Click here for the review of Star Trek

SPOILERS must be tagged with the "SPOILER" tag!

Even though I pegged this as three and a half stars in the competition, I should've known a "reboot" (or "origin" story), you would be a little less enthusiastic about it. Considering the massive praise-fest going on amongst fans (the current RT, all online sources, is 100% at 18 reviews), and many claims of "next to Kahn as the best", it surprising that it got little more than what the franchise got from you when it was slowly rotting away.

Is this a high three star rating, as in considerably of higher quality then something like "Nemesis"? A little comparison of the other movies (besides the tepid original) would be nice.

For what it's worth, here's how I would order them, favorite to least favorite:

STAR TREK II: THE WRATH OF KHAN (1982)
STAR TREK IV: THE VOYAGE HOME (1986)
STAR TREK: FIRST CONTACT (1996)
STAR TREK (2009)
STAR TREK III: THE SEARCH FOR SPOCK (1984)
STAR TREK: THE MOTION PICTURE (1979 - director's cut preferred)
STAR TREK: INSURRECTION
STAR TREK VI: THE UNDISCOVERED COUNTRY (1991)
STAR TREK: GENERATIONS (1994)
STAR TREK: NEMESIS (2002)
STAR TREK V: THE FINAL FRONTIER (1989)

I might be willing to move the 2009 up a slot (above FIRST CONTACT), but I'd have to see it again a second time. There's an awful lot to take in during one showing. I'm sure I missed a bunch of Easter Eggs.

That's a little disheartening. Very disheartening, actually.

First of all, I bet this must have not been an easy review for Jim to write. I mean considering he's been a Star Trek fan for a long time and that he's followed the Kirk years closely. I’m sure, like with any other Star Trek fan, that he wants this new cast and film to do the old cast and films justice. If this movie had been a disaster for him I'm sure it would have been disheartening to write the review. I’m sure it was a relief he found the movie to be good. However, I'm sure he's a bit disappointed this movie wasn't mind-blowing like "Wrath of Khan".

Second, this movie, like any other and especially considering it’s a “reboot”, will probably disappoint a certain percentage of Trek fans. I mean this movie seems like it has many goals of satisfying old fans, bringing in new ones and setting up a new franchise with a sequel. Obviously all these goals are not likely to be accomplished although I'm sure Abrams and co. did their best. I think if a sequel is made, and I'm sure one will be, that it can cut loose and really create a grand, epic Trek adventure like "Wrath of Khan".

In case anyone wants to see my Trek movie rankings (minus the new "Star Trek")

Rankings as of right now:

Wrath of Khan
The Voyage Home
First Contact
The Undiscovered Country
Search for Spock
Generations
Nemesis
Final Frontier
Insurrection
The Motion Picture

Whilst I am not the hardcore fan of Star Trek that James is, I did see the movies as a kid - never watched The Next Generation or other series - never really have even seen more than an episode of two of the original on DVD.

After viewing the reboot at a screener I can say this new film stands above all the other Trek films and sits along side The Wrath of Khan. It does not have the emotional wallop of Khan - how could it in reality, this is about being young, all about passion, whereas as Khan was about growing old and that will always command more gravitas. What this does have is an adrenalin, an excitement, and edge of the seat, Raiders of The Lost Art like quality that Trek has never had.

In my opinion there is no way they could get the depth of character james talks about in just 2 hours for an origin film such as this - just not possible. Bana's bad guy is serviceable enough giving the time constraints - again, this film could not run for 3 hours and there is only so much time to introduce ALL the characters, get the bad guy in there and in addition make the film fun for non Trek fans.

I have to disagree about Star Trek: Insurrection, it was and is an absolute atrocity. It represented every that was wrong about Trek to me - very TWEE and vanilla, to much about prime directives, bland and like an 2 hour TV movie. Same for First Contact, great idea however still looked kinda cheap.

Not sure how those cheapish TNG TV movie looking films can get 3 stars and this one 3 as well. This was in a whole different league.

This is the most fun trek has EVER been it my opinion, Full of life and excitement and for an ensemble origin story I can not really think how they could have done a better job.

My GF, who HATES science fiction loved the film. She walked out of the room when Khan was on TV at one point. So that says everything from my perspective.

It seems that that the more hardcore trekkers are the most critical, whereas the masses and general critics are writing virtual love letters about the film.

I don't think you'll see too many general critics that are long-time Trek fans like James review this movie since their opinion will have some bias.

As usual, a well written and thoughtful review. For my part, I’m now excited about seeing this film. The trailers made me wary about this new Trek, but with each review I read it became increasingly apparent that my judgment may have been premature. I’ll see it for myself soon enough.

Star Trek was desperately in need of a new direction anyway; and although this movie might have no other aspirations than escapism, well, sometimes that’s enough.

That's enough for me.

And about as good as First Contact?

Sign me up!

Freakish similarity

Star Trek II - The Wrath of Khan - Great movie rather than a great Trek film
Star Trek IV - The Voyage Home
Star Trek VIII - First Contact
Star Trek VI - The Undiscovered Country
Star Trek III - Search For Spock
Star Trek IX - Insurrection
Star Trek X - Nemesis
Star Trek
Star Trek VII - Generations
Star Trek V - The Final Frontier

2009 - TBC - but nervous

Rob

I've never seen anything Trek related in my life and I still can't wait to go see this movie. I will be going to my second midnight showing in a week (other one was Wolverine).

James' review comes off like faint praise, not total praise. His opinion is definitely the most reserved of the major critics who have published reviews thus far (Todd McCarthy, Ray Bennett, the guys at AICN). Not quite the ***1/2 review I was expecting, but I appreciate the honesty.

After re-reading James' review, and distilling down everything to a nutshell, it sounds like the writing, acting and special effects are pretty much first-rate. The negatives would be the story (lacking in the "deeper message" and Kirk/Spock relationship categories). Also sounds like the film's status as both prequel and sequel weakens it. But I for one won't mind any of that at all. We need some simple, good escapism for a change.

I have not seen the new film yet.

Here is my ranking of the previous films:

STAR TREK II: THE WRATH OF KHAN (1982) - The perfect homage to the original series.
STAR TREK: FIRST CONTACT (1996) - Love this. I can watch it over and over again. Picard's finest 2 hours.
STAR TREK III: THE SEARCH FOR SPOCK (1984) - Weak on its own, but is essential viewing after Khan.
STAR TREK: THE MOTION PICTURE (1979 - director's cut preferred) - An epic failure, but epic nonetheless.
STAR TREK IV: THE VOYAGE HOME (1986) - I don't know why this is so popular. There are so many things that annoy me.
STAR TREK: GENERATIONS (1994) - I loved it when I first saw it, but with hindsight the story is rubbish and Kirk's death was an insult to the character.
STAR TREK VI: THE UNDISCOVERED COUNTRY (1991) - An OK by-the-numbers romp.
STAR TREK: NEMESIS (2002) - A good idea, but poorly executed.
STAR TREK V: THE FINAL FRONTIER (1989) - Not as bad as some people say, but it is ruined by a few disastrous scenes.
STAR TREK: INSURRECTION - Terrible, just terrible. I agree with the comment that it feels like a TV movie done on the cheap.

Having not seen a Trek since First Contact - and having never seen the original series - I was pleasantly surprised by Abrams' Trek. I though it was ballsy, well-cast, and great-looking. For an "origin" film it was very entertaining, and I'm quite curious to see where they go from here.

While we're doing this...

STAR TREK: FIRST CONTACT
STAR TREK II: THE WRATH OF KHAN

STAR TREK IV: THE VOYAGE HOME
STAR TREK VI: THE UNDISCOVERED COUNTRY

STAR TREK: NEMESIS
STAR TREK V: THE FINAL FRONTIER
STAR TREK: INSURRECTION
STAR TREK: GENERATIONS

I haven't seen I or III in too long for me to place them, but I know I found both extremely boring, so they'd be close to the bottom, probably under Insurrection.

I didnt read the review and prob wont until after I watch the film. This tends to happenfor films I am deadset on seeing, I will read it after to see if my thoughts are similar to Mr. Berardinelli's though.

Somewhat surprised noone likes Insurrection, i thought it was a good film.

My ranking of Star Trek films:

Wrath of Khan
The Undiscovered Country
First Contact
The Voyage Home
Nemesis
Search for Spock
Generations
The Motion Picture
Insurrection
The Final Frontier

I was never interested in Star Trek until Battlestar Galactica. Now I've been watching TOS (full episodes on cbs.com) and am really enjoying it...I'm pumped for this re-boot though. I'm guessing that Star Trek 2009 is going to be like Batman Begins and lead us to a great sequel.

Do I have to be familiar with the Picard team to enjoy First Contact?