Star Trek: A Non-Trekkie's Take

"Live long and prosper." 

"Beam me up, Scotty." 

The Vulcan nerve pinch. 

The USS Enterprise.  

While watching Star Trek, I realized that even though I'd never seen any of the previous ten movies, or so much as one episode of any of the six TV series having to do with Gene Roddenberry's fictional universe, its characters and catchphrases are such a part of the pop culture lexicon that it was impossible to feel like a complete newbie to this space-based franchise.  Sure, there were a few points during the film's two-hour running-time where the hard-core Trekkie sitting next to me had to lean over and whisper-explain why everyone else in the theater was laughing... and I'm positive that I didn't catch 95% of the nods director J.J. Abrams surely gave to All Things Trek that preceded this reboot, but I was completely fine with that.  There are no prerequisites for enjoying Star Trek; from the ridiculously intense opening sequence to the closing credits, I was enthralled.  Now I even have some sort of bizarre crush on Spock, which has thoroughly disturbed my husband.

As Locke reviewed this film in detail from a long-time fan perspective, I'm not going to dish out many specifics about its plot.  But I will say that the front-loaded scenes showing the drastically different upbringings of future-Enterprise captain James T. Kirk and even-tempered half-Vulcan/half-human Spock were my favorite parts of the movie.  Once those backstories were established, the action moved on to a struggle between the crew of the USS Enterprise (on its maiden voyage, no less) and a band of nasty Romulans, led by a perpetually pissed-off Nero (Eric Bana).

I'm happy to report that I wasn't annoyed in the slightest by Adult Kirk, played by pretty boy Chris Pine.  The commercials for the film had me worried that this hotshot at the Starfleet Academy would be little more than an impulsive, hot and bothered meathead, but thankfully that wasn't (entirely) the case.  He served as the perfect foil to Zachary Quinto's calculating Spock; lesser actors might have overplayed these roles, but there was never a point where I felt that Kirk and Spock weren't believable characters. 

In fact, the entire cast was great -- not a weak link in the bunch.  I personally was a little irked to see Winona Ryder as Spock's mother, however.  Her acting was fine and the make-up team did a great job transforming her into an older woman, but whenever she was on-screen, my Bubble of Suspended Disbelief popped and all I could think was, "Why in the hell is Winona Ryder in this movie?!?"  (I hope I didn't just curse you with the same reaction.)

The only other issue I have with the film is that some of its key plot points are pretty darn confusing.  As you may know, producers J.J. Abrams, Damon Lindelof and Bryan Burk also worked/work together on Lost, which isn't exactly known for straightforward storytelling.  Since I've been tuning into and analyzing  Lost for the past five years, I thought I'd easily be able to process anything Star Trek threw my way.  Color me overconfident -- I must admit to being completely bewildered by a few of its twists.  In the interest of not spoiling anything for those of you who plan to see the film, I'll keep mum on what I couldn't figure out.  Here's a hint, though: fellow Lost fans will probably laugh out loud at the similarities between the TV series' current season and some of the events that transpire in Star Trek.

One other similarity Star Trek shares with Lost is the brilliant composer Michael Giacchino.  Remember that breathtaking opening scene I referenced earlier in this review?  It showcased Giacchino's expert ability to subtly shift the score between quickly oscillating action sequences and cry-your-eyes-out dramatic scenes, all while heightening the emotion of both.  However, as Locke bemoaned last week, there definitely wasn't a recognizable, indisputable Star Trek "theme" that emerged by the time the film ended. 

Finally, I can't talk about a sci-fi film without weighing in on its special effects, right?  Well, I've got good news for you: I give the effects a 9.5 out of 10.  I'm one of those people who's quick to complain about shoddy CGI, and at several points throughout Star Trek I found myself thinking the exact opposite: Wow, I can't believe how real that looks.  Nero's ship is especially impressive in all of its gigantic, steel-pronged glory.  When you see that thing coming at the Enterprise, trust me, you'll be worried.

So if it's not already obvious, let me state in no uncertain terms that I highly recommend Star Trek to all of the other non-Trekkies out there.  Since the hard-core fan of the franchise sitting next to me seemed pleased when the theater's lights came back on -- and as Locke was happy with the film as well -- I dare say that even those of you who have gone to Star Trek conventions will approve.

Speaking of Star Trek conventions, let me end with this classic Saturday Night Live clip featuring the original Captain James T. Kirk, William Shatner.  Perhaps it can serve as a primer for those of you who are going in blind to Abrams' franchise reboot.   (Things really get moving at the four-minute mark.)

I'd love to hear the reactions of other non-Trekkies who've seen the film, so be sure to leave your thoughts in the comments section below. Spoilers are fair game there, too. 

In the meantime, I'm off to see if I can find one of those I Grok Spock tees.

Other Trek pieces:

Locke Peterseim's Review of Star Trek

What We Talk About When We Talk About Star Trek -- Locke reminiscences on what Trek has meant to him

Comments

[AJ (Greg Grunberg Rules) Green]

I couldn't agree more, though I am not a die hard Trekkie, in fact I would probably be run out of a convention for saying I liked the theme song to the last series, I do have enough knowledge to grasp plenty of nods to times gone by during the film. I enjoyed it far more than I thought I would, and concur with regards to the special effects.

[jordan shoes]

why so many blog about the Star Trek.

[Erik Michielsen]

Bravo, e. Wonderfully worded. Thanks for the insight into Lost / JJ Abrams / Lindelof / Burk parallels too.

Your humble fan,

Non-Trek E

[JoshB]

I'm a complete Star Trek noob, but loved the film! :D

So cool seeing the credits with all the people you mentioned from Lost [I saw April Webster there too hehe]

[Ally Jay]

As a Former-Non Trekkie (since i'm offically in love with Star Trek, or at least the start of this reboot generation) I truly loved this film. I'd been excited ever since the mini previews that hit theaters two summers ago. There were times during the film when new characters were introduced that my sister and I would look at each other and then glance over at our parents (Vintage Trekkie's as i've taken to calling them) knowing that this new character is someone important and we dont really know the back story. It didn't matter though because as you said in your review we knew just enough because of all the Star Trek references in todays pop culture. This film is something I plan to recommend to everyone I know. There is enough of everything in it from everyone from the heartbreaking opening sequence of Kirk's mother watching (and hearing) her husband, Kirk's father die in action. The comedic relief young Spock brought(Jacob Kogan who should from now on always play a young Zachary Quinto) made falling in love with Spock so easy what with his "This is your 35th attempt to illicit and emotion response" how adorable was that! Then the action sequences which are amazing in themselves, were precluded with great jokes for everyone in the audience. Overall this was a great movie to be included in the start of what will be a summer of great releases.

[Ned]

Dear E, i'm a big fan of your lost blog and appreciated your star trek review. i have a couple of comments.

1. i wished you had gone into the whole time travel issue. having read 'the time travelers wife' (at your recommendation) and followed all the lost tribulations the last couple of seasons, i was hoping you'd go into the various takes on time travel. Star trek was similar to TTW in that spock could go meet his younger self, but changing the time line was definitely possible.

2. i disagree with your assesement of michael giachinno's soundtrack. i reallh like other works of his (lost, incredibles and ratatouille) but i felt this soundtrack was a poor ripoff of a lot of other great soundtracks by other composers such as John Williams (all star wars), Danny Elfman (spiderman) and Hans Zimmer (gladiator). By copying a lot of their tricks it sounded tired because he had lost his own original voice in it. There were also a couple of scenes where I felt he got it wrong, for example the moment the enterprise escapes the black hole. A glorius John Williams brass moment would have channeled and released the tension better than the melancholic romantic them he used.

Anyway, keep up your great work.

[Nomad]

it would seem that Chris Pine's Capt. Kirk encapsulates all that Capt. Kirk was meant to be more than William Shatner's version

[joules]

One little inside joke that probably went unnoticed by most: There's a moment in the bar when Kirk is playing with a salt-shaker in the shape of the Enterprise. I assume this is a reference to the device used by Dr. McCoy to diagnose patients in the original series. The device was a prop made from a salt shaker.

[Locke Peterseim]

Joules, I DID notice the Enterprise salt shaker (actually, on a second viewing, it's not the Enterprise, but an older, single engine starship), but honestly did not make the connection to that old story about using salt shakers as McCoy's intruments. (I do remember the story -- I'm pretty sure it's in The Making of Star Trek book).

That does raise another geeky fan issue: the building of the Enterprise on the ground near Riverside, Iowa. It's a fantastic visual and a nice way to connect Kirk to the ship he will some day come to love like a wife. And I have no problem with the notion -- some old-school fans are upset the Enterprise isn't constructed in space dock.

Anyway, the mention of the salt shaker made me think of that, since it makes sense, in a fun, kitschy kind of way, that the bars around Riverside would have Enterprise salt shakers -- after all, the construction of the ship there would be a huge economic boon, right?

[Denni the Balloon Guy]

J.J. needs to put some scenes in the DVD version to help us hard core fans out. Among those scenes I'd like to see....

1) An explanation of why the mining ship is able to defeat 49 Klingon warbirds and a Starfleet Armada single-handedly.

2) A scene showing where Eric Bana intentionally put Spock prime near the Federation outpost on the ice planet.

3) A scene showing where young Spock intentionally put's Kirk near the Federation outpost on the ice planet.

4) A scene where Spock prime convinces the Federation counsel in closed door meetings that young cadet-graduate Kirk should go straight from graduation to the captain's chair of the flagship Enterprise due to the polluted timeline. Something about the right age, right grouping of people, etc.

5) A scene where Eric Bana is rejected by the Romulan people - when he comes back attempting to tell them of their impending future doom instead of plotting revenge against Spock.

6) Unfortunately, the whole transporting across solar systems and while traveling in warp - should have been while the ship was disabled and unable to leave the ice planet orbit. Instead of the rings of Saturn, the Enterprise should have stopped on a dime on the dark side of the moon.

Not to nitpick, but that would have made it a more perfect movie for me. Hey J.J. - there is still time for the DVD!

[Iva]

@ Denni, I thought about the Romulan ship being able to defeat a Starfleet Armada too then I remembered that the Romulan Ship was from the future where everything is more advanced.

I loved the movie as a mid Trekkie (not die hard, not newbie) I had some issues with Spock having a relationship with Uhura being that the issue of emotion suppression is the core of the Vulcan culture but I kind of liked it afterall. In fact I have gone to see the movie twice already! :)

[Locke Peterseim]

Iva, I think your comment about the Romulan mining ship was directed at Denni not me (the name of the person posting is listed below his or her post, not above).

However, I've been talking about that topic -- the nature of Nero's ship -- over at : my Star Trek review

http://blog.redbox.com/redblog/2009/05/star-trek.html

[Christina]

I loved this review because I share much of the same background as the reviewer. I'm not a Trekkie, haven't seen any of the other ten films, and as far as my memory serves me, I haven't sat through an entire television episode either. I went somewhat kicking and screaming with my husband who was dying to see it on the IMAX screen. Boy am I glad I did. I dare say it's one of the best films I've ever seen! It kept my interest from the opening scene to the credits and everything in between. Funny... I find myself now secretly wanting to go back and watch the old television series now (the OLD one... with Nemoy and Shatner!)

[Locke Peterseim]

Christina, there's an ongoing discussion over here at my What We Talk about When We talk about Trek as to what TOS (The Original Series) episodes Trek fans would recommend to non-Trek fans who want to see some of the old Nimoy-Shatner episodes:

http://blog.redbox.com/redblog/2009/05/what-we-talk-about-when-we-talk-about-star-trek.html

[Rob LeBlanc]

Captain Jason Redbeard: Steampunker from the yesteryears.
As an old timer who was brought up on Flash Gordon and Buck Rodgers, then went into the air force, when I came out I was a bit old for Star Trek and never quite got into it. So I'm a science fiction fan from way back. There were few sf movies which were credible, The original "Things to Come -- 1938" "Metropolis" "Time Machine" and a few others were okey, but the SFX in general stunk. I've seen most of the Star Trek movies and they were okay but nothing to cheer about, but this one was something special and a genuinely good movie, with flaws, sure, but forgiveable with such a complex plot. I would have liked it more if they'd given us more time to get to know the young Spock and Kirk and see a bit more of their lives. Enough said. A good movie.

[melissa orosco]

Well i used to see star treck all the time and i truely enjoyed the episodes and i never considered myself a treky but i thoroughly enjoyed the movie. Its special effects along with the new plot for this movie. I think it opened up a lot of answers to the origins of the original members and new questions for me anyways. It was refreshing to see a new side to all the actors from what i rememember and the old remarks that were given from each actor to the other just brought out memories as i giggled to myself especially from bones to spok. Loved it

melissa o
movie goer

[Patrick Hobbs]

I truly enjoy the new Star Trek movie. I decided to indoctrinate my young children into the Star Trek saga at a very early age. I am happy to admit that the viewing of the new movie was much like a trip down memory lane. We thoroughly enjoyed the subtle nuances of the casts interaction of characters. The director, the writers, and the entire cast did a splendid job of not only re-creation, but a new creation! There was one element however, I found particularly fascinating! Usually, in a Star Trek plot, when there is a time travel element, they will undoubtedly strive to correct the defect in the time space continuum. While it was pointed out in the movie that they were living in an alternate universe created by individuals that traveled through time and changed the face of history. The main point was brought to bear; everything that happened in the movie, should not have happened at all. In the next movie I hope that they don't revisit this notion, of things not being as they should be. But just go forward, as their new future and their new adventures begin.

[Frank Laker]

Well said... not a trekkie, liked the movie. Good times had by all.

[Locke Peterseim]

Patrick, again I'll point you over to the comments discussion at my redblog Trek review where folks are talking about the non-resolution of the time-travel plot line (and it's catastrophic effects on the Old-School Trekverse).

http://blog.redbox.com/redblog/2009/05/star-trek.html

[kaystro]

to Denni the Balloon Guy: You asked for "An explanation of why the mining ship is able to defeat 49 Klingon warbirds and a Starfleet Armada single-handedly." Just guessing here, but it could have something to do with the fact that the mining ship is from 129 years in the future, compared to the movie's "present-day" Klingon warbirds and Starfleet Armada. The Romulan mining ship has the advantage of 129 years of technological improvements. (However, I'll go along with your other suggestions #2 through #6)

[Locke Peterseim]

Denni and Kaystro -- This is never mentioned in the film, but Nero's mining ship, the Narada, is mostly outfitted with BORG technology from the 24th Century, as Abrams, Orci, and Kurtzman explained in their Star Trek: Countdown graphic novel earlier this spring. :)

But I agree, it's pretty shaky plot mechanics to have EVERYONE end up marooned on the same ice planet -- especially to have Young Kirk and Old Spock meet up in the SAME ice cave. Some folks have hinted that this points to a larger force of Destiny at work.

Still, one of my peeves with the script (and they're fading each time I see the film) is that it goes through SO many illogical contortions to put Kirk and Old Spock on Hoth II. Why wouldn't Nero make Spock watch the destruction of Vulcan from Narada where Nero could SEE the Vulcan's pain? And why would Young Spock JETISON Kirk completely OFF the Enterprise?

[JRBear]

Don't nik-pick. the org'l series and movies had plenty of plot holes too. maybe that's what JJ was driving at.

It was great fun, the acting was great, and the CGI was so good it didn't look like CGI most of the time.

It had the JJ 'touch' like on Lost, of the fast action, the humor and the personal stories interwoven together in expert fashion.

I almost wish there was even less 'connections' to the old Trek's, it didn't need it at all.

[Alexander "The Great"]

I am a super Trekkie and if you don't catch any of all the very appropriatly cued fraises interworked into the American Socitey it would be your loss. Not that that is bad, but lame in the sense that you where never to enjoy all the joy that Star Trek brought. I started watching the orginal Star Trek reruns back in the mid eighties then came out the Next Generation series with the all invincible DATA to replace Spock I suppose.

[Kevin]

I must say as an open minded person who has had the advandage of seening almost all 10 of the movies made about Star Trek that this was buy far the most exciteing movie ever made. Although some of the movies made about the show have shown how the movie and the seriers begain none have shown the begaining of life for the crew of the Enterprize. For once it was good to set down and enjoy a movie that was well worth Paying the Price of admission.

[Jim B]

A good movie, a "B" rating. But really, a part for Nimoy without Shatner....CRIMINAL!

[Mark]

The unsecured building dock of the Enterprise in Iowa was somewhat unbelievable since you are always going to have "Bill Ayers"-type terrorist nut jobs in any century who misinterpret vehicles of self-defense as imperialist war machines.

Other than that it was a great movie... 2 thumbs up.

[Locke Peterseim]

Yeah, Mark -- that was a bit unrealistic -- maybe Starfleet felt no possible spies or saboteurs (alien or human) would ever think to look here in Iowa.

Also, when it comes to "don't think about it, just enjoy the ride", how about the fact that Earth and the headquarters of Starfleet (not to mention Vulcan) have NO ships that can fly up and shoot down Nero's plasma mining drill platform? Only Spock can do it in the jellyfish? LOL

[Steven S.]

So, as I suspected, I did not like the new Star Trek film/movie. Let me repeat myself, I did not like the new Star Trek movie. Unfortunately, giving a movie project to a non-Star Trek fan is comparable to giving a head coaching job with the Yankees to a person who doesn't like baseball. Being a new convert (watching for only 10 years or so) I came to the realization that this film, like all films, was made to make money – lots of it! Although one could argue that anyone who took on the new Star Trek project would make money, regardless of who was at the helm of this intricate, massive, cultural-hit of a concept. Alas, in this case it is J.J. Abrams, the “stealer,” the “3M” of many of someone else's idea kind-of director/writer. Please insert your own comparisons for Alias (La Femme Nikita), Fringe (X-Files), Cloverfield (Godzilla meets Blair Witch Project), Lost (The Prisoner [from the 1960's] meets Gilligans Island), etc...

Before I tear a hole in J.J.s alternate-universe of Star Trek, let's give credit where credit is due and make it clear what the silver-lining was: 1) J.J. probably ignited, excited, and down-right invited non-Star Trek fans into possibly researching/enjoying the Star Trek of old/yesteryears and become a fanatic of the sci-fi “Enterprise” and all its counterparts. 2) He made Star Trek “cool”, especially for the younger generation, perhaps younger than me (30). 3) The set, studio, CGI, casting (mostly, especially “Bones”), and most of the storyline (I'll get to this later) was awe-inspiring, saliva-inducing, and visually stimulating to any creature on Earth. 4) They lept the “funny” quibbles in the script. Good job.

These examples of what was good should be enough to love the film, right!? It really sounds like I really enjoyed it, right!? No. And here's why: 1) Once you get past the “glitz & glamor” of JJ’s Star Trek alternate universe, you realize he forgot one thing many Star Trek television series episodes had, a “realness.” Well, you're thinking I'm some head-case to think Star Trek is real. No, I'm not a crazed, Star Trek lunatic, let me explain. Every Star Trek episode/movie teaches a lesson on life – one could argue Kirk, Spock and crew in the movie showed valor, braveness in this film, but at what cost? The message in this film was transparent: Action, revenge, action. It didn't teach me anything about the dangers or consequences of revenge. 2) The original Star Trek had its own explosions, shouting, and grunting, but rarely used expletives, such as “G.D.” Of course, in reality people curse, and I probably do it more than others, but it was another discrepancy to start from a sci-fi series that rarely curses. 3) Yes, I mentioned the casting/storyline was “almost there” but the Sulu actor did not come close to the original; the inflection of voice/tone was especially lacking. The storyline: Well it's completely new for Star Trek – everything that came before, and I mean everything, would logically need to be discarded. Why? In the new film there is now no Vulcan planet, and Kirk's father, as well as Spock's mother (an important supporting character in the original timeline) have perished. This changes everything, creating a J.J. Abrams “alternate universe of Star Trek” Star Trek.

Whether you are a purest, hardcore Star Trek fan or newbie, the movie is definitely a love/hate situation. Basically, this movie disregarded/omitted all previously known created Star Trek material, because the timeline has changed and all the choices/adventures would be irrelevant. Does this set-up allow the studios to make new adventures and create new character development? Yes. Does it sum everything I like about Star Trek? Almost.

Overall, there were many good/bad choices. I don't care for the “hold-my-hand”, watered down, non-thinking Star Trek. To me, there was no rewarding personal character development or new insights. I didn't take away a moral lesson, such as, “oh, this is how I should live as a person...with character, respect, duty, honor, pride, encompassing critical thinking/feeling skills.” This movie tells me I should live by a feeling that lacks realism combined with frenetic movement, and more explosions, the “I can't think, but I can react to visual stimulation” crap. Many will like the dumbed-down, in-your-face version of Star Trek, but I will always have the original genius of Gene Roddenberry vision in mind. This is one that is thought-provoking, breeds massive fans and has been doing just fine for 50 or so years without the almighty, J.J. “stealer of good things”...”I've got to 3M everything” Abrams. All in all, it's like different versions/translations of the Bible, everyone has their opinion. But for me, and many others, it just didn't have the heart of Star Trek and now is a critical time for fans to decide, J.J. is attempting to become the modern-day figurehead of Star Trek, leading the series away from the vision that should and always be guided by the foundation Roddenberry built.

As for the blatant disregard for William Shatner in the new film, especially his original narration, I hope J.J. “boldly goes where no man has gone before” and stays there in an isolated chamber, so he can not steal, borrow, nor corrupt another concept from an original creator and call it his own. “Live, long, and prosper...in a galaxy far, far away”...oh wait a minute; I don't want to give J.J. any more “new” ideas.

[Danny T. From CCTX]

Well being in my mid 30's I can't say I never watched the series, actually I liked the original and the "Next Generation". I gotta say I was really expecting to be disappointed, honestly I was almost wishing for it. So many remakes and resurrections fall completely flat that, well I've just become very jaded in that regard.

I won't say this movie stunned me, but when I think about it no previous Star Trek episode really did, unless you count the super short skirts of the original, or Dr. Troi's amazing cleavage from the "Next Generation" (when I was 15) I mean come on even Seven of Nine was super hot and I hated the "Voyager" series "lol"... It did however leave me with that warm feeling of nostalgia like when you see an old friend after many years.

Stunned or not they always gave me something to dream about when it was time to close my eyes that night. "What would it be like to be in their shoes?" That was what kept me coming back.

I love that non-Trekkies are enjoying this film too. Maybe I won't feel like such a dork when I bring up Tribbles next time. Hope the sequel isn't far behind.

[MiMi Moore]

This comment is coming from a true luvah
of all things Trek : if you don't go
see this movie, then you are a fool! I'm
so happy that they showed how Spock(yum),
Kirk and the rest of the crew get their
starts in StarFleet. The action(a must-
see in IMAX) is fierce and the special
effects make you believe that Gene
Roddenberry's world is just a blink
away. And, where else can you see a
Sistah make a Vulcan shed his icy
veneer? Beam up(don't walk) to the
nearest theatre and see this summer
blockbuster!

[meghan]

My husband and I loved the movie.Im not a trekky, and i got it. Conntinue on more!

[Frank]

With the "old" spock from the future...they can now advance beyond means with his knowledge of engineering, science, etc.. *formula on warp drive given to scotty* ..out of all the characters I think McCoys was the best acting job..I could see a young bones..best supporting actor

[Enjoli]

LOVED THIS FILM!!!

I come from the 90's “Next Generation” when you had Captain Jean-Luc Picard, and Data (And let us not forget “Reading Rainbow, LeVar Burton, and Whoopi)! During high school a friend of mine hooked me in, and every day after school we would go to her house and watch the it once it had been syndicated.

I've only seen a handful on the "old school" aka William Shatner series when Nick at Night was airing it, and I must say that I got the movie. I surprised myself because I have two "I heart Trekkies" guys in the front of me and some others throughout the theater (I went when I knew not a lot of people were going to be there) and I was laughing/getting the things that only diehard fans would know. So I must say that I was proud of myself.

I too felt the same way when I saw Winona Ryder, and was thinking along the same lines as, "What the hell is she doing in this movie!?" But I guess she wasn't in it that much to where it didn't bug me, but every time that I saw her, I was thinking that. Also when Simon Pegg aka "Run Fatboy, Run" busted out as Scotty, I was so happy. I couldn't stop laughing at the fact that he was in the movie. And to top it all off Tyler Perry was the cherry on the sundae! Small role, but a good one considering this is his first action/blockbuster movie he has been in and didn’t have anything to do with the production process.

Go see this movie! Like stated so many times before me, you don't have to know everything about the series to get this movie. I think that since it is such a great action movie (and yes the first 10mins are AMAZING!) people who have no prior knowledge of Star Trek will most definitely love it! Great CGI, great plot (there were a few times when I was slightly confused), GREAT cast, great EVERYTHING!

This is be one that you don’t want to end.

[Thomas]

it's so funny. i went with someone who didn't have a CLUE about Star Trek! i've been a fan forEVER! he didn't know why everyone was laughing so i would lean over and "whisper-explain" to him! haha. they should have made a separate theater for those who went with someone who knew about it and those attending with the clueless so we could explain things. haha. i LOVED this movie. going again this weekend! and i can't WAIT to add it to my Star Trek dvd/video cassette collection!

[Leonard McCoy]

Well I really enjoyed the movie, and I've been a Star Trek fan since the beginning.

I understand that this is a franchise reboot and can bring in a whole bunch of new younger fans with entirly new story lines. But there were a few things that in the original ST universe that brought depth to it, and that's the life lesson and thought provoking type experiences that the original series and the original cast movies brought. It was those experiences that helped shape the characters and brought depth to them. And of course the interplay between Kirk, Bones, and Spock, the things that solidified their friendship. I hope they keep those main essential ingredients to the success that Star Trek has had.

And yes, this is my real name. ;)

[gene white]

loved the new movie except the 13 year old james t. destroying the antique vette - showed too much of a lack of disrespect that i dont think needed to be input into his character. i think the star trek movies have a real future with this cast. hope to see more!!! loved the new scotty and bones the best but spock and kirk were fabulous.

[Buzz]

.. The 4th old Star Trek Movie about the whales has wide appeal to females and non-trekors...

.. The 1st movie was pretty bad, they waste an hour just painting the Enterprise in SpaceDock, and the rest is a rehash of an old TV episode... New images of going into warp speed is good though...

[niki]

I LOVED this film and gladly didn't realize that what actress spocks mother played until AFTER I saw the movie. This is one that i'll buy. Heck! I'd love to pre-order it now! If only they would make this a serial again (with the same actors) ...do the in between missions that the old star trek did.
My only best impression. "WOW!" I "liked" the old series, and many of their spin offs, especially in hours that I couldn't sleep anyway, but THIS one is for daylight. SEE it!