Gene Roddenberry’s hopeful future was not there. It was implied, perhaps taken for granted, but it was not evidenced in any meaningful or significant way. That future—one in which poverty, disease, war, hunger, and most human vices have been eliminated—was what made Star Trek rise above most other science-future spaceship serials. This is something director J.J. Abrams either didn’t realize or didn’t care about. Hope was a huge component of Star Trek, and Abrams left hope on the cutting room floor. The major reboot performances are only interesting if you’re familiar with the originals, which these performances vaguely echo without actually measuring up to. Eye candy, lots of fun, but not enough depth to make the film compelling, no lessons learned, no questions pondered, no hope extended to us.
As fun a way to kill an afternoon as any, and I suppose the film will rake in lots of cash. But, for this Trek fan, it serves manly to underscore just how great the original was.
Oddly, I found a $5 copy at Walmart last Christmas season.
Under Abrams, Kirk’s core competency as a starship captain appears to be limited to hanging off of things, based on how many times that’s all that Kirk manages to do during a scene.
I enjoyed the movie, but the longer they wait to release a sequel, the less likely fans will be to line up for it. And without Nimoy’s presence, the movie will suffer. They need a really good story that harkens back to the original series without rehashing old plotlines. They definitely need to give characters something to actually *do.* And Jim Kirk needs to deliver one of his famous speeches.
Not gunna hoppen. They are obviously dumping *Shatner* while taking it out on Kirk. They have nothing to replace the Shatnerisms with. If Whatsisname had an act even half as compelling, it would be fine. But the lack of Shatnerisms leaves an enormous hole in Abrams Trek. That and Spock soundling like a nine-year old girl. It’s a little jarring.