Cindy Prascik's Reviews of Geostorm & Thor: Ragnarok

Dearest Blog: Yesterday I ended my week's vacation at Marquee Cinemas with a double-bill of Geostorm (finally) and Thor: Ragnarok. 

 

Spoiler level here will be mild, nothing you wouldn't know from the trailers or a quick check of the IMDB cast listings.

 

First on the docket: a delayed screening of Geostorm.

 

When a satellite controlling extreme weather events is sabotaged, it's up to its prickly creator to make nice and go fix it.

 

Dear reader(s): Having missed two weekends at the cinema (!!!), I'm a little late to the Geostorm party, so I won't be the first to inform you the movie features a stupidly implausible plot, inane dialogue, and second-rate performances. What I may be the first to tell you is that I haven't had as much fun at the cinema in months. Indeed, Geostorm is the only picture in recent memory to render me totally oblivious to the outside world for a couple hours.

 

There's no denying Geostorm is a pretty bad movie by almost any quality barometer; it's Sharknado-level idiocy on a big-screen budget. Meathead extraordinaire Gerard Butler is the ideal hero for such a film, delivering a performance on par with "shepherd number two" in the third-grade Christmas pageant. Jim Sturgess and Abbie Cornish are even more laughable, and you really have to wonder how Ed Harris and Andy Garcia got talked into this. (My guess is blackmail. It's the only thing that makes sense.) The story plays out in predictably silly fashion, with painfully obvious "twists" and every cartoonish character behaving exactly as you'd expect. The good news is all that isn't really bad news because Geostorm knows exactly what it is, and thus couldn't be any more enjoyable. Throw in some solid disaster effects and a timely (if cheesy) message, and you've got a hilariously terrible outing that may well be the best time I've had at the movies in 2017.

 

Geostorm clocks in at 109 minutes and is rated PG13 for "destruction, action, and violence."

Geostorm is the best bad movie I've seen in a good long while. Of a possible nine Weasleys, I am exercising great restraint in awarding Geostorm only seven.

 

Fangirl points: Ohmygosh you guys, Robert Sheehan is in this movie!!

 

Next on my agenda: Thor: Ragnarok.

 

And you thought Loki was the bad sibling.

 

My usual Marvel disclaimer: For the most part I don't think Marvel movies are anything special; rather, they're enjoyed and quickly forgotten. The notable exception is Captain America: The Winter Soldier, which stands alone in its greatness, but, as series go, the Thor movies are always my Marvel faves. Ragnarok gives me no reason to change either of those opinions: Marvel movies are still nothing special, but the Thor series remains my favorite.

 

Getting the bad news out of the way first: Thor: Ragnarok feels about twelve hours long. I wouldn't say I was bored, but...well...for some of it I wouldn't exactly say I wasn't, either. The battle scenes didn't seem as repetitive or overlong as most Marvel movies (lookin' squarely at YOU, Avengers!), but, my god, it felt like I was sitting there forever. Luckily, that's about the only really bad thing I have to say about the film. Ragnarok isn't a funny superhero movie; it's a straight-up comedy about a superhero, fully self-aware. No shoe-horning in a Tony Stark wisecrack every 20 minutes, Ragnarok is organically hilarious. Trippy 70s effects, a bit reminiscent of Doctor Strange, are particularly well-suited to this outing, giving it the feel of an old-school arcade game. Chris Hemsworth (sadly shirtless only once) isn't just a perfectly-sculpted hero, he's legitimately funny, with great comic timing and terrific expressions. The supporting cast is filled with names that, on their own, are enough to draw me to any picture: Idris Elba, Tom Hiddleston, Benedict Cumberbatch, Karl Urban, Cate Blanchett...and--OH!--this is Cate as you haven't seen her before! Hiddleston's Loki remains the best thing about any Thor movie, but it's Cate's Hela who steals the show here, and whose pics you'll be Googling for your new phone wallpaper as soon as the credits roll (or was that just me?). Triple bonus points for carrying Led Zeppelin's Immigrant Song from the trailer into the film itself--not just once, but twice!--a musical move so inspired as to be almost Edgar-Wrightish in its perfection.

Thor: Ragnarok runs 130 minutes and is rated PG13 for "intense sequences of sci-fi violence and action and brief suggestive material."

 

Thor: Ragnarok is another fun outing in Marvel's best series. Of a possible nine Weasleys, Thor: Ragnarok gets eight.

 

Fangirl points: Hey, Bruce Banner, you're lookin' mighty fine in that Duran Duran shirt!

 

Until next time...

Cindy Prascik's Reveiws of Pete’s Dragon & Florence Foster Jenkins

Dearest Blog, yesterday I decided to leave Sausage Party to the grownups (my blog partner Daniel!) while I headed off to Marquee Cinemas for the inoffensive pairing of Pete's Dragon and Florence Foster Jenkins. Spoiler level here will be mild, nothing you wouldn't know from the trailers. First up: Disney's remake of Pete's Dragon. 

An orphaned boy survives in the wild with help from his best friend...who happens to be a dragon. Dear Reader(s), I have not seen the 1977 version of Pete's Dragon. I like to think that leaves me free of nostalgia that might unfairly bias my opinion of this remake, but, sadly, I am still underwhelmed. My first issue is that the dragon looks awful, resembling a jungle cat with wings more than anything else. 

The movie attempts to imbue him with pet-like mannerisms, but doesn't come close to the excellence of How to Train Your Dragon in that regard. Both television and film have set a pretty high barre for dragons these days, and a picture with a titular dragon cannot afford to fail on that front. Filmmakers have loaded the movie with an environmentally-conscious message, cookie-cutter good and bad guys, and moody pseudo-folk tunes, but none of that is any help to this dull rehash of a tired tale that's been told a thousand times before, with only the details varying. 

There's an unintentionally hilarious moment where two adults, first faced with the dragon, hide behind a child (really??) and, despite having nothing else to date the movie outside a few older-looking vehicles, everyone in Pete's Dragon still uses a land line. 

I found that even more unbelievable than dragons! Having said all that, even the worst movie has its positives, and Pete's Dragon boasts some gorgeous scenery and dizzying aerial shots. 

It's also worth noting that "Forest Ranger" Bryce Dallas Howard has learnt her lesson from Jurassic World and is at least wearing sensible shoes to run around the wilderness this time. Pete's Dragon runs 102 minutes and is rated PG for "action, peril, and brief language." Pete's Dragon is a weak effort from Disney that has very little to recommend it. Maybe take the kids to see Secret Life of Pets again instead. 

Of a possible nine Weasleys, Pete's Dragon gets three. Fangirl points: Robert Redford. Karl Urban. 

On the same screen. I nearly swooned myself to death! Next on the agenda: Florence Foster Jenkins, a.k.a. This Year's Meryl Streep Oscar Nomination. 

The true story of a a wealthy heiress who, encouraged by her husband, pursues a singing career despite a notable lack of talent. 

There's no hiding the fact that Florence Foster Jenkins' primary function is the annual throwing of Meryl Streep's hat into the Awards Season Sweepstakes. She is her usual magnificent self here, expertly playing both the comedy and the tragedy of Jenkins. Jenkins was a terrible singer who believed (or was led to believe) she was actually good, and Streep tackles her performances with the earnestness of a woman who not only believes in herself, but is making a genuine effort to learn and improve. 

On the surface, there are sadder aspects of her story (a chronic illness and an unfaithful husband, for starters), but to me none of it seems any more tragic than being the butt of a joke of which everyone but her is aware. 

It makes the character sympathetic, bordering on pathetic, and makes the movie almost too uncomfortable to watch at times, though its saving grace is it's never mean spirited. Hugh Grant is charming as Jenkins' enabling husband, and Simon Helberg is delightful as her young accompanist. His reactions to her caterwauling are some of the movie's funniest moments. 

Like Eddie the Eagle before it, Florence Foster Jenkins presents viewers with some awkward questions: To what point can devotion and enthusiasm substitute for talent and skill? Is it better or more kind to destroy a loved one's dream than to let him make a fool of himself? If a good movie is one that leaves you thinking about the points it raises, then Florence Foster Jenkins certainly fits the bill. 

Outside of Streep's extraordinary work, the film probably isn't special enough to create much of a stir come awards time, but if you love music more than anything else (as I do, and as Jenkins did), you're going to feel this one in your very soul. Florence Foster Jenkins clocks in at 110 minutes and is rated PG13 for "brief suggestive material." Florence Foster Jenkins is a delightful, if sometimes awkward, story that's bolstered by strong performances and likeable characters. 

Of a possible nine Weasleys, Florence Foster Jenkins gets seven. 

Until next time...

Cindy Prascik's Review of Riddick

Dearest blog, today it was off to the cinemas for one of my least-anticipated films of the year, Riddick.

Spoiler level here will be mild, nothing the trailers didn't reveal.

Riddick again finds himself stranded on a dangerous planet, pursued by threats both native and not.

Listen, dear Blog, I didn't find the previous two films in this series very interesting, and I didn't expect better from this. My only motivation for seeing it was that I absolutely love Vin Diesel and Karl Urban, and, that being said, I suppose I deserve what I got.

Diesel is, of course, acceptable in the lead. That's not saying much, as a robot or anyone who has brought down the house at a third-grade Christmas pageant also probably would have been acceptable. Urban doesn't have even a full minute's screen time; if you were thinking of suffering through this to see him, don't bother. The rest of the cast is most notable for a guy I would have bet a paycheck was Dave Chappelle who is not Dave Chappelle. There are actually two people in this world who have Dave Chappelle's crazy teeth. Who knew, right?

Riddick is two hours of gross outs, puerile humor, shots of dry rocks and scrub, then wet rocks and scrub, and a pointless parade of badly-done CGI creatures. The story is dull as dishwater, and if you find a twist the biggest idiot won't see coming...well, I'd give you a paycheck if I hadn't already lost it on Not Dave Chappelle. I'd complain that it's too long, too, but that hardly seems fair since five minutes would have been too long. If I had to say something good about this movie, I'd say at least I was able to see it with one of my favorite people, whom I don't see nearly enough.

Riddick clocks in at an interminable 119 minutes and is rated R for "strong violence, language, and some sexual content/nudity."

Of a possible nine Weasleys, Riddick gets none, as in ZERO, as in this movie is the equivalent of Voldemort taking Hogwarts and KILLING THEM ALL. The bad news is, this film is god-awful. The good news is, it's nice to be right sometimes, I guess?

Until next time...



Yinz are lucky I love ya, yeah?

MOVIE REVIEW: RIDDICK

Vin Diesel's Riddick character gets a new lease on life in this third film from writer/director David N. Twohy. Katee Sackhoff and Bokeem Woodbine head up a group of assassins out to kill Riddick, who lures them to a desolate planet when confronted with a hostile alien species. ~ Jeremy Wheeler, Rovi

Director: David Twohy

Cast: Vin Diesel, Karl Urban, Jordi Mollà, Katee Sackhoff, Bokeem Woodbine.

Release Date: Sep 06, 2013

Rated R for some Sexual Content/Nudity, Language and Strong Violence

Runtime: 1 hr. 58 min.

Genres: Action/Adventure, Sci-Fi/Fantasy

Review:

After The Chronicles of Riddick I was fine if we never saw Riddick again, that’s how bad that sprawling mess of a movie was. Sometimes certain characters deserve to be left alone in their singular film, Pitch Black, so they aren’t degraded by lesser sequels. Riddick is closer akin to Pitch Black in scope and setting but it’s lacking any of that film’s strengths. Instead we have a laborious slog of a movie that never goes anyway and definitely doesn’t bring anything new to the story. Riddick “borrows” the main plot from Pitch Black and throws in a bit of Aliens for good measure. This sound’s like it should make for a fun film but it doesn’t. It’s doesn’t, in fact the 3 acts can be described like so; Act 1: Riddick gets a dog, Act 2: The Mercenaries, Act 3: It rains. Sadly, I think I’ve ruined the movie because outside of those basic descriptions not much else happens. There’s lots of monotone “cool” dialogue from Diesel and stilted dialogue from characters that wouldn’t even qualify as one dimensional. This all might be forgivable if the film was quick and delivered a solid punch during the action sequences. It doesn’t instead were subjected to more bad dialogue that sounds like it was written by 13 year olds. The film clocks in at nearly 2 hours for some reason and feels more like 4 hours. The tone is so incredibly serious you get the feeling that Twohy and Diesel thought they’d just created the next sci-fi masterpiece. Thankfully I think they came to their senses because they end the film so abruptly. Perhaps they took pity on the audience and decided to put us out of our misery, hopefully they do the same with the Riddick character.

D-

Cindy Prascik’s Review of Star Trek Into Darkness

Dearest Blog, today I set out for the cinema to see the much-anticipated sequel Star Trek Into Darkness.
An attack on Starfleet HQ sends Kirk and company after the terrifying culprit and into peril...erm...darkness.
Spoiler level here will be mild.

First, dear reader(s), a couple disclaimers. Been awhile since I've needed a review disclaimer, so here are two to make up for lost time.

1.) I am not deeply invested in Star Trek lore. The series was always on at my house when we were growing up, and I love the 2009 reboot with the fire of a thousand suns, but there's...uh...let's say a 90% chance that anything non-canon would go right over my head, and there's a 100% chance that it wouldn't bother me even if I noticed.

2.) The cast of the 2009 Star Trek flick is one of my top five movie casts of all time. I stalk red carpet footage, watch hour upon hour of interviews, and use their photocall shots as my desktop wallpaper. I love them as I love my dearest friends, and there's no doubt that affection colors my opinion of their movies.
That out of the way, I loooooooooooved Star Trek Into Darkness!

My beloved cast does not let me down. There's screen chemistry to spare between Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto, and both have ample opportunity to showcase their dramatic and comedic chops. Simon Pegg has a bit more to do this time 'round, and more Simon Pegg is always better than less Simon Pegg. Karl Urban, Zoe Saldana, John Cho, and Anton Yelchin are once again solid, exceedingly likeable, and exceedingly easy on the eyes. If I resent having to put up with Alice Eve and Aisha Hinds, it's more than outweighed by the awesomeness that is Benedict Cumberbatch. His performance is magnetic. Those who aren't yet fans (what's wrong with you???) surely will be by the end of 2013!

Star Trek Into Darkness has big, loud effects that, at times, had me jumping out of my seat. Per usual, I did a 2D show, but I'm confident several scenes must be absolutely stunning in 3D, almost certainly worth the upcharge and stupid-glasses headache.

What really makes this film special is the relationships among the characters. Sure, it's a wild ride, complete with terrific effects, amazing ships, shootouts, mortal peril, and crazy, futuristic weapons, but it's the great affection among the crew, and their faith in one another, that gives Star Trek Into Darkness its heart, and makes it better than your average summer sci-fi blockbuster.

Star Trek Into Darkness clocks in at 132 minutes and is rated PG13 for "intense sequences of sci-fi action and violence." I'm always complaining about movies being too long, but I could easily have sat through another two hours of this one.

Of a possible nine Weasleys, I'm giving Star Trek Into Darkness eight and a half, and officially naming it the best film of 2013 so far.

Until next time...




Perfect cast is perfect.

MOVIE REVIEW: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS

The Star Trek franchise continues with this follow-up to 2009's J.J. Abrams-directed reboot. Abrams returns to direct from a script by Damon Lindelof and the writing team of Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman. The crew of the Enterprise engages in an epic battle of good versus evil after being summoned home, only to discover Starfleet in ruins, and they venture into a war zone to find the powerful villain (Sherlock's Benedict Cumberbatch) responsible for the devastation. ~ Jeremy Wheeler, Rovi

Director: J.J. Abrams

Cast: Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Karl Urban, Benedict Cumberbatch, Zoe Saldana.

Release Date: May 16, 2013

Rated PG-13 for intense sequences of sci-fi action and violence.

Runtime: 2 hr. 12 min.

Genres: Action/Adventure, Sci-Fi/Fantasy

Review:

4 years ago J.J. Abrams restarted the Trek universe by moving it into an alternate time in order remove the burden of years of mythology to deal with. His new version was fun and had a certain pop while removing most of the subtext in most of the classic Trek shows and movies. As a long time fan of Star Trek I’ve had a weird relationship with the reboot because I like it but never warmed up to it as much as new fans. Still, I was interested in seeing where Abrams would take the franchise with the opportunity to blaze his own trail and tell his own stories. Star Trek Into Darkness delivers all the visual spectacle and massive action set pieces (a duel space flight and the Enterprise’s out of control decent to Earth in particular stand) to appease the summer blockbuster hordes. The story this go around is darker, duh, and more nuanced with plenty of real world parallels readily evident. Long time fans will have plenty to geek out over like redesigned Klingons, Birds of Prey and if you look carefully the Enterprise NX-01 and Zefram Cochrane's warp ship. Needless to say, there’s plenty of fan service throughout the film. Unfortunately, there are a multitude of issues with the film. While the over all plot is better the script itself is a disappointment. A large chunk of the dialogue sounds incredibly clunky with some of the speeches sounding kind of silly. Chris Pine, who did a solid job in the original film, is rather wooden this time around. There are times where his line delivery just comes off as disinterested. Zachary Quinto fares much better but it’s not on the same level as his debut as Spock. Karl Urban, Zoe Saldana, John Cho, Simon Pegg and to a smaller extent Anton Yelchin get moments to shine but they are in the background more often than not. Benedict Cumberbatch delivers the best performance of the bunch with his bellowing voice used to maximum villainous effect here. His character is the crux of a major twist. Sadly, said twist is so obvious that most people should be able to figure it out in the first act if not earlier. It’s a common theme as there are numerous moments that the filmmakers clearly expect to make a huge impact but they fail because it’s all so obvious. For a reboot series that tried so hard to tear itself away from it’s past, a lot of this feels incredibly familiar. I could go through a list of films that it borrows from but I’d spoil most of the plot. New fans should find plenty to enjoy and I did like it more often than not but not nearly as much as I did the first time around.

C+

MOVIE REVIEW: DREDD

A feared urban cop takes on a vicious city drug dealer in a futuristic metropolis as director Pete Travis (Vantage Point) and screenwriter Alex Garland (28 Days Later, Sunshine) team to bring iconic 2000A.D. lawman Judge Dredd to the big screen. In the future, much of North America has been poisoned by radiation. The sprawling urban jungle Mega City One stretches from Boston to Washington D.C., and in order to keep the growing criminal element in check, police enforcers called "Judges" have been given the power of judge, jury, and executioner. Judge Dredd (Karl Urban) is the most feared of them all, delivering death sentences with impunity as he fights to rid the streets of "Slo-Mo" -- a powerful new drug that alters its user's perception of time. In the process of training psychic rookie Cassandra Anderson (Olivia Thirlby), Dredd receives a report of an incident in a sprawling criminal stronghold ruled by fearsome drug lord Ma-Ma (Lena Headey), and ventures in to investigate. Upon learning that one of her top men has been captured by Dredd shortly thereafter, an enraged Ma-Ma seizes control of her massive 200-story complex, launching an all-out war against the Judges as Dredd and Cassandra find themselves trapped in the belly of the beast. ~ Jason Buchanan, Rovi

Director: Pete Travis

Cast: Karl Urban, Olivia Thirlby, Lena Headey, Wood Harris, Langley Kirkwood

Release Date: Sep 21, 2012

Rated R for strong bloody violence, language, drug use and some sexual content

Runtime: 1 hr. 36 min.

Genres: Action/Adventure, Drama, Sci-Fi/Fantasy

Review:

Taking another shot at a character that’s best remembered for a laughably bad Sylvester Stallone film takes some guts. Dredd isn’t necessarily a film that anybody asked for or wanted and the fact that it was mostly ignored by the movie going audience kind of rams that point home. It’s a bit of a shame because Pete Travis’s version is actually a solid piece of R rated action fun. He fully embraces the splatter factor delivering a series of visual punches in the face. Along the way he delivers some of the best looking use of slow mo to visually represent the effects of the drug in question. The plot is incredibly thin and you could probably watch it while doing something else and you’d miss absolutely nothing and still enjoy the gory spectacle. Character development is sparse and we don’t know much about the titular Dredd. Karl Urban, helmet on for the duration, gives a gravelly chin driven performance that’s impressive but your left wondering what’d he done if he’d been given a little more meat. Olivia Thirlby is equally one note with a slightly more fleshed out character. Lena Headley, as the lead baddie, isn’t asked to do much outside of having constant bitch face; thankfully she was born with that talent. While it sounds like the film is flimsy, which it is, it’s also a lot of fun for all the action thrown at you.

B-

[Trailer] Star Trek Into Darkness

We get our first glimpse of the upcoming reboot sequel via this "announcement" trailer, as a life long Trek fan I’m still not sure what to make of it. I enjoyed the reboot but it lacked a true Trek feel, we’ll see if this one can capture that as of right now it looks like a big action tent pole film….

The Star Trek franchise continues with this follow-up to 2009's J.J. Abrams-directed reboot. Abrams returns to direct from a script by Damon Lindelof and the writing team of Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman. The crew of the Enterprise engages in an epic battle of good versus evil after being summoned home to discover Starfleet in ruins, and venturing into a war zone to find the powerful villain (Sherlock's Benedict Cumberbatch) responsible for the devastation. ~ Jeremy Wheeler, Rovi








Japanese trailer below has a bit of extra footage which hints that they might be doing a version of a classic Trek film…



Full new trailer

MOVIE REVIEW: PRIEST

ON VIDEO

PRIEST



In a world ravaged by wars between humans and vampires, a renegade priest fights to rescue his niece from the legions of bloodsuckers who seek to transform the young girl into one of them. A battle-weary veteran of the last vampire war, warrior Priest (Paul Bettany) now resides in a heavily fortified city where the ruling Church is a greater menace than any creature of the night. When a pack of vampires abduct Priest's niece (Lily Collins), the vengeful holy man breaks his vows and promises to save the young innocent from a fate worse than death. He can't do it alone, but with a powerful warrior Priestess (Maggie Q) and his niece's boyfriend, a sharp-shooting sheriff (Cam Gigandet), on his side, Priest may have a fighting chance. Stephen Moyer, Karl Urban, and Brad Dourif co-star. ~ Jason Buchanan, Rovi

Director: Scott Charles Stewart

Cast: Paul Bettany, Karl Urban, Cam Gigandet, Maggie Q, Lily Collins, Stephen Moyer,
Christopher Plummer, Brad Dourif

Release Date: May 13, 2011

Rated PG-13 Intense sequences of violence and action, disturbing images and brief
strong language

Runtime: 1 hr. 27 min.

Genres: Action/Adventure

Review:

Priest is kind of like a dollar store Frankenstein monster of a film. It’s made up of so many sources that it’s hard to keep track of them. Occasionally, director Scott Charles Stewart hits the sweet spot with a few cool visuals or ideas that look like they could spring into something but just never do. Instead, you are left to trudge through a Blade Runner-esque world before heading into a Western-esque post apocalyptic world mixed with as many clichés as you can think of, throw it in a blender and call it a day. Paul Bettany string of truly questionable role selections, he’s really a fine actor, continues here as he looks like a holy roman Jedi while carrying the same demeanor he had in the woeful Legion, also directed by Stewart. Bettany looks like he came straight from that set and just had a quick wardrobe change and went right to work. Not that there’s much he can do given the script but he tries, in fact he’s so serious throughout that he could be passing a diamond as the movie progresses. Cam Gigandet is tasked with being his partner in their heroes quest and he distractingly bad in a bad film. Gigandet reads lines like a first year acting student, leaving you wondering if that was really the best take they could possibly get from him or if everybody was just in a rush to go home. The lovely Maggie Q looks lovely and cool in limited screen time. Karl Urban is mostly wasted as the villain here, in the sparse amount of time he’s given he looks like he’s begging to do some actual work but just isn’t ever asked. Christopher Plummer and Brad Dourif pass through on their way to other films. The strange thing and probably biggest sin Priest commits is that’s its actually fairly watch able, helped by it’s scant run time and brisk pacing, if it actually had any sort of worthwhile script it might have made for a solid B movie.

C-

Movie Reviews: STAR TREK

Friday, May 08, 2009
Movie Reviews: STAR TREK
IN THEATERS
STAR TREK

From director J.J. Abrams ("Mission: Impossible III," "Lost" and "Alias"), producers Damon Lindelof and Bryan Burk and screenwriters Roberto Orci & Alex Kurtzman ("Transformers," "MI: III") comes a new vision of the greatest space adventure of all time, "Star Trek," featuring a young, new crew venturing boldly where no one has gone before.

Cast: Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Leonard Nimoy, Eric Bana, Bruce Greenwood, Karl Urban

Director: J.J. Abrams

Opened May 7, 2009

Runtime: 2 hr. 6 min.

Rated PG-13 for violence, sci-fi action and brief sexual content

Genres: Space Adventure, Science Fiction

Review:

First let me preface this review that I’ve been a Trek fan since I was kid and started watching ST: The Next Generation in 87’. Since then I’ve watched any and every incarnation of Trek that’s come out, good or bad. Needless to say I may be a bit biased in my view of J.J. Abrams redux. Regardless I’ll give it my best shot. J.J. Abrams has created a new “version” of classic Trek which now comes in an easy to swallow pill for the uninitiated. First off it’s not a reboot in the truest sense as the script uses a few of Trek’s biggest crutches, time traveling and alternate realities, to give us this fresh version of Star Trek. From the opening sequence we get a great sense of what’s in store. An impressive space battle filled with the type of frenzied combat that has rarely been seen in Trek before. The action is well choreographed and briskly paced. The classic phaser beams from the starships have been replaced with pulse shots which resemble Star Wars a tad more. As a result, the space battles are quicker and more like dog fights as opposed to the classic submarine feel. Its effect and engaging, grabbling the audience from the start. J.J. Abrams makes it clear from the start that his version of Trek would have a higher focus on action as opposed to the cerebral aspect of Roddenberry’s original concept. In this version we don’t get long philosophical monologues about the prime directive or any high sounding concepts. In doing so Abrams streamlines the overall concept and make the film a more visceral experience as opposed to a cerebral one. The space battles are massive set pieces clearly benefiting from the greatly improved budget, when compared to the previous Trek films. The technical aspects are deftly handled giving the audience all it can handle in each engagement. Needless to say, Abram’s does a great job at the helm giving the general audience something fun and easily digestible throughout. Scripting from his long time collaborators Roberto Orci & Alex Kurtzman does a fine job of giving hardcore fans plenty of tidbits and throwaway lines that’ll make them grin while never folding too deeply into Trek’s massive mythology. That being said, the script is a weak point as it relies on very traditional Star Trek devices and antagonist. The overall plot is a rehash from countless other Trek stories from the movies and shows. The villain and his motivations are just as familiar. The fresh faced cast gives the script a much needed lift and most turn in very impressive performances considering the task at hand. Chris Pine was tasked with the toughest task of turning in a fresh approach to Shatner’s Kirk. Pine turns in a solid if slightly uneven performance. There are moments were channels Shatner’s charisma and charm and other times he just misses the mark. Thankfully he succeeds more than he fails and makes a fine Kirk and never falls into parody. Zachary Quinto delivers a measured performance, his younger version of Spock brims with emotions ready to bubble up at any moment. Karl Urban truly channels the late Deforest Kelly in his turn as Doctor McCoy. It’s a fun performance that recalls all of Kelly’s fine work but avoids strict imitation. Zoe Saldana gives Uhura a strong sense of self and purpose in limited screen time. Simon Pegg, John Cho & Anton Yelchin are all clearly having fun in their supporting turns as Scotty, Sulu and Chekov. Bruce Greenwood’s turn as Captain Pine, the Enterprise’s first captain, is appropriately serious and fatherly. Ben Cross as Sarek, Spock’s father, misses the mark especially when compared to Mark Lenard’s previous interpretation. He doesn’t do anything new with the role and is mildly forgettable. Eric Bana is straddled with a very traditional Star Trek villain and he does the best he can with it. Bana gives Nero a decent amount of rage but the script doesn’t really allow for much more. Leonard Nimoy’s extended cameo is great giving longtime Trek fans a nice link to this new iteration. Cameo’s by Winona Ryder and Tyler Perry (?) are non invasive and ultimately pointless. As a whole this entire endeavor is a fine example of properly rebooting long running franchises much like the recent James Bond and Batman redux. J.J. Abram’s film walks that fine line, keeping hardcore fandom and the general public happy.

A