Comments on: A Star Trek, Boldly

By: star trek fangirl

star trek fangirl — Thu, 14 May 2009 21:49:53 +0000

I liked the article even though I am a new star trek fan. I guess that is my comment, but I would also like to say that I look forward to the new upcoming episodes that are still yet to be released.

By: Bob Urell

Bob Urell — Wed, 13 May 2009 05:49:26 +0000

Huh. Well, since it’s unlikely that he’ll write a review of this movie, I’ll quote the that I went with to see this thing, “It’s the best Star Trek movie ever, which is like being the prettiest pig in the pen.”
Bana, a pretty good actor when he’s not green, was a grotesquery reminiscent of every other inane Star Trek villain. None of the science was science. All of the plot was deus ex machina. Simon Pegg can do no wrong. He couldn’t save this pig. Explosions cannot replace nuance. Every single opportunity to frustrate expectation and to create something truly unique was passed over for the cheap, easy cliché (Dammit Jim, I’m a doctor…; I’m givin’ it all she’s got…; Hey, that chick’s green. Think I’ll jump her bones…). This thing ran like a paean to Star Treks past. When it should have looked forward, it fixed its gaze firmly to stern. While I wasn’t disappointed, that was only due to my rockbottom expectations (fringe benefits of having friends that get screeners).

By: William T. Vandemark

William T. Vandemark — Wed, 13 May 2009 04:48:59 +0000

Hi, J M McDermott.

To be clear, the definition of science fiction I like best is Damon Knight’s: “Science fiction is what we point to when we say it.”

However, I do maintain that “much”(by no means all) of science fiction is about transcendence. If you took my opening paragraph to mean all, or even a majority, I regret the lack of clarity.

Glad you enjoyed the movie.

By: J M McDermott

J M McDermott — Wed, 13 May 2009 01:57:16 +0000

I hate to say this, but I never like any reviewer to tell me what science fiction fundamentally is. Ultimately you are narrowing your vision down to the lens of just one aesthetic.

The field is too diverse for easy explanations that fit into a movie review’s opening paragraph.

I also don’t see any evidence of what you suggest JJ Abrams did to the franchise, to make it fit your proposed model of SF.

I would suggest that what JJ Abrams was doing was trying to recapture the experience the original audience felt, and to give that experience to a generation that has developed different expectations from their movies and space adventures.

I did enjoy the movie, quite a lot.

By: Mike B

Mike B — Tue, 12 May 2009 22:02:51 +0000

Your review was thoroughly on point.
You didn’t mention how horrifying it was to see that big ol’ queen Tyler Perry as a Federation school principal. What a way to un-suspend my disbelief!

By: Jason Heller

Jason Heller — Tue, 12 May 2009 20:04:41 +0000

“Hull breaches in logic.” Ha!

Great review, Todd. And a damn fun film. Granted, the movie was a bit thin in spots. But you don’t really notice — and that’s the mark of a great action/adventure movie, where holes in plot and logic are almost always unavoidable. And the best thing? Now there’s a fresh canvas upon which to paint some great new Star Trek sagas.