astarta
21.05.09, 08:32
Star Trek
http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/underwire/2009/05/spock_kirk_660.jpg
Star Trek (2009) (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0796366/)
In the year 2387, a star goes supernova, threatening to destroy the Romulan homeworld. Ambassador Spock pilots a Vulcan ship carrying "red matter" to the supernova; the red matter, when ignited, can create a gravitational singularity, drawing the supernova into a black hole.
I hate tossing up recommendations of really really really mainstream films, so I'll promise to conjure up a review (or scrambling from someone who pretends he knows something about films) of some less hyped and praised picture soon.
Fuck the fans, the franchise is now accessible to us who don't walk around with plastic extensions glued to our ears, and who don't consider Shatner and Nimoy to be legends amongst men.
The directing is good, which is surprising, as J J Abrams has a sea of mediocrity under his belt (I don't mean it like that!).
Abrams wasn't in-depth familiar with the countless sequels and spin-off series of the original franchise to begin with, so I suppose (without prior knowledge of the series) this should be seen as a complete reboot, or prequel if you can consider it that.
The plot is at times very confusing, which leads me to my next concern, which is the running length of the picture itself, which could easily be an hour longer. It's a fun ride, but at 2 hours, it feels a bit short. It's great up till the point of no return (or climax if you will), but after that, it seems a bit rushed.
Back to the plot though, it starts off in medias res (I finally got to use this one on the internets! Look it up), with a lot of bangs and cool music (Kirk introduction), at this point I felt I had to let out a disappointed Bay/Bruckheimer sigh. But hey, I guess this was done to please the action crowd.
After a while the story stepped up, crushed my preconceived opinion, and managed to put a smile on my face.
The acting is varied, and because of the huge cast, it's hard to judge everyone, but it's a relatively large sea of mediocrity, where Zachary Quinto (Spock) comes out as the impressive actor you'll most likely notice.
All in all It's a fast, jumpy, snappy and generally hilarious trip from slightly after beginning to end. It will stand as one of the real titans of the space Sci-Fi genre. Blade Runner has it's vision and style, 2001 has it's artistic value, and Empire Strikes Back has it's story.
Star Trek will have have it's place at the podium with it's action and humor.
It's not perfect, but it's a great picture (which seems rare nowadays).
I hope there'll be another one
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0xaCB2nLS0
Han Solo would still kick Kirk's keester.
...also, Greedo shot first
http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/underwire/2009/05/spock_kirk_660.jpg
Star Trek (2009) (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0796366/)
In the year 2387, a star goes supernova, threatening to destroy the Romulan homeworld. Ambassador Spock pilots a Vulcan ship carrying "red matter" to the supernova; the red matter, when ignited, can create a gravitational singularity, drawing the supernova into a black hole.
I hate tossing up recommendations of really really really mainstream films, so I'll promise to conjure up a review (or scrambling from someone who pretends he knows something about films) of some less hyped and praised picture soon.
Fuck the fans, the franchise is now accessible to us who don't walk around with plastic extensions glued to our ears, and who don't consider Shatner and Nimoy to be legends amongst men.
The directing is good, which is surprising, as J J Abrams has a sea of mediocrity under his belt (I don't mean it like that!).
Abrams wasn't in-depth familiar with the countless sequels and spin-off series of the original franchise to begin with, so I suppose (without prior knowledge of the series) this should be seen as a complete reboot, or prequel if you can consider it that.
The plot is at times very confusing, which leads me to my next concern, which is the running length of the picture itself, which could easily be an hour longer. It's a fun ride, but at 2 hours, it feels a bit short. It's great up till the point of no return (or climax if you will), but after that, it seems a bit rushed.
Back to the plot though, it starts off in medias res (I finally got to use this one on the internets! Look it up), with a lot of bangs and cool music (Kirk introduction), at this point I felt I had to let out a disappointed Bay/Bruckheimer sigh. But hey, I guess this was done to please the action crowd.
After a while the story stepped up, crushed my preconceived opinion, and managed to put a smile on my face.
The acting is varied, and because of the huge cast, it's hard to judge everyone, but it's a relatively large sea of mediocrity, where Zachary Quinto (Spock) comes out as the impressive actor you'll most likely notice.
All in all It's a fast, jumpy, snappy and generally hilarious trip from slightly after beginning to end. It will stand as one of the real titans of the space Sci-Fi genre. Blade Runner has it's vision and style, 2001 has it's artistic value, and Empire Strikes Back has it's story.
Star Trek will have have it's place at the podium with it's action and humor.
It's not perfect, but it's a great picture (which seems rare nowadays).
I hope there'll be another one
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0xaCB2nLS0
Han Solo would still kick Kirk's keester.
...also, Greedo shot first