It was with some trepidation that I accepted the responsibility to write a review of the new Star Trek movie. My experience has been that no film or TV franchise has engendered such a rabid and invested following, with aficionados debating plot and character points like aged Talmudic Scholars. Therefore, no matter what my review stated, it would attract criticism like a Golden Corral attracts seniors.
I was also concerned by the amount and quality of pre-press for this movie. Firstly, when I hear the term “reboot”, it makes me cringe, as I immediately wonder how much good stuff was cut out from whatever was “rebooted”. Secondly, does the hype create hype, earning the movie rave reviews that it earned more on reputation that content (like The Dark Knight)?
This being said, I was eagerly anticipating viewing this Blu-ray, as I grew up a big fan of the original Star Trek TV series, as well as the original series of movies (well, II, IV, and VI anyways). Although I do not profess to be any sort of Trekkie or Trekker, the contrast of the characters combined with the moral and social issues addressed by the show lent it a certain gravitas that other shows of the day did not have. Its constant use of humor and emotion was also refreshing, giving characters a sort of realism other TV characters did not have. When I was nine years old, Star Trek was about as good as TV got (though Chuck Jones-directed Bugs Bunny was a close 2nd).
As one additional side note, I never became a fan of any of the subsequent series (“The Next Generation”, “Deep Space 9″, “Voyager”, or “Enterprise”), as none was able to hold my attention for more than a few episodes. When watching any show, I feel there needs to be an emotional connection between the viewer and least one of the characters (be it good or bad), and this is where the original series was never replicated.
Film 
Wow, lots of explosions. Neat gadgets. A giant time-travelling spaceship that uses red matter to create black holes in the centre of planets to make them collapse. Rushing madly from action scene, to action scene, to action scene, with never a pause to take a breath! We! Must! Save! Earth!
End result: watching Star Trek left me feeling more conflicted that I can ever recall while watching a movie.
From the perspective of an action movie, Star Trek left me feeling giddy. The story rushed madly downhill right from the early minutes, starting with Kirk’s Father sacrificing himself to save his wife and son (born conveniently just before impact), to a young James Kirk just about killing himself on a joyride and in a bar fight, to a few stops for breath on Vulcan and at Starfleet.
Then of course the young and inexperienced crew rushes madly off into space, where they encounter really, really bad time-travelling Romulans who blow up planets for fun. In the interim we have a mutiny, even more time-travel hijinks, and old friend shows up, and the young crew has to save Earth from said bad Romulans.
As not to spoil the plot, I won’t say any more about the story other than what is above. However, I believe this conveys that rapidity with which the plot moves – from one fantastic action sequence to the next. It is definitely a stick-to-your-seat-don’t-blink-or-you’ll-miss-it action packed movie. Quiet reflective moments in the movie are brief, and appear more as plot linkages than truly thought-provoking scenes (see: Spock in front of the Vulcan Council, Kirk with Pike, Spock and Uhura).
From the perspective of a Star Trek movie, this film left much to be desired. Generally, I found myself rationalizing why characters did what they did during the movie based on all the accumulated knowledge I had about them in their later lives. This is never a good sign, and usually signals that character development was taking a back seat to the action (which it did). For someone without years of experience watching Star Trek, the characters may have been somewhat confusing, especially Kirk and Spock.
Furthermore, it was difficult to make the all-important connection with the characters that was so easy in past Star Treks. In fact, I really felt no strong emotional attachment to any character until Leonard Nimoy reprised his role as the older “Ambassador Spock”. To me, this encapsulated the issue with this as a Star Trek movie; instead of feeling a moral or emotional tie to the challenges and dilemmas (both personal and professional) that the characters faced, we instead just sit back and enjoy the action.
The casting was well done, and Chris Pine (Kirk) and Zachary Quinto (Spock) will likely grow into their roles with more meaty material. However, this will only come when the writers require Kirk to show passion as well as emotion, and require Spock to be less of a black/white archetype and a more complex character.
The supporting cast was also well assembled, with a group of actors that have the ability to model the originals upon whom they were based. However, the dedication to all-out action meant that Karl Urban (Bones), Simon Pegg (Scotty), John Cho (Sulu), Zoe Saldana (Uhura), and Anton Yelchin (Chekov) were dreadfully underused, with Uhura being the only role hinting at some substance. The others appeared more like a talented group of actors staging a “Star Trek Revival” – the script simply didn’t give them enough to say or do to develop their characters past what we already knew. Of the “new” crew, Bruce Greenwood (Pike) was the greatest revelation, as he carried some of the best lines in the movie with the necessary weight they required.
Interestingly enough, during development, writers Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman had stated that they wanted to bring more of the feel of Star Wars to the Star Trek franchise. This is apparent in the pacing, the introduction, and the interaction of the main characters. Although some may find this laudable, I felt this undermined the seriousness and contemplativeness a fan expects of Star Trek (though I do love Star Wars, but for different reasons).
For example, consider the extremely well acted scene at the beginning of “Star Trek II“, where Bones and Kirk discuss Kirk’s promotion. In this simple scene, DeForest Kelley and William Shatner discuss the heavy subject of ageing, its inconveniences, and how it can cause one to lose their feelings of usefulness and self-worth. It also showed the depth of friendship between two men who had worked and aged together for a number of years.
Would this scene have effectively fit into a Star Wars movie? In my opinion, no. And ultimately, these are the types of scenes that made Star Trek fans as loyal and dedicated as they were – the emotional and personal resonation these characters had with viewers was undeniable.
As an action movie, 5 out of 5 discs. As a Star Trek movie, 2 out of 5 discs. J.J. Abrams has successfully taken a poignant and socially relevant show, and turned it into MI:III in space. The movie moves fast, looks great, is very thrilling, makes you suspend disbelief beyond comfort, and has an explosive ending. A great action movie, yet a disappointment for the long-term Star Trek fan in me.
Video 
Although I tend not to gush greatly about video transfers, this movie has now supplanted Wall-E as my Blu-ray reference disc.
With many movies, I find the high resolutions of the Blu-ray player and Television over-emphasize film grain or can generate noise, especially in dark screen areas. This can be especially problematic in “dark” movies like The Dark Knight, though some studios clean the transfer well, such as in 2001: A Space Odyssey?
Simply put, this is as near flawless a transfer as have I seen on any Blu-ray. The fine detail in the space scenes is crisp with the right amount of luminance, and is remarkably free of distracting film grain. However, the movie theatre purist in me was still satisfied with the amount of grain that was left in, especially noticeable in character scenes.
Color and lighting-wise, the studio got the balance near perfect. When scenes require light and color (like on the bridge of the Enterprise), it is there. When the light and color needs to be muted to convey a location or a scene (like in a cave on Delta Vega), it is also spot on. When it needs to be transparent and neutral (like in the space scenes), again, spot on.
A special commendation should also be given to the Cinematographer (Daniel Mindel) as his camerawork is absolutely superb. From composing shots well (the Saturn-Titan scene stands out to me), to having action naturally flow through the screen, his work was excellent. Even small details, such as selecting proper f-numbers to ensure depth of field when focusing on characters were done with care.
Although much care was obviously used by Paramount in this transfer, the product it had to work with was a well-filmed, beautifully balanced movie. There is an old adage that says “Garbage in, garbage out.” In this transfer, the adage would be more “Sublimely good in, sublimely good out.”
Audio 
My main pet peeve with any movie is when dynamic levels are not balanced well. This can manifest itself when you cannot hear characters speaking, yet explosions tear holes in your furniture. It can also be manifested by overloading rear channels with sound instead of the ambient noises generally generated by explosions. The opening Afghanistan scene in Iron Man is the worst example of this I can find. I actually use this scene as a subwoofer “durability” test.
I am pleased to report that the 5.1 Dolby HD mix for Star Trek is excellent, and does not suffer from overly high dynamic peaks. Sound from the movie was very well balanced, dialog was very clear and intelligible through the centre channel, and explosions had sufficient oomph and weight without needing to compensate through volume.
Channel separation and sound placement was also very good. However, one small complaint was that I found the rear ambient sounds to be somewhat less than in other movies – “Star Trek” was a very heavily front-mixed movie. Although this is not always a bad thing, it tended to make me feel less “enveloped” in the move.
Generally, Star Trek had a very good but front-heavy mix, with excellent dynamic level and speech balancing.
Special Features
As a film lover, I place little value in special features excepting deleted scenes. Generally, two hours spent reviewing features means two less hours for watching movies. Or watching the movie with someone talking (i.e. the director) makes my private home theater sanctuary into a public movie theater!
In the 3-disc edition, the main disc comes with director’s commentary, as well as an unimpressive NASA BD-Live news feed. However, the second disc has a virtual cornucopia of HD goodies, including behind the scenes featurettes, including the valuable deleted scenes.
Not only are the deleted scenes in beautiful HD, most are near finished and look like they were cut at the last minute. To me, these are a treat, and allow me to decide if the director made the right decisions. In the case of Star Trek, I’d say J.J. Abrams was only about 40% right, and the majority of deleted scenes explained a few gaps in the plot (including the big one of what Nero was doing while Kirk was growing up).
Otherwise, if you like quality featurettes, Disc 2 is chock full of them. Some highlights include a featurette on the casting and the gag reel.
The third disc is a DVD with a digital copy, plus a Xbox 360 demo for Star Trek D-A-C, a fairly well-reviewed arcade-style game. Apparently the disc will also allow you to download the game from the Playstation Network on your PS3.
To me, the movie is the point of buying the disc, and if there is actually a special feature I like (such as the ones Disney includes on its Blu-ray releases of classic films), then it is a bonus. In the case of “Star Trek”, both the deleted scenes and the featurettes are of such high quality, they fully deserve a perfect score.
Final Thoughts
Star Trek is a very good-looking, well-shot, well-transferred, exciting action movie – the type of movie that translates extremely well to Blu-ray.
Oddly enough, this movie presents an interesting dilemma. In the way it was scripted, it almost implies one must have a prior knowledge of the original Star Trek to get full enjoyment from the movie. However, the lack of character building and its presentation as an all-out action movie appears to be type of direction that would offend a long-term fan the most.
Is it worth viewing? Yes, simply based on its visuals, sound, and action. However, I would caution the long-term Star Trek fan to go into this movie with low expectations – plan on enjoying a very thrilling movie, and don’t expect too much to be done with your favorite characters.
