Abrams made a lot of noise in 2009, that he was giving Trek a Star Wars treatment; and I can admit, it was a good adventure. In subsequent watchings, though, I found it felt more SW and less Trek to me, which (and I'm ducking as I type this, because one of my favorite readers here happens to be a Wars fan) begins to be distancing, somewhat. ID, though, feels ALL Trek - and that makes it a bit of a deeper a story, and all the better for me as a fan.
I did have a couple of "huh" moments and a couple of nerd (*) moments, of course. The ship underwater bit (it can't be a spoiler if they put it on a poster) - it was cool and all that, but they did do that in Avengers, so I found it a little less whizzbang for just having seen it during our last Blockbuster summer season. No harm/no foul, though, but rather a lot of production money for a repeat. I also laughed in the wrong way when they ripped off the Godfather trilogy, because I was laughing - "really? going to do a scene from a Godfather movie, and we pick PART THREE? seriously?" - but hey, they did it well so it was fine.
My nerdier moments were, "aww - they just mentioned the Mudd incident last month!" and (MICRO SPOILER) "oooh, so we're admitting to Section 31 just that easily, are we?" and, finally - "they're spelling Q'onos THAT way???" Hee.
I can admit to realizing, as I watched, just how much Trek really does mean to me, in those couple of moments I wanted to kill my moviegoing companions for giggling and joking during moments I was sitting there welling up at scenes custom made for me as a lifelong fan. I can also admit giving a wee smackdown to one of them, all of nineteen years old, saying he knew more about Trek than I because he's read the Reddit and "all" the novels (at that age, to read "all" the Trek fiction out there would have had to take 70% of your life, kid). "It's just not the same experience as to have had this stuff in your DNA for forty years, though." He agreed to this pretty readily. Hee again.
ST 2009 I loved and still do, but I can see 2013 meaning a lot more to me over the long run. As a popcorn flick it is par excellence on its own terms, but as a fan flick it is amazingly well done. Its use of existing canon is wonderfully finely balanced, and its deviations are a very nice set of inversions.
There's much talk of how pretty the cast are, but they've come into incarnations now whose maturity and oneness with the original cast are breathtaking. Zoe(umlaut) Saldana is a fine actor and (it sounds stupid) but I'm so proud of her; stepping into Nichelle Nichols' boots has got to be a hell of a job, and she is doing it unbelievably well, while still bringing some new feelings to the role. Bravo. Pine has begun to eerily resemble Shatner, and I actually mean that as a compliment. Though his upper lip is still distractingly pouty. Heh. And Karl Urban continues to bend my brain by sustaining a teeny tiny crush on Bones, of all characters. Heh again.
One standout was Simon Pegg, a brilliant casting choice, who has been aged to look a lot more like classic Scotty (though the rest of them, mature as they are in the roles now, don't look actually older) - and, indeed, much harried now that he's fully in the role (... and out of it ...). The sole quibble I had with the fantastic choices they made in using Scotty is that they had him kill someone right on the heels of a moral stance so firm it shaped the entire film. I almost felt Jimmy Doohan there in his opening scenes, and hated to see Scotty used even to kill one minion. You don't use Jimmy like that. He may be the most LOVED of all the characters. You give him a moral stance, you give him harrowing frustrations. You don't use him to kill a guy.
Finally, Cumberbatch. I wanted him for Christmas the first time I saw Sherlock, but that's the pretty cast for you. (EVERYONE is gorgeous in this movie, from Bruce Greenwood to the little girl in a coma who never even opens her exquisite eyes onscreen.) Blown up to the bigscreen, he's great in his role, but I was distracted by the weird fact that his mouth resembles and ex boyfriend of mine, who himself very strongly resembles Mr. X, but who in turn bears no resemblance to Cumberbatch to complete that dizzying personal circle of psychological issues. (Say it with me: erm/hee ... ?) You can't go wrong with a Brit for a villain, of course, particularly one as nicely complex as this one - and the eventual ruthlessness is perfectly realized, following some displays of almost clinical civility. This guy makes Hannibal look like an absolute wreck, and of course it's immaculately, wonderfully terrifying.
All the relationships are just CINCHED in this movie. And that is the thing that means most in Star Trek, any iteration. It's enough to make a fangirl cry, and EVEN want to see it (in theaters!) again, and wish I had a hellacious sound system on my TV for when I get it at home, so the movie need never be diminished nor compromised.
So - yeah - liked it.
(*Nerd moment - I meant to note when I first wrote this post, my brother and I analyzed my level of ST geek cred, and I seem to settle, not at geek, but at nerd status. I'm more than a mere bystander, if only by dint of a generation (plus) absorbing the Trekverse by osmosis ... and yet, I stand not quite in the pantheon of fully *geeked* fans. I know far too much - and care enough about the minutiae - to assert a certain status for myself. But I fall short of fully fledged Trekker/Trekkie-dom. I don't even passionately care about the choice between Trekker/Trekkie ...)
No comments:
Post a Comment