I simply cannot comprehend the positive press and reactions that this movie has generated. As both a long term fan of Star Trek (particularly in its more recent, less campy iterations) and more generally an enthusiast of most science fiction (including Wolverine, which I saw last week and enjoyed more than expected), I believed Star Trek would provide at least a modicum of basic entertainment. Instead, I left the theater feeling like one of the few remaining moviegoers who do not mindlessly worship J.J. Abrams or routinely freebase cocaine.
Has the collective intelligence of the viewing public so devolved that we are now unable to discern the difference between a shaking camera and a situation offering genuine excitement? Mr. Abrams seems to think so -- and I have yet to discover a single review where his incoherent, nervous style gets called out for the outrageous distraction that it is. Every single scene in the entire film is relentlessly and mercilessly shaky - even the ones we're expected to find "emotional" - with astoundingly frequent cuts from shot to shot, as if the entirety of the footage was recorded on Nokia camera phones (perhaps the one shamelessly flaunted in the film) by children suffering from peculiar, acute seizure disorders.
Pop Cinematography
Welcome to the new standard in popular cinematography: Star Trek, ala Blair Witch. And this visual assault never once pauses - not even for 30 seconds to allow us to contemplate the total annihilation of a planet. There is a difference between breathtaking and breathless, or cool and cruel. Apparently Mr. Abrams believes we are too stupid to know the difference.
The situation is not improved by this film's disconcertingly thin plot. Even in the world of sci-fi television, there have been limits to the inane technological shortcuts cooked up solely for the purpose of camouflaging a weak script. "Transwarp beaming"? Huh? How is it that the ship's transporters are unable to work when a person falls through the sky, or off a cliff, but they operate flawlessly when the plot needs them to transport people across light years of space and onto a moving starship? Red Matter? And how, in any sci-fi universe, could a hysterical, last-minute ejection of an engine core help a ship escape from the edge of a black hole? This would be akin to switching off the ignition in one's car in an effort to avoid a collision with an oncoming freight train.
I read Roger Ebert's criticism of this movie prior to viewing it, but dismissed his remarks as the ramblings of a jaded old man. Jaded he may well be, but also accurate, and perhaps even excessively gentle. The film features one moment after another of this sort of astonishing feeble-mindedness; even as it bases its entire premise on a flimsy time travel mechanism involving the creation of an "alternate universe." A new low is established here for dumbed down sci-fi. The plot devices in this film are so ridiculous that they make Flash Gordon, let alone the previous history of Star Trek, seem like actual science. It's been suggested that the concept of saving whales was previously evidence of a weak script. How, exactly, is "transwarp beaming" an improvement?
Looking for Wires
Upon this train wreck of discordant and violently stretched premises, Mr. Abrams applies a heavy coating of special effects that at times borders on comically cheesy. I must have seen an entirely different movie than many of the other viewers, because I found the CGI and visual style appalling - well below the standards of virtually any contemporary action movie, and yet simultaneously not cheesy enough to function as effective satire. After the first half of the movie, I began challenging myself to look for wires. Seriously.
The acting was relatively inoffensive, but hardly up to the stellar magnitude suggested by this movie's wild torrent of hype. I found the leads weak, but perhaps that was all one could expect, given the insipid material they had to work with, and the fact that not a single line - in any scene, in the two-plus-hour entirety of the film - is uttered at a normal speaking pace. Mr. Abrams instead seemingly forces the entire cast methamphetamines - perhaps appropriate, given the dysfunctional yet lucrative, Ritalin snorting demographic to which this film clearly panders. To my great surprise, the best performance - and the solitary moment of warmth in what otherwise constitutes more than two agonizing hours of brutal, emotionally desolate pounding - was delivered by our old friend Winona Ryder.
Visions and Insults
At its core, Gene Roddenberry's Star Trek has always represented a vision for a better future, challenging viewers to think about central, important issues like racism, cold wars, social injustice, conservation. Against this rich history, the new film is downright condescending - it seems, in fact, deliberately intent on discouraging all thought. A breathlessly shallow, disjointed conglomeration of poorly filmed explosions with no nuance, no depth, no artistry, and indeed no redeeming traits whatsoever, as a whole it amounts to nothing less than a thinly concealed insult to intelligence itself.
It is difficult to believe I would ever suggest this, but the Star Trek franchise would have been better off dying a graceful death than having been so deeply bastardized by J.J. Abrams with this abomination. Overwhelmed with disappointment in both the movie and a general public either unwilling or, perhaps even scarier, unable to perceive what it actually represents, I left the theater despondent.
[Post-review afterthought: A Star Trek in name only, this film retains only the most superficial aspects of the franchise, while discarding its mind, heart, and soul. What formerly was geek domain has been sacrificed to the mass market gods of profit. Those with even half a brain are no longer welcome. The apparent runaway popularity of this film shows exactly why American youngsters lag behind their foreign peers in mathematics and science. The fault lies not with our hard working teachers, but with ourselves, as individuals and a culture, for embracing this sort of anti-intellectual garbage.]
Posts
