Star Trek (Film)

STAR TREK
Dir: JJ Abrams
2009, U.S.A
19/05/09

The plot is unimportant in a franchise reboot of this size but here it is anyway. The U.S.S. Kelvin stumbles upon a strange electrical storm from which emerges a Romulan ship of superior technology. The captain is killed by the Romulan Nero (Eric Bana) and the first officer saves the lives of his crew including his pregnant wife. This man is the father of James T. Kirk (Chris Pine) who is born moments before his father‘s heroic death. Flash forward through two decades or so and we see Kirk and Spock (Zachary Quinto) on their respective planets. Kirk is rebellious and arrogant and after a bar fight is convinced by Christopher Pike (Bruce Greenwood) to join Starfleet. Spock on the other hand is intelligent yet bullied because he is only half Vulcan. After a remark from a teacher which amounts to little less then racism he shuns his home planet and instead heads to earth to join Starfleet. Once here all the regular characters from the original series including Uhura (Zoe Saldana), Leonard “Bones” McCoy (Karl Urban), Sulu (John Cho), Chekhov (Anton Yelchin) and Scotty (Simon Pegg) gather aboard the Enterprise and get to know one another whilst stopping Nero from destroying the Federation.

The aim of writers Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman was to create a story that has plenty of action and chances for all the characters to get their introductions (only Scotty can do the transporter stuff, Sulu is the expert fighter, only Uhura can understand Romulan etc). This means the plot feels like a late addition, with things such as ’red matter’ added just to move things along and conflicts, such as different opinions on courses of action, added to develop the friendship between Kirk and Spock which is the films central relationship, and even Leonard Nimoy pops up in a cameo as the original Spock to help the two overcome their differences and become the familiar partnership The way that developing friendship is played out is one area in particular where Abrams should be championed. When Kirk asks the older Spock who he is, his first reply is “I always have and always will be your friend”. As is usually the case in developing friendship storylines, the two begin at loggerheads after Kirk becomes the first person to beat Spock’s Kobayashi Maru programme (which is intended to be unbeatable, and something Trek fans will know about), but does so by ‘cheating’. It is Spock who is the captain of the Enterprise and Kirk trying to wrestle command from him provides the opposition between the two. We get to see Kirk and Spock fighting but the two come together to destroy Nero, and whilst not great friends at the end, are at least comrades with respect for each other. Their interaction is well played, even it if is sometimes on the over-aggressive side, but this isn’t distracting in the context.

Most the characters look similar to the classic roles which helps, and the performances are good, especially Zachary Quinto who’s Spock secretly usurps the film, and although we see the death of Kirk‘s father at the beginning, if feels like Spock oddly enough has more emotional background and depth. Kirk grows up a cocky and petty criminal with an eye for the ladies and a tendency to for brawls. It’s the down-and-out losers that Americans may warm to in their cinema but can feel a bit tedious elsewhere, which is simply a cultural discrepancy. Spock on the other hand is bullied because he’s different (half-human), something no doubt many Trek fans can relate too. His father is quite cold as you would expect from anyone without emotions (although Vulcans do have emotions but they learn to repress them when young), and he is belittled by his superiors. As he goes through the film he has to overcome a tragedy and sacrifice far greater then that of Kirk’s, and learn to accept the role of second in command to the brash young Kirk, and all this makes him a far more rewarding screen character.

Unlike the original series which had the triumvirate of Spock, McCoy and Kirk, here McCoy is pushed more to the background, becoming instant friends with Kirk so there’s no need for development, and Uhura is more central, probably because of the lack of a female lead, and she plays Spock’s love interest although Kirk makes several unanswered passes. All the actors play their roles fine, and they have the recognisable characteristics without being carbon copies, (Sulu had more of a sense of humour, Chekhov wasn’t so excitable, Uhura never seemed as agressive) with McCoy being the best of the lesser characters since he has the best catch phrases, and plays up the anxious side rather then the grumpy side, whilst Simon Pegg is the most wayward as Scotty, not nailing the accent and trying too much to be funny rather then anything like the original character.

It’s not to spoil anything to say that Nero’s time-travelling changes history meaning the franchise can be taken in any direction Abrahams wishes, and technically meaning that the film isn‘t a prequel. The film ejects the intelligence and politics of classic Star Trek in return for a loud action film that is basically here to place the characters of the upcoming films (all main actors have signed on for three films). The problem is Abrams seems to have little respect for the ethos of the original (I wonder if Rodenberry had made it whether their would be middle Eastern characters and maybe some openly gay ones: most probably). However the reception from the fans has been favourable since the series themselves had already dealt with alternative realities so none seem offended, and as action films go it’s perfectly well directed, Abrams having Produced Lost, Alias and Cloverfield and directed Mission Impossible III.

The special effects are remarkable. A lot of Hollywood films are actually let down by there effects but Abrams pulls it off, probably because in scenes with actual actors he uses sets instead of blue screen like say, George Lucas, and the effects are saved for the ships in space with no flesh and blood to compare them next to. In some shots Abrams uses his camera to fly upside down over the ships to give us unusual angles and viewpoints and whilst they can sometimes feel a bit nauseating the images are still breathtaking, and add to the sense of action and otherworldliness.

It’s been hailed as the first blockbuster of the Obama era, something Abrahms as denied had any effect on the film. But if we take every film as a product of it’s time then Star Trek has some very interesting factors. Nero makes a point of telling Captain Pike that he is a miner, a simple labourer who’s home was destroyed by the federation (America?). Nero then catches Spock and takes the Red Matter, a weapon that the Federation was intending to use to save the Romulans and they proceed to use it to destroy Vulcan/Federation planets in revenge. The similarities between America and the war on terror is clear. There’s also the connotations in the opening scene of suicide bombing and whilst it is possible to read too much into things there is still a lot to consider behind the action (although I feel on Abrams part, unintentional).

It is a mindless, enjoyable film with great action set pieces and visuals. The humour lets it down (Simon Pegg trapped in a tube of water is just too adolescent), which is an often overlooked part of the Hollywood blockbuster package, but is enjoyable none the less, merely because of the respect it pays the characters. The mindless part may be a bit disconcerting for some Trek fans, but many feel the big brash action treatment is what the brand needed, and Abrams deserves full credit for his treatment. I had a good time, and although a part of me expected more (especially in regards to the plot) another part of me was worried I would get something truly awful. Needless to say I came out relieved, if not entirely satisfied, but a sequel probably isn’t a bad idea if they can continue at this standard.