Star Trek 2009

[8.4/10] The 2009 Star Trek movie lacks the contemplative bent of the franchise that spawned it. There are few, if any, real moral or philosophical dilemmas at play. Those who enjoy this universe and the stories told within it for their aspirational, thoughtful bent will and did walk away disappointed by what is more in the vein of high-flying blockbuster entertainment.

And yet, that’s often the first thing to be jettisoned in Star Trek’s jaunts on the big screen. Trekkies who can set that aside and embrace the blockbuster mode of the franchise that’s been in force (more or less) since 1982 when Trek meets cinema will discover one of the series’s most exciting, invigorating, and impressive silver screen outings. Somehow, J.J. Abrams’s star-bound coming out party manages to deliver thrilling set piece after thrilling set piece, establish new versions of a familiar crew, and most of all, deliver on character.

That’s Abrams strength as a filmmaker and storyteller. Much has rightfully been made over his inability to end things. But much of that stems from a focus on establishing character over story. He’s more apt to try to endear the audience to the players he puts on the screen than to move them in one coherent direction or another. Good endings require satisfying narrative resolutions. Good beginnings, on the other hand, require characters you can root for and, more than anything, that you want to keep spending time with. Abrams’s filmography, and this movie in particular, delivers on that in spades.

It achieves that feat not only with tremendous casting and smart scene-to-scene script-writing, but by crafting compelling arcs for its major leads. Kirk and Spock, as they did in the old days, get the lion’s share of the story here, but Star Trek ‘09 puts that focus to good use.

For Spock, that means telling a story of the venerated Vulcan reconciling his human emotions with his culture-bound stoicism. The fulcrum of his arc is his mother, Amanda, with his attachment to her summoning a sentimental, sometimes angry side that he cannot suppress despite all his discipline. That attachment spurs him, away from the Vulcan Science Academy, into scraps with his fellow Vulcan pupils and with Kirk, and eventually toward risking his life to avenge his mother and save his people. His journey here is one of embracing that part of who he is and acknowledging it as a strength not a weakness, through the mother he so loves.

But Kirk doesn’t have mommy issues; he has daddy issues! What’s striking about his arc in Star Trek ‘09 is that it’s basically the inverse of his arc in Wrath of Khan. While the 1982 classic was about loss finally catching up with the good captain, after he evades it for so long despite his long history of risk-taking, the 2009 reboot is about a Kirk who was born into loss. His path in this film is to embrace that “I don’t accept no win scenarios” side of his personality, and use it to counteract the staid, dogmatic vibe in order to save the day.

Those arcs are simple and straightforward enough, but also incredibly effective. This Kirk is not just another lovable rogue, but someone haunted by his father’s death and legacy, trying to live up to both. This Spock has the layers of emotion beneath a stoic exterior in the proud tradition Leonard Nimoy established, making the cracks in the facade all the more impactful. It’s elemental character work that resonates, especially when brought to life by such sterling performers.

That is, arguably, the greatest feature of Star Trek ‘09. Whatever else you can say about plotting or continuity, Abrams and company find a nigh-perfect set of inheritors to the original cast and give each of them moments to shine.

Chris Pine doesn’t start Shatnering even for a second, but captures the soul of Kirk for a new era. Zachary Quinto could be forgiven for doing a Nimoy impersonation, particularly with the man himself on set, but instead he channels the spirit of the original Spock while putting his own spin on it. Zoe Saldana’s Uhurua is confident and commanding but sensitive. Karl Urban’s Dr. McCoy is the closest to a straight up impression, but absolutely gets Bones’s irascible charm. John Cho and Anton Yelchin bring low-key humor and sweet earnestness to Sulu and Chekov. And Simon Pegg’s Scotty is feisty and rough and round the edges in a truly endearing way. The new cast was always going to be the hardest part of a reboot, but Abrams and casting directors April Webster and Alyssa Weisberg absolutely nail it.

Better yet, they give the rest of the cast something to do. The Trek movies, like the 1966 series, put most of the focus on Kirk and Spock and, to a lesser extent McCoy, leaving everyone else fighting for scraps. Star Trek ‘09 remedies this, with cool moments in the spotlight for Sulu’s swordplay, Chekov’s system-taming abilities, and Scott’s transporter wizardry, among other fun character beats for each. Uhura gets the biggest upgrade, not only being treated like an expert officer, but acting as a foil, in different ways, to both Kirk and Spock.

The movie also manages to evoke stellar performances in big parts and small parts from the rest of the cast. Jennifer Morrison earns the tragedy of the film’s explosive opening with a small amount of screen time. Leonard Nimoy returns to the role he made famous with impressive ease and gravitas. Bruce Greenwood in particular finds the balance between encouraging father figure and consummate officer that lives up to the legacy of Captain Pike. Aside from a serviceable but unmemorable villain turn from Eric Bana, Abrams gets the best of everyone he puts on the screen.

And he puts a lot on the screen! Make no mistake, this may very well be the best Star Trek has ever looked on the big screen. Yes, there’s rampant lens flair and some odd dutch angles at play. But there’s also incredibly slick direction and production design. The film’s creative team does a stellar job of reimagining the old 1960s aesthetic for modern times, with sharp uniforms and futuristic-looking ship interiors that still call to mind the spirit of the old ones. Abrams includes plenty of glory shots of the crew in their new digs and the Enterprise itself looking spiffy and ready to go, with passes that call to mind The Motion Picture.

Star Trek ‘09 is also filled to the brim with rousing action sequences. The Kelvin explodes in a suicide run. Young Kirk races the cops over a canyon while the Beastie Boys blare. There’s skydiving runs that lead to fist flights and clashes of swords, races against elaborate plumbing systems, and the inevitable leaps and jabs that come from encounters with the bad guys. Whether it’s ship-to-ship combat or human-to-vulcan scraps, Abrams and director of photography Dan Mindel deliver heart-pumping set pieces with relish and vigor. There’s a frantic pace to the movie that keeps the film light and nimble, borne out in these well-staged, well-edited, well-crafted visuals.

But what of the plot, you ask? In terms of the basics, it’s nothing special. Familiar but villainous aliens resnet the Federation and a group of not-quite-ready cadets have to spring into action to stop them. It’s not the first time the Star Trek franchise has deployed those tropes. But Star Trek ‘09 gives them a little extra oomph, not only due to the time travel shenanigans that are also practically intrinsic to Trek, but also for the sense that arch baddie Nero is trying to avenge the destruction of Romulus and make Spock in particular feel his pain. It’s not much, but it adds an emotional contingent to the usual doom and destruction threat that gives it a bit more life.

The brilliant turn, though, comes from that time travel premise that manages to both connect Star Trek ‘09 to the prior adventures of Kirk and company, while also giving this new setup the leeway to explore without having to be slavish to continuity. Spock’s speech to that effect gilds the lily a little bit, but making Nero a timeline disruptor who ends up bringing prime Spock with him accomplishes so much.

First, it’s the sort of high concept, timeline-hopping craziness that some of the most enjoyable Trek stories are built around. Second, it frees Abrams and his team up from the strictures of 40+ years of continuity and expectations of the future. Third, it builds a bridge between the new cast and the old, with Nimoy/Spock all but blessing the new faces without erasing the old stories. And last but not least, it honors the old Trek, while giving these characters new challenges both personal and professional to conquer.

It’s a wonderfully clever solution to the soft reboot problem. Whatever later stumbles Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman may be responsible for, their script here gives fans enough of a mix of the fresh and the familiar to soar, with enough of an excuse for changes and homages in turn.

Those homages, mind you, are utterly delightful for the longtime Trekkie. There’s expected bits like Spock saying “Live long and prosper” while giving the Vulcan salute and other famous quips, but these typically come with enough of a twist or wry line that makes them more than just a soulless conjuring of something the audience already knows and likes. But there’s also nice little tributes to less-loved entries in the canon, from Star Trek: Enterprise to The Animated Series, with subtler callbacks like Kirk chowing down on an apple. While the movie throws off the shackles of rigorous continuity, Abrams, Orci, and Kurtzman clearly reveled in honoring the stories that made this one possible.

It’s the same approach Abrams would take to revitalizing the Star Wars franchise less than a decade later, one founded on lovable characters, rollicking adventures, and reverence for what came before with enough new twists on it to make the old feel new again. It is, frankly, strange returning to his first, 2009 effort at a star-centered film in the shadow of all that’s happened since.

The “NuTrek” era of films this movie was meant to kick off never matched the acclaim or box office success of this opening salvo, despite reuniting the same team. Orci would pen other genre tales that mostly disappointed audiences. Kurtzman would go on to shepherd Star Trek into its third major T.V. epoch, polarizing fans in the process. Abrams would resurrect another moribund interstellar franchise, only to cement a reputation as an imitator and, eventually as a ruiner, when he tried to wrap it up. If you saw this movie in 2009 and were told these three men shepherded some of the biggest genre properties imaginable, you’d expect far greater things than the mixed results they’ve produced over the ensuing decades.

Still, what grabs you when returning to Star Trek ‘09 is how the film plays to Abrams’s considerable strengths as a filmmaker. No, the story does not have the high-minded perspective or scientific rigor of (some) of the franchise’s prior movies and T.V. shows. But he does have the visual chops to convey the grandeur, excitement, and scope of Trek, carrying the audience’s attention and investment through from the first big set piece to the warm, final send off.

More than that, though, he knows what franchise luminaries like Gene Roddenbury, Gene Coon, and Nicholas Meyer knew when picking these same toys out of the toybox -- that what makes these stories come to life is the characters. It is no small thing to establish new versions of beloved icons. Despite that uphill climb, Abrams not only refreshes the roster with a murderer’s row of talented performers, but he roots these high-flying, phaser-blasting adventures in those characters’ journeys.

Chris Pine’s Kirk is a different person than William Shatner’s was, but he’s also a different person from the bar-fighting townie we meet early on to the responsibility- and risk-taking officer we see at the end. Zachary Quinto’s Spock is not the wizened ambassador whose spritely figure Leonard Nimoy still cuts, but he is a man, and a vulcan, better able to resolve those two parts of himself than when the movie begins.

And Abrams’s Star Trek is not the same as Roddenberry’s Star Trek, instead becoming something slicker and shinier and more bombastic, but it is still built around these men and women who make up the heart of this series and whose experiences engross and inspire us. Good beginnings depend on that sort of character. Whatever stumbles this version of Star Trek would have in the future, this movie and its commitment to developing those figures amid a rip roaring good time more than earned J.J., his crew, and his cast, their chance at a five-year mission.

I enjoyed this well enough back when it came out. I wasn't a Trek fan in the past, so all the bits about alternate timelines and whatnot were completely lost on me. I understand what they were doing, now.
I also understand why many Star Trek fans were not pleased with this film. They just turned Star Trek into a fairly brainless action flick. Not that Trek was ever devoid of action, but it was almost always done intelligently. This, on the other hand, is a collection of fairly nonsensical events.

• Why is a mining vessel so well-armed? Well-armed enough to take out multiple Federation starships at once? Its large size and the planet drill thing make sense, but it doesn't make sense why'd they be so strong in combat otherwise.
• Why was Spock's mother with the culture council thing? She's a human, she wouldn't be on the council. Mega convenient they were all in the same room at that exact moment, though.
• Kirk is ejected down at the exact planet where future-Spock happens to be. Not only that, but he ran for his life from two different creatures, and just so happened to head in the exact direction that future-Spock was located. Wow. (Side note, why is a predator that lives on a snow planet bright red?)
• Earth is a big ol' planet, yet the Romulan drill thing happens to be right in San Francisco where Starfleet Academy is. Lol

You know one thing that's good, though? At least the bridge in this film has plenty of lights on. All of the nuTrek TV shows take place in the fucking dark. Turn some damn lights on!