Skip to content

Thing that makes me happy #3: Star Trek

May 11, 2009

I am a huge Trekkie. Always have been, always will be. I’ve watched TV specials, I’ve been to conventions and I’ve even dressed up as one of the characters (Captain Janeway for Halloween when I was 12 years old). I even have an autographed Lt. Tom Paris doll.

Yeah, that’s right.

Although I totally missed out of the original Star Trek series by virtue of the fact I wasn’t born yet, I managed to catch up pretty quickly with Star Trek: The Next Generation, Stark Trek: Voyager, and Star Trek: Deep Space Nine (though not as much, because the show competed for my Voyager attention, so I mostly just watched Voyager). I never really got into Enterprise, and it seems like others felt the same way considering it was canceled. I just didn’t find the plot or the actors all that engaging.

originalseries

The original cast.

I’ve seen most – but not all – the Star Trek movies. My favorites are Star Trek: Generations and Star Trek: First Contact (which I’ve seen at least 20 times and can run lines with the movie while I’m watching it). While I was disappointed with the last couple Star Trek movies, I was excited by the prospect of seeing how the whole series came together with a quasi-prequel in the J.J. Abrams creation, Star Trek.

new-trekkie-photo

The new cast.

Now, because I’m a die-hard fan, I am probably on the more critical end of the spectrum of moviegoers. And you know what? I really liked it! There were some plot-holes, but the movie is about time-travel, which in and of itself doesn’t make a lick of sense. There was also some fancy-schmancy technology that left me, my boyfriend, his sister and her husband going, “Now how does that work?”

It’s science fiction – that’s how it works.

Although the movie has clear connections to the future series in the form of some choice phrases from the characters, (“Fascinating!” and “I’m a doctor, not a physicist”), but because this was pre-Star Trek: The Original Series, there was very little continuity that you had to be aware of. It was like starting over from scratch. There wasn’t any backstory or relationships you have to be aware of, because none of them have happened. Of course, if you are aware of the future relationships, it makes the movie all the better, but unlike previous movies, like Star Trek: First Contact, there aren’t any references that may leave you confused.

If you’re into ignoring authority, witty quips, hot guys, cute [green] girls, bad-ass action scenes, big scary monsters, funny accents, and some ill-placed romance (OK, seriously, those who have seen the movie, are you with me?), you’ll love it.

9 Comments
  1. dawn aurora permalink
    May 11, 2009 3:05 PM

    With you on the romance. Um, what? I haven’t watched a huge amount of Star Trek (being more of a Star Wars fan) but it seemed a little strange, even to me. A little forced, too.

  2. tmana permalink
    May 11, 2009 7:33 PM

    Saw it 3 times over the weekend. First time I found some of the CGI of the trailers too obvious and really went to see the movie. Saw some streaks on the print that really annoyed me that I had to go back in to verify whether or not the theater had gotten a bad reel. Second time to pay attention to some of the details, looked like the streaks were caused by lens flare, which should have been corrected for in filming (Photography and Lighting 101), and which was very hard to understand why someone might choose to maintain lens flare for artistic reasons. Third time got a bit further through the musical analysis of the score, analysis of STARFLEET uniform design, and analysis of the lens-flare decisions. Found it partly an issue of set design and lighting, and part of it a decision added into the CGI scenes… to make it look as if one were looking out a window, rather than through a digital viewscreen… the amount of computation that would have required… wow. Regarding the particular “attempt to avoid favoritism” relationship… there were some hints along similar lines in the original series that could have been extrapolated in that manner for an alternate universe.

    I really liked the lines about xenolinguistics. Technobabble was actually correct (except the “talented tongue” and “oral performance” lines had nothing to do with the study and everything to do with sex), and there was no indication of the sound-replication issues posed by different pharyngeal and laryngeal structures between the different Federation species/peoples/humanities.

  3. May 23, 2009 12:24 AM

    I liked this movie, but am sort of troubled by how it’s already changed Star Trek history. I mean, think of this; no more Vulcan planet! This means no Spock in the 1st movie studying kolinahr. Oh well,…

    As for time travel, this is actually kind of been proven to be possible by quantum physics, though it’s not quite time travel. Quantum physics says time is a constant, which means we’re living time at the same moment, no matter the day, week, century. All one has to do is find the means to move into each dimension, and thus time travel. Easy, eh? 🙂

    • May 23, 2009 9:54 AM

      From what I’ve heard/read, it isn’t so much that we changed Star Trek history as we changed history in an alternate dimension. I think that’s what the wormhole was all about and why Spock was able to come back in time and tell Young Kirk that Old Kirk still had his father. If Old Spock was from the same future, that would have changed as soon as George Kirk died. That’s at least what I’ve been told.

      • May 23, 2009 10:03 AM

        Well now, that’s an interesting perspective. Course, in an alternative universe, Spock then really could have been the captain. Still, I like what you’ve put forward; it might help my mind some. lol

        • Skular permalink
          June 22, 2009 2:07 AM

          Yes, I don’t think the movie was meant to be on the same timeline as the series. It’s an alternate reality created when Nero goes through the wormhole and destroys the USS Kelvin. At first I found it almost too convenient, because it means that the new timeline can chuck out 40 years of established Star Trek history and do whatever they want, but at the same time it opens wide the possibility of new stories, new adventures, new relationships… it’s an interesting prospect. My only hope is that they don’t make a bunch of superficial movies that lack the depth the rest of the Star Trek universe (excepting Enterprise. I’m sorry, but that series was terrible) had. Hollywood has enough generic-plot, mindless, blow it up or shoot it movies going; this is a good opportunity for them to do something different and add another great installment to Star Trek.😀

  4. Cake permalink
    May 15, 2010 11:45 AM

    A reason they changed the whole history of star trek is so that they wouldn’t be as restricted when creating the other two films. It was a good idea, a lot better than just recreating the movie, but i still like the original series the best!

Trackbacks

  1. Things That Make Me Happy Thursday: #8 thru #10 « Lemonade Life
  2. Things That Make Me Happy: #36-39 « Lemonade Life

Comments are closed.