Jonathan White’s review published on Letterboxd:
This review got way out of hand. It was more an exercise for me, a very long term Trek fan, explaining to myself why I liked this installment above the others. In short, Sacrilege! I’ll save you the read. It’s my favourite Star Trek movie because I felt it captured the spirit of the original series and characters far better than the others. Simple as that.
I remember the fall of 1966 like it was yesterday. I was 7 years old, and we had just moved to a new city, Montreal, that summer. I’m not sure how it came to be that I was in charge of the remote control on that weeknight evening, but, flipping through the channels I caught a glimpse of space. I was a space-nut. Need I say more. That night began my long time devotion to Star Trek.
Since that time, aside from watching all of the series, yes even Voyager, but maybe not Enterprise so much, when a Star Trek movie was released a band of like minded friends and I would attend the opening weekend show. It was the same when Star Trek was released in 2009.
I remember when my friends and I came out of the screening; we were all pretty much in consensus. A fine little action picture, a clever way to break the shackles of the bloated Star Trek timeline, and good takes on the classic characters .... but it wasn’t really Star Trek.
Six or eight months later my wife surprised me by renting it, surprised because she hates all things Star Trek. When it came time to go down to the theatre I really didn’t figure she would join, but she did. Her eyes rolled a bit. At the end of the screening, my son, who was never a Star Trek fan, thought it was a good action picture, I still thought it was a good action picture .. but strangely seemed to like it more this time .. my wife was grinning ear to ear. She LOVED it. She LOVED everything about it. Tried as I might to convince her that everything she liked about this was influenced by, and not that different than, the original series, she still wasn’t having any of it.
As Star Trek became my wife’s go-to brain-dead movie, I’ve seen it quite a few times over the last few years. Every time I seem to like it more. Tonight, we used it as a palette cleanser after a month long diet of rich foreign films. It was also so we could prep ourselves to see Abrams newest installment, which, alas, I didn’t see with my buddies on opening weekend. After the screening finished I decided that I wanted to stay on in the theatre and watch an original Star Trek. My first thought was to watch Wrath of Kahn, my favourite of the movies, but Sony Entertainment Network was fussy. I then thought that I shouldn’t really be comparing it to one of the Star Trek movies; I should be comparing it to what it was based on, the original show. I switched over to Netflix and started my favourite episode, The Doomsday Machine.
Gene Roddenberry wanted to tell pure Science Fiction stories in his show, and produced the pilot episode The Cage. NBC wasn’t having it, but they were impressed enough to order a second pilot after Rodenberry promised a ‘Wagon Train To The Stars’. Clever of him. So clever, he really invented a genre. Science Fiction guised in an action pictures clothing. Give the audience the fights, the romance, the tension, and subtly slip in the sci-fi. The sci-fi wasn’t the fact that it was set in outer space; it was a reflection on our human condition. Almost every one of the original teleplays, with some notable exceptions, followed this rule, and Doomsday Machine was a brilliant example.
Start of the film. Abrams starts out big, WAY BIG. Over the top? Well, I don’t know. The series was known for some over the top moments. I really think the opening works in what the spirit of Star Trek was. It is what the first movie should have been. Grab the audience. Compared to Robert Wise’s first movie effort, that eschewed action for slow CGI visual awe, this film does what the series did. Engage.
The Kirk back story. I’ve always had a bit of a problem with the whole Rebel Youth scene. However, after the numerous viewings, I see this as important for setting up the ‘New Kirk’. In the series, we saw 31 year old, youngest Captain in the fleet, Kirk as a somewhat mercurial, tough and fair leader that had a way with the ladies. Very few references about his academy youth, and even fewer to his childhood. I now think that the main difference in the re-imagining is Kirk. Abram’s has made him more accessible, more relatable, more fun. In watching Doomsday, I actually cringed a bit at Shatner’s Kirk’s stoicism. I understand that it was important for the show to make Kirk believable as a Captain, but I think Abrams made the correct decision here to change this lead character to make him accessible and fun. It certainly worked for my wife.
The Spock back story. Calm and believable. Spock hasn’t been changed at all. I know that Zachary Quinto campaigned hard to get this role, as he believed he was born to play Spock, and it’s true. Spock/Leonard Nimoy was my favourite character growing up, and the one I’m most invested in. Zachary Quinto is not acting like Leonard Nimoy as Spock, he IS Spock.
The Bones back story. Karl Urban is also a perfect drop-in for Deforest Kelly. Abrahms imbues the character with just enough ‘enhancement’ to make him likeable from the get-go, and the relationship between he and Kirk to be believable without a lot of exposition or history.
The Uhura backstory. Like Bones, Abrams not so much enhances, but rather fleshes out a character that was primarily a set-piece in the original series. The progression of her relationship with Kirk from mild intrigue, mild disgust, and then trust is believable, and gives this character much for depth for the future. The Spock involvement is a new and tantalizing element for future exploration and sci-fi storylines.
John Cho as Sulu and Anton Yelchin as Chekov. Both fit the mould, and both are given just enough extra to keep us interested. I particularly liked the playful emphasis and enhancement of Chekov.
The Scottie back story. I think the most ‘enhanced’ character here is Simon Peg’s Scottie. He is funny, but the original Scottie wasn’t. I’m not sure if this is a betrayal for the sole purpose of laughs will work in the long term. I think there is enough comic relief in the newly imagined cast, and that sculpting Scottie in this way may well work against what can be done in the future. Plus, I hate his little lizard like buddy. I always cringe when I see characters like this in science fantasy, and more so in something that’s supposed to have pure science fiction at its roots.
Eric Bana as Nero, the necessary antagonist, meh, I think that Abrams went a bit too far here in the looseness / playfulness of the script. His casual ‘well hello’s’ were a bit much for me. I think if Abram’s played it straight in any area of the film, I think it should have been here.
Now onto the story. It has a rather furious pace that keeps you constantly engaged. I think that Abrams could have given us a few breathers here without sacrificing the pacing. I felt the decision to throw Kirk off the ship was rather idiotic, and stretched my suspension of disbelief to the limit. What made it more annoying is that it was an obvious device that Abrams used so that characters could meet, and a convenient break to throw in a whole whack of exposition about the back story. Again, I felt this was a rather sloppy way to accomplish this, but I concede that by keeping the audience in the dark it served the plot.
For me, what has always differentiated Star Trek from its contemporaries was its sci fi element. Abrams chooses time travel here, and it’s potentially universe altering ramifications. While it’s a well worn chestnut of sci-fi, and well used within the original series, Abrams cleverly employs it for his own ends. This new, altered, universe will allow him to play with the characters and history in whatever way he sees fit from now on, keeping what he likes, and discarding the rest. It’s also clever in how it affects the two primary audiences. Those who are Trekkers, and those who are not. For those who are of the religion, there is a tapestry of subtle changes and references. For those who are not, there are clearly demonstrated ‘what was to be’ and ‘what is to be’ events to keep the viewer satisfied.
In conclusion, and I’m sure anyone who has managed to read this far is breathing a sigh of relief, I think that Abrams reboot is the truest to Roddenberry’s original vision for the show. A Wagon Train to the Stars. One that entertains the audience, but still gives them something to think about. It also succeeds spectacularly be being inclusive of a broader audience without sacrificing the original ideals. In my opinion, the original set of movies went off course, and took themselves too seriously. Abrams corrects that. I was wrong when I judged this film after the first screening. This ‘is’ Star Trek.