well, pretty much everybody, I found the new Trek film to be well-cast and thoroughly entertaining. Structurally, I think that the intro for Kirk could have been tighter – the joyride scene in no way needs to be as drawn out as it is, especially not when followed by the bar fight. For me, the movie really gets started when Spock shows up. And yet, I do agree with Chris Wisniewski at Reverse Shot about the lack of philosophical ambition in JJ Abrams' reboot. Trek's creators have always strived to make the franchise about something, and while this hasn't always led to good film or TV, it does, I think, help explain the durability of the storyworld. The new movie is not only the first installment that seems to have been made purely for thrill and spectacle, but allows horrific genocide to go by with hardly more than a nod in the direction of the profundity of such an event. I still enjoyed the movie, but after the fact, I felt myself missing the typical moral and intellectual earnestness of the series. Sugar. An interesting and sometimes beautiful film, particularly in its handling of cultural juxtapositions and the deftness with which it wraps an immigration story in a sports movie. I need to watch it again though to fully develop my thoughts; my expectations were pretty high going in and sometimes it helps to see a movie like that once, with those burdens, and then again later, without them to gain some perspective. The Brothers Bloom. Another film I was looking forward to, and enjoyed, but need to see again. I mentally composed, but never wrote, a post on the movie's production design, which I think works well to shift the core cast into their own version of reality, one where Stephen's elaborate and literary cons might actually work. Motivated quirkiness of this kind, which is probably most often associated today with Wes Anderson's movies, works better for me than unmotivated oddness, as in Juno (2007), where the quirks are pretty much their own arguments, and not in the service of anything of consequence. The Girlfriend Experience. Not sure what to write here; a film I'm glad I saw, but can't say that it left much of a lasting impression. Public Enemies. This is a movie I like and appreciate more now than when I first saw it. I am compelled by the use of HD for a period piece like this, a device that clearly announces itself as a product of now, a movie about the 1930s, not of or from the period, which is the more conventional way of approaching historical material. Harry Potter & the Half-Blood Prince. As the film franchise has progressed, I am less enthused about seeing these movies. In part, this is because the films are becoming more what they should have been to begin with, which is directed at fans and readers of the books, which I am not. Moon. The best film I've seen this summer, easily. Beautiful, cool, provocative, anchored by a surprisingly understated lead, almost one-person show, performance from Sam Rockwell. Love the way the film quietly and cleverly plays with the memory of 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968). Originally posted on:Short-Circuit Signs

Spout Post: STAR TREK a film review

Mon, 29 Jun 2009 23:40:38 GMT

Post By: KevynKnox
Post To: KevynKnox Blog
Post Date: 6/29/2009 7:40:38 PM
Body: Forty-three years after Gene Roddenberry first boldly went where no one had gone before and thirty years after the first cinematic endeavor and twenty-two years after the coming of the next generation and seven years after the last movie attempt (and at least fifteen years after anyone really cared anymore), Star Trek has been reborn - or should I say, rebooted. Daring us to once again boldly go while at the same time tagging us with the bold statement that this was no longer our father's Star Trek (or in the case of us "older folks" who grew up with the original series - "our" Star Trek), TV wunderkind J.J. Abrams has managed the seemingly impossible. He has made a Star Trek so ingrained with four plus decades of sci-fi mythology as to please even the most discerning of die-hard Trekkers (even those still living in their parent's basement at near middle age - their own phasers set on stun) while at the same time keeping it youthful enough to bring aboard legions of novice Starfleet cadets. He, just like a young and cocky James Tiberius Kirk, has beaten the unbeatable Kobayashi Maru - and he only cheated a little. How's that for a reference sure to confound all those aforementioned neophyte cadets yet thrill the legions of Trek nerds I boldly announce myself as completely in tune with. Using the time-tested (pun very much intended) Trek standby (re: cheat) of time travel to create what is in essence an alternate reality Star Trek, Abrams comes aboard, as brash and full of bravado as Chris Pine's newly retooled rebel without a cause Kirk himself, with not just a beloved sci-fi universe rolled out in front of him, but with the suave beauty of a clean slate to boldly go wherever he damn well pleases. Abrams (born mere months before the original series first flew into living rooms across America) can have his space cake and eat it to - and blow it up if he wants (which he does in part). Just like Roddenberry back in '66, it lays at his feet for him to do with whatever he so desires. After seeing the finished product, this self admitted Star Trek nerd can safely say he believes that Roddenberry is looking down from his resting place amongst the stars with a happy heart - or at least he should be. The story begins, as always, in the heat of battle. A federation ship is being attacked by Nero, a renegade Romulan looking more like a Maori beyond Thunderdome than the traditional Romulan of Trek lore. When the ship's captain is summoned over to the Romulan's obvious deathtrap, he places a young officer by the name of George Kirk in command. To make a long story short, Kirk goes down with his ship after making sure the crew, along with his giving-birth-right-now wife and their fresh-faced new son, one James Tiberius Kirk, are shuttled off to safety. It is pure space opera and it works on just that level. After this we get backstories and character introductions (and even get to see cadet Kirk's tryst with a green-skinned alien) and finally just why that damned Nero is so pissed off at the federation - and especially Spock. We even get allusions to Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan when Nero screeches Spock!!! into the otherwise soundproof environs of space just as Shatner's Kirk yelled Khan!!!. It's just as cheesy and just as fun. Pauline Kael once wrote of the second Trek movie that it was "wonderful dumb fun" and this is certainly no different. And the new cast, the veritable nexus of chat room speculation and argumentative controversy ever since Abrams' revamping plans began to first unfold, works as well. Chris Pine as the iconic Captain Kirk is a twenty-something horndog roustabout who joins Starfleet more out of spite or on a dare than out of any sense of duty. The perpetually brooding Zachary Quinto plays the even more iconic Mr. Spock with a Vulcan calmness just this side of emotional eruption. He looks so much like Nimoy one must wonder if he wasn't born to play the part. Karl Urban, in one of the most dead reckoning impersonations in the group, plays Dr. Leonard "Bones" McCoy with the same bug-eyed curmudgeonry as DeForest Kelly's original grizzled anti-social country doctor with a taste for bourbon and a definitive distaste for space travel. Then there is Simon Pegg doing Scotty in high brogue as only a comic actor can and should do him. My one major criticism of the film is there is not enough Scotty (he doesn't even make an appearance until around minute 85 or 90). We also get Zoe Saldana as the smokin' hot Uhura in retro mini skirt and gogo boots (she really doesn't have much else to do), John Cho (sans Kumar) as the helmsman Sulu, Anton Yelchin as a seventeen Pavel Chekov with a major case of 23rd century ADD, Bruce Greenwood as the ill-fated Captain Christopher Pike, Ben Cross and Winona Ryder as Spock's star-crossed parents, Eric Bana as the aforementioned Khan-esque Nero and even Tyler Perry as a Starfleet Admiral (luckily not trying to be "very funny"). All the favorite characters are here (but where are Nurse Chapel and Yeoman Rand?) fulfilling their duty as newly appointed icons, replete with all the old standard lines that have become part of sci-fi lore, but still, as always, this is the Kirk and Spock show. Philosophically set against each other - Kirk and Spock, body and mind - we watch the beginnings of an eternal struggle put to rest by the almost symbiotic way these two opposite reactions work together toward the same goal. Both are great in the parts but it is Pine who has the decidedly tougher mountain to climb. Pine has to channel the bravura of Shatner's Kirk but also avoid falling into the drama queen over excess of Shatner the actor. A friend describes Shatner lovingly (sort of) as that embarrassing uncle who tries to get you to fish around in his pocket for a present. Shatner's presence, bloated jackass or not (and don't get me wrong, I loved him in the original role), will always be there and yet Pine manages to parlay only the good into his transformation into Captain James T. Kirk. Yet, the old school Trekker in me (I was just two years old when the original series was canceled due to low ratings!? but grew up on the seventies reruns) cannot help but keep returning to Leonard Nimoy's Spock Prime. More than just a glorified cameo, Spock Prime, who's inadvertent delineation of the known timeline which flips everything on its head is the nadir of the film's story, is the very heart and soul of the new Star Trek. Watching Nimoy back where he belongs and obviously loving every moment of his trek back home (pun intended again) is like once again seeing that beloved childhood friend you never even realized you missed like crazy but who has been in the back of your mind for years and years and years. Just as Nimoy has gone home again (and who said you couldn't?) so to has this once, and always, impressionable perpetual youth. Forty-three years of pop culture references - from South Park and Family Guy to Galaxy Quest, SNL and even That 70's Show - and the franchise of Star Trek, with its phasers and communicators and its "beam me up Scotty" apocryphals, is still alive. Perhaps it has been on life support for a while now. Kept alive long after any real interest in the later spin-offs and elongated episodic cinematic endeavors has gone as kaput as a red-shirted ensign on a landing party. But no matter how sick it may have become, the imagery has never died. It is this very pop culture and all the mythos and iconography which surrounds it that makes Abrams reboot work as well as it does. His sleek new look that never takes away from the now-retro original series is a pitch-perfect melange of old and new sensibilities. My critical half (aka my pretentious half) is inline with my nerd half and I too can have my cake and eat it. In the final scene, when everyone is on the bridge in those iconic (and somewhat cooler) original episode uniforms - I actually got chills (God, I am a nerd!!!) and Pine's subtle Shatneresque smirk and slap on Bones' shoulder and the way he sits in that captain's chair, legs crossed ala Shatner, along with the obvious love and care in giving us Nimoy's Spock "Prime", shows that though this is not our father's Star Trek and is definitely boldly going where no one has gone before, it would and could still hold high reverence for all that had come before it. The mythology is still there and yet, like Zefram Cochrane making first contact, Abrams brings new life to this long dead Phoenix and we realize we can boldly go anywhere from here. What more could we ever ask for. Now bring on the Klingons.

Spout Post: Star Trek Boldly Goes Where It's (Not Often) Gone Before

Sun, 28 Jun 2009 15:26:49 GMT

Post By: pippin06
Post To: Reel Thoughts
Post Date: 6/28/2009 11:26:49 AM
Body: A week ago, I was enjoying a short vacation and excursion to the Windy City to visit some friends I had not seen in a bit and to enjoy a bit of shopping and high-priced dining. The trouble is that the Windy City was largely the Hot City, and so I was less apt to do outdoors and touristy activities than I was to find indoor places to play. I've been to Chicago too many times to be a bona fide tourist anymore anyway, as opposed to an idle visitor, so I did not feel like I was missing anything. I digress. So, last Friday, when it was both hot and stormy, my friend and I decided to catch a film at the multiplex off Michigan Avenue and to take in some downtown type food afterward. We elected to see Star Trek, as neither of us had seen it, we are both modest trekkers (at least from past precedent), and none of our other friends would be likely to want to see it with us. I must admit, I was a bit skeptical. Even though the film was directed by one of my personal heroes, JJ Abrams, and even though the film was, essentially, a prequel, focusing on younger versions of everyone's favorite James T. Kirk, Mr. Spock, Dr. "Bones" McCoy, and so on, I am always a bit leery of franchise reboots because they can be so hit and miss. For example, Batman under Christopher Nolan: hit. Star Wars prequelization: miss. This year's Star Trek, however, actually becomes quite the different animal compared to its predecessors, featuring one of the cleverest uses of a traditional science fiction plot device I have ever seen. The film opens as a Romulan vessel encounters a Federation starship. The Romulans - who are tattooed and, in some ways, far more menacing than earlier televised incarnations - are captained by Nero (Eric Bana). He questions the Federation captain about the star date and then about the whereabouts of someone named Spock, but when the Federation captain, who agrees to board the Romulan vessel with the hopes of peaceful negotations, cannot provide the answers, Nero murders him in cold blood and launches an unadulterated attack against the other ship. The damage is severe, and First Officer turned captain George Kirk, who assumes command after his captain's demise, orders evacuation, including of his pregnant wife, before committing an act of heroism that fans know is not in the annals of Star Trek history. The film then careens toward the future, as we see young James Tiberius Kirk in Iowa driving his stepfather's automobile at breakneck speeds to the rousing sounds of the Beastie Boys' "Sabotage" until he manages to drive it over a cliff. Then, years later, he (now played by Chris Pine) gets into a bar brawl with recruits from the nearby Starfleet Academy outpost. When their recruiting officer, Captain Pike, who served aboard the ill-fated vessel with his father, challenges Kirk to abandon his rebellious streak and apparent daddy issues and join Starfleet, Kirk initially scoffs at the idea, but, later, seemingly to prove himself, he agrees to become a cadet. At the Academy, he flirts with a young and pretty Uhura (Zoe Saldana) who wants nothing to do with him; meets a flight-phobic young medic by the name of Dr. Leonard McCoy (Karl Urban); and a stuffy Vulcan teaching assistant named Spock (Zachary Quinto - Sylar!), with whom, at first, Kirk seems to get along like oil and water after he famously "works around" the confines of the Kobiyashi Maru psychological test (see Star Trek mythology, or this film, for further details). Of course, we learn of Spock's particular idiom as well - his half human, half Vulcan heritage and his struggle to keep his emotions in check while honoring the traditions of his father Sarek and his home planet. After Kirk is brought before an Academy tribunal to be called to task for "cheating" through the Kobiyashi Maru, the Academy learns of an attack on a nearby Federation planet. The cadets, as the closest available section of the fleet, are called aboard the newly minted Enterprise to answer the distress call, and Kirk manages to cheat his way aboard thanks to the help of his friend Bones. Noticing the pattern of the attack, Kirk remembers the story of the Romulan vessel that attacked his father's ship and tries to warn Captain Pike of the impending trap. Too late, however, does Pike realize that history is repeating, particularly when Nero's ship ensnares the Enterprise, and he demands that Pike board his vessel. Making Spock acting captain and Kirk acting first officer (much to each other's protest) in his wake, Pike agrees to go, leaving the cadets in charge of the likes of a young Pavel Chekov (Anton Yelchin) and a young Ikara Sulu (John Cho - Harold!). Through chance events that result from Kirk and Spock's inability to agree, Kirk eventually learns why Nero indiscriminately attacks Federation starships and embraces the road toward his destiny of becoming the youngest Starfleet captain in Federation history. That was a lot of plot summary but, in some ways, this is the densest Star Trek plot of any of the previous motion pictures, and it barely touches half of the overall story. Star Trek had the potential of being either really good because it was so new and directed by JJ Abrams, who has the golden touch, or of being really bad because it was a complete reboot of a beloved franchise grounded in complex and complicated mythology that cannot readily be tampered with without the risk of alienating its longtime fans. Fortunately, this Star Trek is the former type of reinvention. Abrams struck an almost impossible but highly impressive balance: he remained true to the mythology while allowing just enough tweaking to make it new and fresh. Thanks to the screenwriters, not only does this Star Trek film boast one of the best-written Star Trek stories, providing a riproaring tale that never really dragged (even when Spock Prime, played by the reverent Leonard Nimoy, had to take time out for some plot exposition), it is one of the cleverest revamps I have ever seen. Using time travel and some other interesting Star Trek/science fiction devices, Abrams and company slyly created enough fuel for sequelization without erasing the possibility of ignoring the reboot should another reboot come along in the future. I can't give too much away without spoiling the plot, but the changes were welcome and oddly exciting, even though they were significant changes in the end that longtime fans will either embrace or shun. The visual effects were stunning, and the cinematography was actually quite breathtaking, mixing camera angles, brighter lighting, and bluescreen technology to great effect. Also, the performances by this new version of the Enterprise crew were actually quite entertaining. There were no strict imitations; instead, each actor chose to fully inhabit the characters rather than pay homage to their predecessors. Thus, Pine neglected William Shatner's melodramatic delivery, but its absence was never noticed. Quinto, though it was hard not to think of Sylar at times, managed to infuse Spock with a delicate balance of barely controlled emotional undercurrent (particularly rage) that Nimoy never offered, except in extreme situations. Urban's Bones was hyper and funny, though his delivery of "I'm a doctor, not a ..." left something to be desired. Simon Pegg, as a late-arriving, young Montgomery Scott, was easily my favorite of the new crew, but I wouldn't be able to do justice to just how hilarious his Scotty turned out to be. The only portrayal I struggled with was Uhura's; on the one hand, Uhura was frequently reduced to a two-dimensional character as the only female of the original Enterprise crew. Though Gene Roddenberry worked hard to portray the diversity of the globe and his hopes for future racial and ethnic harmony, there was still a gender-bias of sorts underlying the Original series cast, likely due to the fact that it was a product of the sixties, during which women's liberation movements were really starting to gain momentum. This incarnation attempted to give Uhura some complexity, to make her a three-dimensional woman, which was good. The problem is, three dimensions also transformed her from the sweet and loyal communications officer played by Nichelle Nichols to something of an ambitious (five letter word) as portrayed by Saldana. My struggle, therefore, is understanding why a strong woman with an irrepressible character cannot retain the sweetness inherent in the original portrayal, since I never felt such sweetness in the Uhura I saw in this film. and whether she was written, directed, or played that way is hard to ascertain. Of course, this is one of the larger philosophical dilemmas facing women in motion pictures today. Also, while Bana was given relatively little to do as the menacing Captain Nero, what he was given to do he performed with a complete lack of originality. More than once, I felt as though he were channeling Ricardo Montalban's Khan from Star Trek II. If an actor playing a new antagonist adopts some character traits of characters from prior films while manifesting an entirely new character, the most obvious choices should be left alone. Of all of the nemeses that have threatened Kirk or even Picard in the motion pictures over the years, Khan is the most obvious choice, and it was distracting, distasteful, and a little annoying that Bana found his inspiration in this character. Of course, with the way the film ended, Kirk may never meet Khan in the likely sequels, so maybe this a minor point in the end. Still, the most impressive part about Star Trek was that it was funny and exciting and new while remaining true to, at least, foundations provided by the mythology. The ensemble of actors had a great chemistry, and the story possibilities are endless should this cast be migrated to television thanks to the foresight and creativity of the screenwriters and Abrams. In short, the film surpassed my expectations and is actually one of the most enjoyable Star Trek film chapters, in my opinion. What is even funnier is that it is an odd-numbered entry into the film series. Interesting, yes?In the end, I loved Star Trek. Of course, JJ Abrams can do no wrong in my eyes (I have followed and am following all of his projects, except Felicity, since his breakthrough into Hollywood), but he risked much with this film. It was a calculated risk that paid off in the end, however. I think Star Trek deserves an 8.5 between having minor flaws/very good (thanks to Bana's largely mediocre performance) and being perfectly entertaining. I also think it passes the test! I am in the process of collecting the Star Trek films, but I would love to watch this one a few times more too, just because it was so surprisingly exciting and funny. With this film, Star Trek has voyaged into new, uncharted regions of its own space-time continuum, and, frankly, I am happily along for the ride. Warp speed ahead!

Spout Post: More Star Trek!

Thu, 11 Jun 2009 17:41:53 GMT

Post By: hautecritique
Post To: The Haute Critique on Spout
Post Date: 6/11/2009 1:41:53 PM
Body: Space, the final frontier. These are the voyages of the franchise Star Trek; it’s continuing mission to seek out lucrative licensing opportunities. To blandly go where there has been a comfortable encampment for decades! To be honest, I didn’t hate the new Star Trek movie. It looked really pretty. There were some decent performances… It didn’t poison any significant memories of my childhood. And did I mention it was pretty? Oh, and hopefully it will stir the exploratory spirit of the movie-going world and fuel a resurgent space age, one which will carry a united humankind into it’s interplanetary adolescence. High hopes, I admit… But what Trek was to me, both TOS and TNG (to toss around Trekkie shorthand) was optimism. It was a positive furture created by and for sentient beings out of enlightened self-interest, intellectual curiosity and a genuine desire for the betterment of all peoples. A utopian future that looked hoplessly naive, but was the better for it. However, what I disliked about this new chapter was not the perceived misinterpretation of Trekness; it was the accurate interpretation of crappymovieness. JJ Abrams doesn’t like to earn his drama. He seems to like to jump over all the “character building” and “plot development” by playing on the archtypes and stereotypes that have been built by generations of American popular culture and expecting the media reflexes of his audience to close the gap. Sadly, I can’t say for sure if that is a terrible thing, or a brilliant one. I don’t know whether this is a symptom of a lazy media production/consumption cycle or a sign of an emerging metaphorical syntax (akin to the Tamarians from that episode of ST:TNG… you know, “Darmok and Jilad at Tanagra”, etc). Most likely it’s both. A distressing simplification AND an evolutionary storytelling technique. Curse you grey area! Curse you for not letting me loathe JJ Abrams with the purity to which I am accustomed by our nuanceless mediascape. And the thing about Star Trek is it’s full of enough archtypal characters to make Joseph Campbell masturbate into the nearest clean sock. This allows JJ Abrams to hit certain story markers in dull, mechanical stride and make you think that he’s woven a story. You’re familar with how these people *should* relate to one another, and how these events *should* play out, so you think you’ve seen a coherent story. It’s a multilayered illusion that seems, at a distance, to be a movie. But the longer you look, the more you ask, “What the fuck”? This new Trek is scifi by art students instead of science wonks. So, the Enterprise was built on Earth, not in some sort of orbiting spacedock. WTF? Kirk and most of the crew of the Enterprise were all in the same class at Starfleet academy. WTF? An emergency comes up and the only available crew are academy-fresh cadets, so Starfleet gives them the new flagship. WTF? And it continues like this through the whole movie. Small discrepencies and nonsenses that slowly build dissonance in the brain, dissonance which requires a mighty suspension of disbelief (or simple inattention) for the movie to be digested. Part of what made the ST:TOS endearing was what it was surmounting. It was on TV when TV was cheap. It was compelling anyway. It sneakily promoted racial equiality when race was a taboo topic. It pointed at the wars of the 20th century and called them madness. It promoted a core idealogy of optimistic freedom and social duty. It had it’s flaws, but it pointed to a future where humanity was going to be better than we are now. This incarnation of Trek has no lofty ideals to inspire. Kirk seems not rakish but reckless. This can all be explained away by the plot I suppose, a divergent timeline. Sure. But it’s not the Trek I have loved. JJ Abrams may have pulled the Trek universe back from the brink Brannon Braga pushed it to, but it was already a hollow shell of a franchise by then anyway. It’s pretty much what I was expecting, but I was hoping against past experience that I would be wowed out of my trousers by a bold new Trek. No luck. Still, the product placement wasn’t nearly as bad as it could’ve been. A Nokia central computer in a 300 year old gas burning Ford Mustang and “Budweiser Classic” ordered at a bar… both plausibly vestigal corporate identities on the future Earth of Star Trek, where they don’t even have money, goddammit! But hey… Bruce Greenwood ROCKED. Sylar and Harold were decent, and the other folks weren’t bad. When Simon Pegg appeared, Scottie-ing it up, it seemed like everyone else turned to cardboard… That guy is fun to watch. The design was mostly nice; Old Spock’s Hoth-coat was rad. The Enterprise herself looked nice enough, some proportions altered, but nothing distracting. So, overall, not too bad, but not Star Trek. Or, not *my* Star Trek anyway. It was like Star Trek’s dumb cousin who loves football and Jerry Bruckheimer movies got into Star Trek’s wardrobe and did some role playing. But it was watchable, as are Jerry Bruckheimer movies. Accompanied by the appropriate intoxicants it should be VERY watchable. But there’s no depth, no substance. Lastly, my strongest hope for this movie, I shit you not, is still that people love it and are inspired by it and that interest in the exploration of space is reinvigorated by it. Because mankind’s future is among the stars, and if JJ Abrams can push us just a little closer to that Trekkish future by making Star Trek cool, then all his other transgressions can be forgiven. Even Cloverfield. Youtube - The most cogent visual analysis of New Trek I could find IMDB - New Star Trek Related posts:Star Trek Originally posted on:The Haute Critique

Spout Post: Star Trek

Thu, 11 Jun 2009 17:39:53 GMT

Post By: hautecritique
Post To: The Haute Critique on Spout
Post Date: 6/11/2009 1:39:53 PM
Body: Star Trek It is a wonderful thing to see what a talented director of Generation X can do with a piece of media. In some ways JJ Abrams’ Star Trek is a revelation. In other ways it is a vastly missed opportunity. First the good part. This haute critic had the good fortune to view the film in IMAX and it benefits from the facelift. The visuals are (for the most part) gorgeous - filled with inspired architecture of what an optimistic and very human future might look like. Abrams takes the look and feel of vintage 60’s Trek and resurrects it boldly into the 21st century. Costumes have just the right flush of color to give you the feel that you are watching “in real life” what the folks captured “on TV” in the 60’s. And the characters go there as well. Abrams fully modern touch hangs real psychological depth on our once legendary two dimensional favorites. Kirk, Spock, McCoy and Uhura. Even Checkov, Scotty and Sulu come to us now suddenly as real people with real motivations behind their actions and desires. The essence of the new generation. In this dimension, Star Trek might even exceed Batman Begins and Spiderman - now, finally, you can understand Kirk’s almost salacious womanizing and fire-from-the-hip (lack of) strategy. Bones’ growling and eye-bulging become the natural expressions of a real person from a real place that seems plausible. The Shatner, Nimoy, Kelly characters presumably came from somewhere, but the GI Generation templates that must have been impressed on Gene Roddenberry’s mind in a flying fortress over the Pacific couldn’t translate through the stock personalities available in the 60’s. Abrams seamlessly accelerates our favorite characters into his mythical universe without spilling a drop. And, in a way, that is the bad part. At the end of the day, Abrams fails to take advantage of the real power and heritage of Star Trek: it is the expression of a personal experience and vision from a generation that is almost fully passed from the Earth. The greasemonkeys who looked back on the collapsing 19th Century world of their parents with confusion and dismay and forward to the Final Frontier that science, technology and American Gusto could bring to bear left their collective fingerprints all over Star Trek. Hatching in the last warm glow before the tumult of the mid 60’s, Star Trek unselfconsciously and unashamedly projected a confident (even cocky) view of what the kids of WWII aspired for in a human future. And from its earliest beginnings Trek managed to catch enough to keep it renewed and relevant through more than four decades — as the rest of the culture warped and spun all over the place. There is a message to be found there - somehow more vital and alive than most that have managed to survive into our era. In many ways Star Trek represents the last breath of a pure optimism from our pop culture - importantly birthed out of the lived experience of people who were children in the Great Depression and youths in World War II. Its easy to dismiss Trek. Its linear extrapolation of 50’s society and technology into a decently distant future seems absurd and implausible. Vernor Vinge’s singularity compression curve makes us all too painfully aware of how near the future is and how implausible that the future will look anything at all like today. But lest we forget - for the past four decades, that Roddenberry vision has been the ultimate self-creating future: generations of inspired kids have been working hard to make real that portion of Star Trek that most captured their imagination. The deep sprit of Trek goes far beyond Klingons, communicators and transporter beams into a comprehensive vision of how we can go about building what we imagine to build. FInding that deep spirit, reaching down into it and giving new life to it in a way that works for the children of a New Millenium; that would have been a true gift. And the opportunity was there - Abrams had the opportunity to (and did) reboot the entire Star Trek concept - and he did so with style, panache and a real sense for the aesthetic of the world. Unfortunately, he didn’t really take his shot. The story was very much a re-tread and clearly was little more than an excuse for Abrams to fulfill his visual intent. There aren’t that many Star Treks left in the world. The door isn’t closed on what can be done with the franchise, but it will take a real effort to craft the right depth of story and sense to match the potential of what could be done. A quality experience for the initiated, but nothing compared to the Watchmen and one suspects upcoming fare (Terminator, Harry Potter, Nine) will have more to offer those looking for a fully baked theatrical experience. Related posts:More Star Trek! Originally posted on:The Haute Critique

Spout Post: Catch Star Trek Wrestler on Friday the 13th in Cold Blood

Mon, 25 May 2009 14:32:51 GMT

Post By: dibot
Post To: dibot Blog
Post Date: 5/25/2009 10:32:51 AM
Body: Star Trek is just a whole lot of fun. Director J.J. Abrams ("Mission Impossible III") takes us back to when the original crew were just cadets at Starfleet Academy. The story messes with the whole series' timeline, setting the stage for a whole other round of sequels. So there's that. But the effects are really good. The audience I was it with clapped and cheered. Fun, fun. And worth seeing on the big screen.I'm still not really sure what to think about Catch and Release. It's not really a romantic comedy, though there are bits of that. It's not really a tragedy, though elements of that are present, too. And it's not really great, but it has some good moments. Jennifer Garner ("Ghost of Girlfriends Past") stars as a woman whose fiancee dies and then she discovers that he had a child he never told her about. I guess it's just an interesting character study. I did think about it for several days, which is always a plus.In Cold Blood is the film version of Truman Capote's nonfiction novel of the same name. It runs very much like the book, with the build-up before the crime, the investigation and trials afterward. The film is dry, but still compelling. If you enjoy Court TV, this should be right up your alley.For the first fifteen minutes or so of the new Friday the 13th, I was totally pumped. It was goofy, dirty and bloody - all elements of a great slasher. Then it tried to have a story, and I just got bored. I'm not saying that slashers can't have stories. I'm just saying this was a bad one. It felt like just another tired sequel in this already overstretched franchise. Disappointing.Every time Darren Aronofsky ("The Fountain") makes a movie, I'm reassured that he's a genius. The Wrestler is no exception. Mickey Rourke ("Domino") is amazing in the title character, an aging professional wrestler who just doesn't know how to do anything else. The whole thing is heartbreaking. And wonderful.

Spout Post: Mostly Not Illogical

Wed, 20 May 2009 15:04:40 GMT

Post By: andrewmil
Post To: andrewmil Blog
Post Date: 5/20/2009 11:04:40 AM
Body: Maybe I just outright decided not to be cynical about a Hollywood summer movie, but I had a good time. Probably about as good a time I had at Iron Man and Casino Royale, which is strange because all three movies have really weak villains and half-assed endings. I guess with all 3 movies, you forgive most the dumb loopholes and coincidences (though Jim happening to run into future Spock on the abandoned planet has to be one of the worst coincidences since McClane ran into Sam Jackson as he’s being shot out of the sewer in Die Hard 3), cause the actors are well cast and the movies have a pulse (as opposed to the mopey emo tone of The Dark Knight). If I were to give Trek any sort of star grade, half a star would have to be taken off for how every tussle climaxes with someone hanging on the brink of some shit by their fingertips. The only time that should ever happen is when Michael Ironside gets his arms ripped off.

Spout Post: Mostly Not Illogical

Wed, 20 May 2009 14:58:26 GMT

Post By: perera
Post To: perera Blog
Post Date: 5/20/2009 10:58:26 AM
Body: Maybe I just decided not to be cynical about this, but I had a good time. Probably about as good a time I had at Iron Man and Casino Royale, which is strange because all three movies have really weak villains and half-assed endings. I guess with all 3 movies, you forgive most the dumb loopholes and coincidences (though Jim happening to run into future Spock on the abandoned planet has to be one of the worst coincidences since McClane ran into Sam Jackson as he’s being shot out of the sewer in Die Hard 3), cause the actors are well cast and the movies have a pulse (as opposed to the mopey emo tone of Dark Knight). If I were to give Trek any sort of star grade, half a star would have to be taken off for how every tussle climaxes with someone hanging on the brink of some shit by their fingertips. The only time that should ever happen is when Michael Ironside gets his arms ripped off.

Spout Post: Star Trek

Sat, 09 May 2009 09:48:07 GMT

Post By: Gerosimov
Post To: Gerosimov Blog
Post Date: 5/9/2009 5:48:07 AM
Body: It has been a while since an action movie was this entertaining. I havent felt this exited since Spider-Man 1 & 2. The casting was just perfect, although I had my doubts about it at first. I have nothing but good things to say about the visuals. I even loved the lens flares! JJ Abrams managed to do an almost perfect action scifi movie. Only thing that could have made it even better would have been a theme of some kind.

Spout Tag:funny

Wed, 16 Dec 2009 21:10:58 GMT

funny
Number of films tagged: 609

Number of people who tagged: 317

Number of times used: 942

Spout Tag:romance

Wed, 16 Dec 2009 19:01:30 GMT

romance
Number of films tagged: 7162

Number of people who tagged: 169

Number of times used: 1004

Spout Tag:murder

Fri, 04 Dec 2009 02:57:25 GMT

murder
Number of films tagged: 8748

Number of people who tagged: 157

Number of times used: 830

Spout Tag:friendship

Mon, 14 Dec 2009 22:42:20 GMT

friendship
Number of films tagged: 6791

Number of people who tagged: 154

Number of times used: 980

Spout Tag:revenge

Wed, 02 Dec 2009 23:13:41 GMT

revenge
Number of films tagged: 5189

Number of people who tagged: 145

Number of times used: 489

Spout Tag:death

Mon, 16 Nov 2009 17:27:13 GMT

death
Number of films tagged: 4306

Number of people who tagged: 140

Number of times used: 526

Spout Tag:action

Tue, 15 Dec 2009 15:49:02 GMT

action
Number of films tagged: 319

Number of people who tagged: 111

Number of times used: 460

Spout Tag:sci-fi

Fri, 04 Dec 2009 19:33:53 GMT

sci-fi
Number of films tagged: 217

Number of people who tagged: 102

Number of times used: 375

Spout Tag:future

Sat, 22 Aug 2009 09:46:43 GMT

future
Number of films tagged: 492

Number of people who tagged: 101

Number of times used: 258

Spout Tag:adventure

Tue, 15 Dec 2009 15:49:03 GMT

adventure
Number of films tagged: 228

Number of people who tagged: 95

Number of times used: 368

Spout Tag:sweet

Tue, 15 Sep 2009 13:28:46 GMT

sweet
Number of films tagged: 108

Number of people who tagged: 90

Number of times used: 170

Spout Tag:escape

Tue, 01 Dec 2009 19:51:44 GMT

escape
Number of films tagged: 2868

Number of people who tagged: 76

Number of times used: 279

Spout Tag:timetravel

Tue, 03 Nov 2009 17:56:35 GMT

timetravel
Number of films tagged: 449

Number of people who tagged: 55

Number of times used: 114

Spout Tag:space

Mon, 25 May 2009 14:36:30 GMT

space
Number of films tagged: 494

Number of people who tagged: 54

Number of times used: 139

Spout Tag:aliens

Mon, 16 Nov 2009 09:12:57 GMT

aliens
Number of films tagged: 74

Number of people who tagged: 51

Number of times used: 111