Fascinating, Captain

Star_trek02 Not only is the new STAR TREK a brilliant and exhilirating re-boot of the franchise, it could serve as a text book for writers on how to update a beloved media property. JJ Abrams and his writers manage to pay affectionate and respectful homage to the original series and all of its spin-offs…while at the same time cleverly and elegantly freeing themselves from all that has come before. 

Like CASINO ROYALE — which successfully rebooted "James Bond," another beloved, enduring franchise — the film is both comfortingly familiar and delightfully surprising. And like in CASINO ROYALE, you won't hear the franchise's iconic theme until the end, when the movie and its characters have earned it.  The one miss-step in the movie is Karl Urban as Dr. McCoy. He is the only actor in the cast who seems to be attempting an impersonation of the original performer in his part…and he does it badly. But that's a minor quibble. This is a terrific movie. 

I am already looking forward to the sequel.

7 thoughts on “Fascinating, Captain”

  1. I actually liked Karl Urban’s McCoy a lot. The one that felt wrong to me was Chekov (and wasn’t it odd that a guy who can’t even get a computer to understand him is chosen to tell the ship what their mission is going to be?) Great film. Minor quibbles only. Loved it.

  2. Maybe I didn’t get it, but this Star Trek movie obliterates so much of previous Star Trek cannon, that we can confidently say all past Star Trek programs have been washed away like Sunday night’s dinner leavings. Important characters to the original story line are edited out so that episodes of Star Trek, the original series, Star Trek The Next Generation, and even Deep Space Nine, would never have happened. As a Star Trek fan since I was a child watching the original Kirk and Spock on Prime Time, I have a problem with that.

  3. Patricia,
    It’s my understanding that fiddling about with the timestream by the villain of the piece creates a divergent reality. So all your stories from Treks past still happen, but the new movie adventures from now on will be the divergent reality.

  4. Patricia,
    I watched all of that, too…and I have no problem with it all being wiped away. That’s why it’s called a “re-boot.” Besides, it’s fiction. None of it is real.
    The same thing essentially happened with James Bond and CASINO ROYALE. That movie and that Bond don’t fit within the “canon” either…I mean, c’mon, how can young Bond be working for the same “M” in his first adventure that the veteran Bond was? “M” was, if you will recall, the woman who replaced the original “M” in GOLDENEYE and considered Bond a misogynist “dinosaur,” a relic of the cold war.
    But here’s the thing. Nobody gave a damn. Why? Because everyone knew going in that it was a “re-boot,” too.
    And it’s only a movie.

  5. I concur with Desk, up there; liked Bones, didn’t much like Chekov. By me, a large part of *all* the characters is in their delivery, moreso, I think than is generally true in this sort of work. But I think it was even *more* true of Bones than the rest.


Leave a Comment