What’s romantic about Star Trek? The series and films are not exactly famous for long-lived happy coupledom (yes, I am looking at you who killed off Jadzia Dax), and the focus is hardly ever on characters’ serious romantic attachments. Yet Star Trek offers the ultimate romance in its determined, occasional stubborn optimism in the face of great odds. In the new movie, Spock explains to Kirk the function of a simulation that is meant to prepare for the worst and promote dignified actions in the face of death, and Kirk isn’t having any of that. He refuses to think either death or defeat, and similarly the whole Star Trek universe is about overcoming (or having overcome) racism, poverty, inequality of women, environmental damage, and general selfish greed. It’s the people as a whole who get their HEA.
In addition, Star Trek carries strong personal romantic associations for me, because I met my husband through a Star-Trek-related computer password that he used, and our acquaintance started off with comparing notes about Enterprise. You can imagine our astonished delight when we discovered that the new Star Trek film was to open in Germany on the day of our wedding anniversary – the perfect treat!
The new Star Trek, directed by J.J. Abrams, is a prequel to the original series, and so it’s set earlier than anything in the Star Trek franchise except for Enterprise. The movie begins with high drama in space: Out of a thunderstorm, a huge and ugly ship appears and threatens the USS Calvin. The captain goes on board the alien ship, where he is soon killed, and leaves his first officer, George Kirk, in command. In order to give the 800 crew of the Calvin a chance to reach safety, among them his pregnant wife, George sacrifices the ship and his own life, dying the very minute his son is born.
After some short scenes from Jim’s and Spock’s childhood, we meet Jim Kirk (Chris Pine) again as a rebellious good-for-nothing, getting into a bar brawl. Captain Pike of the USS Enterprise picks him up, reminds him of his father’s heroism and encourages him to enter Starfleet as a cadet. Three years later Kirk is a rebellious as he ever was and quarrels with an Academy instructor named Spock (Zachary Quinto), when an urgent emergency call from Vulcan forces Starfleet to man a number of ships with cadets …
The film is full of action, loud noise and fast-moving close-ups, and in this it is little different from most other contemporary action films, tailored to please a young audience. Yet at the same time, the film pays loving attention to creating and developing the characters. There they are, young actors that only look a bit like the well-beloved characters one has watched so many times, and they both resemble their originals in mien and gestures, and give the characters their own stamp. And it works – the way they interact, the way that you can see an older Kirk with his brand of self-irony in this young, hot-headed man, a less secure version of Spock, an enthusiastic Chekov (Anton Yelchin) who wants to prove himself. I also loved the design, as it pays loving homage at what we know and what lies yet in the future, while granting the movie its own esthetics. While not everything fits with what we know of Star Trek – for example, Uhura (Zoe Saldana) is far more kick-ass –, and only some discrepancies are addressed, there are numerous references to the older series and movies included. There’s action and a suitably nasty villain (Eric Bana) and humor and a hint of a romance. My only (minor) quibbles are that I thought Scotty (Simon Pegg) a bit over-the-top and his companion (as borrowed from Star Wars) an entirely unnecessary addition.
I enjoyed the film hugely and plan to see it again soon, hopefully undubbed. As for a possible sequel, there are several promising story lines left open, and I hope there will be one! Although the latest Star Trek movie means a departure from what the last films did, in my opinion the new direction is taken with respect and love for what Star Trek as been so far, and determination to see it on a new course. I can definitely go with that.
-Rike Horstmann
I skimmed your review because I’m trying to stay spoiler free but I do find ST to be romantic in a wonderful future kind of way. I’ll have to come back and read this when I see the movie – maybe next weekend. Waiting for the crowds to get through
Cindys
Just a quibble but JJ Abrams said in an interview BEFORE the movie came out and I can attest to this fact after but (mild spoiler, mild spoiler, mild spoiler mild spoiler)
The film is not a prequel, it is alternate reality. It is an alternate version of how Jame T. Kirk and crew came to man the Enterprise. The time line is changed starting at Kirk’s birth and going forward. This means that several episodes in the TV show couldn’t even have taken place (Amok Time and Journey to Babel) and most others are affected in some way.
I feel a bit silly quibbling but there really is a difference between a prequel and an alternate reality.
I have to admit the whole thing has me confused. People have been hailing it as a block buster but it didn’t even make half it’s money back in the opening weekend and it has STIFF competition coming out in the next few weeks. Woverine made 15 million more, I have my doubts about Angels and Demon’s making solid money but I am confident Terminator will knock it off it’s top spot and so will UP and HPB and (squee!) Transformers. So if I were paramount I woudn’t be rushing to talk sequel till I actually saw myself in the black.
I know a lot of people really love this new version. It certainly had all the pomp and circumstance of the modern sci-fi blockbuster but it actually just made me sad. I like the old Trek and I witnessed the passing of an era. Thank God this is the digital age — at least I still have my DVD’s to comfort me.
maggie b.
Yes, the fate of Christopher Pike is certainly different (though I can certainly see how this would square with the series) and the Mom and Dad and the planet Vulcan were also fine. Not to mention I thought Spock was motivated mostly only when the Vulcan mating thing struck. But, I think all these — as is the difference between prequel and alternate reality — are quibbles. The important thing to me is that J.J. Abrams took a beloved franchise and reinvigorated it for a new generation — and for the old one, too. As a BIG fan of the original series in reruns, I absolutely loved it. It remained faithful to what was really important about what made Star Trek work while still playing around just enough to freshen it up.
I loved it.
I saw “Star Trek” and as maggie b. pointed out, it’s not really a prequel because if it was, then a number of episodes of the original series would go up in smoke because their premises wouldn’t be valid. “Star Trek” in its various incarnations has dabbled in alternate timelines many times, so as I continue to consider the plot of the movie, I’ve come to the realization that the writiers and J.J. Abrams can tinker with the “Star Trek” timeline if they like, as long as they respect the fact that some of us have long memories and favorite episodes of the original series. Having said all that, it IS a good movie; I think that the re-casting of the various roles was first-rate (LOVED seeing Ben Cross as Sarek!). Of course the visuals and special effects were spectacular–light-years ahead of what we saw in the original series. Assuming that there’s a sequel to this movie, it will be interesting to see if there’s more tinkering with “Star Trek” history!
Spoiler alert! Spoiler Alerts! Please don’t keep reading if you dont want a
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
My understanding from JJ Abrams interviews and others is that Ambassador Spock (Leonard Nimoy) did indeed save his universe so that it still exists as is. The universe that the movie is in was in fact created by Nero’s first act outside the wormhole. From what I can tell this was done so that cannon as put forth by TOS, TNG, Voyager and DS9 — not to add tons of books (”Ishmael” by Barbara Hambly is brilliant, btw) and comics would not be overturned. So this crew is living a separate “reality” from the Roddenberry Universe of Trek.
maggie b.
I thought the movie was a lot of fun and I am hoping it does well enough at the box office that there will be sequels. I saw it on Saturday night in a packed theater, so I think there is hope of that.
I’ve gone into full-geek mode with this movie and have seen it three times in the theatre already. I fully expect that I’ll probably go a couple more times in the coming weeks. (My theatre has $5 matinees, which are affordable.) Each time I go, I see something — a reference to TOS — that I missed before. Each time I go, I feel a different emotional impact. I went for the third time yesterday and was much more teary-eyed this time around. Cried through much of the opening scene, especially the END of the opening scene, and sniffled for probably the entire last 10-15 minutes of the movie.
I DO consider myself to be a fan of the entire Star Trek franchise, although TOS was a little before my time so I haven’t seen as many of those episodes as I have of TNG, DS9, VOY, and even ENT. But of course I’ve watched the movies as well as the tv shows.
One SPOILER below
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
I’m fine with the changes Abrams made — the alternate reality and some of the deviations from canon — because I feel that in general he stays true to the characterization and the values of TOS. TOS was always about bravery, altruism, sacrifice, loyalty, optimism, and all of that is there in this movie as well. I loved watching the relationships develop — especially the relationship between this Spock and this Kirk. One of the scenes that stood out to me the most is the scene inside Spock Prime’s ship, when Spock is telling Kirk that they have a 4% chance of succeeding and Kirk is all, “It’ll work.” That’s part of what’s so awesome about the Kirk/Spock pairing. Spock is logic, reasoning, equations, probability. He’s looking at the scenarios from one perspective only. And it’s important that he’s able to do that. In TOS, his logical mind and reasoning has saved the crew and ship on numerous occasions. But that’s also what makes Kirk such a good foil for Spock. Kirk has brains, but he also operates from his emotions…his intuition, his instincts, his gut. He has an unflagging optimism that Spock cannot have, given Spock’s preoccupation with the facts and statistics. And there are times when you can’t help but believe that Kirk effects a success through sheer force of will and his determination that it be so, his determination to believe — to FEEL — that it will happen. So I loved that scene because to me it so totally illustrated what makes Spock and Kirk the perfect pairing in TOS and in this incarnation as well.
I truly have NO complaints about this movie. None. No quibbles. I don’t care if the “alternate reality” setting deviates from canon laid down in TOS. I think the movie referenced and paid homage to the original series in a gazillion ways and stayed true to the essence of the vision and characterization of TOS.
I saw it the weekend in a packed theatre Sunday matinee and LOVED it!! It’s not yer father’s Star Trek – but who wants it to be – come on – it’s 40 years later and time for something new.
What I loved was the respect that Abrams and team showed to the old Star Trek. It was in every frame – did anybody notice anything “camp” about the movie? No way. (Although I do agree with Rike’s comment on Scotty’s companion.) Although I know the new cast was in no way imitating the old cast, there was (what I thought of as) an homage to William Shatner’s Kirk when Chris Pine slightly hesitated (and very faintly over-acted) on a couple of his lines. It was almost unnoticeable but VERY old-style Captain Kirk.
As a big fan of the old Star Trek, and TNG, I thought this new movie was superb. It looked great and it sounded great. I can’t wait to see it again, and I can’t wait for the sequels that are sure to come.
I loved it too. My favorite of the new cast was Bones. The actor had such an expressive face, and he really got across Bones’ irreverent humor. I also thought the Bones/Kirk friendship was well done.
As an addition to what Nifty said: There’s an exchange in the movie where Spock says “It’s supposed to be an unsolvable problem.” To which Kirk says, “I don’t believe in unsolvable problems.” To me that really summarized what is so great about that relationship.
I saw it Monday and also loved it. It kept enough of the old but it’s very new and fresh, too. I saw a piece of an interview with Gene Roddenberry’s son recently and he said that his dad had always hoped that there would be a time (and it’s now) when technology could bring more depth and effects and such to Star Trek. So if it’s what GR wanted, it’s fine by me. I thought Karl Urban did a fantastic job as Bones, the constant state of exasperation of the original (Kelley) but he made the role his own and I loved every scene with him in it. I’m another Trekkie from way back. I actually saw Nimoy/Shatner together in Sacramento about 7 years ago and they were hysterical as a team on stage. I also had the pleasure to meet Majel Barrett Roddenberry there, she was very sweet. My sister in law and I were so star struck, we forgot to ask her for an autograph,LOL.
Well, it’s been a few days since I first posted to this blog…and I’ve now seen the movie 3 more times!! (That’s a grand total of 6 times so far.) Ha! And no, I’m STILL not bored with the movie. I could definitely go see it again.
I think there are perhaps a lot of repeat-goers. Wednesday night I went and as I was leaving the theatre, I heard the couple behind me saying how much they liked the movie. I confessed that that had been my fifth viewing, to which the guy responded, “It was my third” and the woman responded, “My second.” And today when I went, the theatre was jam-packed — the kind of crowded in which people are asking you to scoot down and twosomes and threesomes are having to split up to occupy the single seats scattered around. A guy came and squeezed in next to me, and I wryly remarked to him that this was not a good showing to come late to. He agreed and said that this was his third time, and he’d not seen it so crowded at the other showings.
I really DON’T want them to correct the timeline to line up with the original series and canon. Not yet. I’m happy with where they’re going with this one.
I have read various articles, etc. on the web that suggests they may visit Khan for the sequel. That leaves me scratching my head, as I saw TONS of Khan references in this movie.
Finally saw the movie this weekend (how dare my best friend schedule her wedding on it’s opening weekend and ask me to be in her bridal party causing the delay in viewing!) and loved it. I concur with most of the post and hope I can catch it again. I went on a Sunday afternoon to a packed theater.
The movie stayed true to the Rodenberry ideals while making it newly interesting. I acutally wished we had more screen time with each character. I think all the actors walked that fine line of representing the fomer characters while not becoming a caricature of them. My most major quibble is…
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
the destructions of the planet Vulcan. They raised the stakes pretty high and I may dislike the plot point because it’s both emotionally painful for me, but also wipes out a large contiburing force to the Federation. The future of the Federation wil be much much different without one of it’s founders, the Vulcans.
But of course, this underscores a vulnerability to Spock that was one of my favorite parts of the story, character-wise.
My favorite parts, the relationships between Kirk, Spock, and Uhura. As any romance reader knows, it’s all about character driven relationships and as much about what’s unsaid, as what’s in the dialogue. This was no doubt one of the most romantic Trek movies. But I’ll have to post on the boards to discuss that aspect more.
BTW, I read that they had already signed everybody for a least another sequel, if not two even before this movie opened. I wonder if they’ll start a different storyline or simply continue with the stage they set now.