Star Trek

9

CaseyFJul 26, 2009

I never liked Star Trek. Hell, I never watched any of the episodes. I always kind of thought Star Trek sucked- just because I hadn't seen it and it had such a nerdy reputation. Prejudice, yes. Immensely. I don't deny that. However, I never liked Star Trek. Hell, I never watched any of the episodes. I always kind of thought Star Trek sucked- just because I hadn't seen it and it had such a nerdy reputation. Prejudice, yes. Immensely. I don't deny that. However, I went to see Star Trek regardless. Simply put, this movie blew me away. Without any Star Trek background whatsoever, I left the theatre knowing the characters, their roles, the ships, and a lot about Star Trek. This film took the nerdy Star Trek and, while retaining it's roots and great characters, turned it into a modern day pop culture action film that ANYBODY could enjoy. Star Trek was stellar, and I recommend it to anyone who likes good action.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

ShayWJul 24, 2009

There are no words for how much i love this movie. Whoever said it sucked are the people who LOOK for errors and have nothing better to do than say how terrible a movie is for the minor flaws it has.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

ChrisCJul 24, 2009

10. Great story, great sfx, great acting/casting, AND it had to deal with the epic pressure of living up to the star trek name.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

DávidK.Jul 24, 2009

Absolutely average. A movie that wouldn't be remembered if it wouldn't have the name "Star Trek" in it. The example of what is wrong with cinematography today. Foreseeable story, characters and etc. It tries to be us clear as Absolutely average. A movie that wouldn't be remembered if it wouldn't have the name "Star Trek" in it. The example of what is wrong with cinematography today. Foreseeable story, characters and etc. It tries to be us clear as possible leaving no room for thoughts just dumb starring. When someone kiss it doesn't have to mean its romantic, or when someone says something with Russian accent it doesn't mean its humor. And since when does it is that films that include "action, romance, humor for everyone" are good movies? The effects were good, wont be in 5 years. The effects in old star trek movies still do it. So no it was NOT great, just average.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

TobyHJul 24, 2009

I only went to see this film because it was an action film being directed by J.J.Abrams, who had directed the pretty decent M:I:III and Cloverfield. I was completely absorbed from the hyperactive opening to the breathless ending! I've I only went to see this film because it was an action film being directed by J.J.Abrams, who had directed the pretty decent M:I:III and Cloverfield. I was completely absorbed from the hyperactive opening to the breathless ending! I've never watched the series or any of the films, and the characterisation of Kirk and the incineration of Planet Vulcan may have bothered me more if I had, but as a purely visual and sensual experience, this was simply AMAZING!!! Who cares about a wafer-thin plot if the direction is as relentlessly breathtaking as this! Yes, it didn't exactly test the grey matter, but the characters were brimming with attitude and full of personality- a rare thing with an action film (e.g. the Bourne series). I can't recommend this highly enough. Abrams is God!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

0

FrankL.Jul 20, 2009

Something mentioned in few reviews (including most of those on this site) is how relentlessly DUMB this film is. Previous Trek films have had plot holes, to be sure, but this one is essentially two hours of end-to-end plot holes. Yes, the Something mentioned in few reviews (including most of those on this site) is how relentlessly DUMB this film is. Previous Trek films have had plot holes, to be sure, but this one is essentially two hours of end-to-end plot holes. Yes, the acting is good, and the (drastically revised) characters are moderately interesting. But the story is so incredibly senseless - and so breathlessly paced - that no real character development is possible. One gets the feeling that Roddenberry's Trek has been deliberately dumbed-down and had its higher aspirations eviscerated to suit the mentally and morally deficient tone of our times. The film's amazing popularity is thus a sad comment on who its audience has become. Far from being a 'reboot' of the franchise, this Star Trek is more like a demonic changeling that's murdered the original and been left in its place. I'd give it a 1 for the talent of its stars, but that might imply that if this abomination were the last film in the world, it might, however remotely, be worth seeing. It wouldn't. This film goes beyond 'bad' all the way to 'evil' - and should be avoided at all costs.… Expand

3 of 10 users found this helpful

9

TeliJul 19, 2009

First Star Trek movie that I liked, absolutely brilliant straight after watching it I wanted to watch again. The DVD release is just soooo far away.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

Simv1Jul 19, 2009

This movie has it all - action, special effects, a decent plot and great character development (esp. Kirk and Spock). And best of all, you dont have to be a hardcore Trekkie to enjoy it! The space-jump scene deserves special mention as one This movie has it all - action, special effects, a decent plot and great character development (esp. Kirk and Spock). And best of all, you dont have to be a hardcore Trekkie to enjoy it! The space-jump scene deserves special mention as one of the coolest action sequences I've ever seen on film.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

EdwardR.Jul 19, 2009

Just how the Next Generation movies failed to capture the spirit of TNG, this move failed to capture the spirit of Trek is general. Despite having a stunning opening, you eventually realise that this is a generic action movie with little Just how the Next Generation movies failed to capture the spirit of TNG, this move failed to capture the spirit of Trek is general. Despite having a stunning opening, you eventually realise that this is a generic action movie with little plot. Oh, an things don't make sense. Why do Kirk and Spock hate each other so much that they fight on the bridge? Why does Nero blame Spock for all his problems? Why is Nimoy in this film? Why have a scene where Kirk drives a car of a cliff? When did black holes become time travel portals (har, har)? Still, if you want a generic action movie...… Expand

3 of 7 users found this helpful

10

RobynM.Jul 19, 2009

Wonderful. Believability of characters was a concern (as a long-time James Kirk Star Trek fan), and I was very pleased. The action, the fast-paced scenes made the movie seem shorter than it was. Not to sure I enjoyed how the Romulens changed Wonderful. Believability of characters was a concern (as a long-time James Kirk Star Trek fan), and I was very pleased. The action, the fast-paced scenes made the movie seem shorter than it was. Not to sure I enjoyed how the Romulens changed the future. I mean - I really enjoyed the shows that had Spock's mother in them. Have to mull on that one. But an A+ effort. How the movie started? A++… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

RonaldR.Jul 18, 2009

This is a great comeback for Star Trek and Star Trek fans! It was brilliantly done in wonderful retrospect if individual characters and theme of Star Trek. The producers and director both went where no person had ever gone before!

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

TylerKJul 17, 2009

This is one of my favorite movies of the year! The acting was brilliant and the action quenches your need! Love it.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

LukeHJul 17, 2009

I'm not a Star Trek fan. I got taken to see this film and, if I'm really honest, i was approaching it with a very narrow mind because i just didn't want to like it. Despite that, this film blew me away. Almost everything about I'm not a Star Trek fan. I got taken to see this film and, if I'm really honest, i was approaching it with a very narrow mind because i just didn't want to like it. Despite that, this film blew me away. Almost everything about this film was great and there are only two reasons I didn't give it a 10. One was because there were moments in the film that I couldn't really appreciate because I was never a fan. But I'm glad they put these moments in because it will be great for the people who are in to it. The second reason was the character Uhura. She's introduced early in the film but after that the only relevant thing she does is kiss Spock and it just seems like the dynamic of the film wouldn't be altered at all if she wasn't there. Other than that, this film is undeniably brilliant.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

JB.Jul 14, 2009

I think this movie is a bit overated by people hoping for a huge sci-fi flick to follow for years to come. ST was not bad, but it was not that great either. I'm sure they will make a few sequels that will be even worse than this though I think this movie is a bit overated by people hoping for a huge sci-fi flick to follow for years to come. ST was not bad, but it was not that great either. I'm sure they will make a few sequels that will be even worse than this though just like transformers managed to go from fun special effects boom-boom to pure rot.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

0

AndrewJJul 13, 2009

"It's Star Trek Jim, but not as we know it." "But Spock, with alternate timelines anything is now possible! Remakes of Ben-Hur fighting Romans with phasers; John Wayne could be the man who nuked Liberty Valance; the Orcs could use "It's Star Trek Jim, but not as we know it." "But Spock, with alternate timelines anything is now possible! Remakes of Ben-Hur fighting Romans with phasers; John Wayne could be the man who nuked Liberty Valance; the Orcs could use transporters to capture the ring of power from Frodo in Lord of the Rings; or imagine Casablanca where Humphrey Bogart flies off with, what's her name?" "Bergman, Captain. Ingrid Bergman." "Yes Bergman. Much better if she went off with Bogart rather than Victor Laszlo. And with an alternate timeline, maybe they could cut the smoking. And fight those Klingons rather than the Germans. And maybe there need be no world war two anyway! Think of all the lives saved Spock!" "That would indeed be Casablanca Jim, but not as we know it." "But Spock. If we had enough computer-generated special effects, the critics would give it a 10. Who would care whether it was faithful to the original... Spock? Spock! Put that phaser down Spock!" "An alternate timeline Captain...".… Expand

3 of 6 users found this helpful

10

BenS.Jul 12, 2009

What exactly constitutes a "true fan"? I am very proud that I got to be a part of this cinematic experience, and I think that all this criticism is completely unfounded. I mean, come on people---this isn't supposed to be "Anne of Green What exactly constitutes a "true fan"? I am very proud that I got to be a part of this cinematic experience, and I think that all this criticism is completely unfounded. I mean, come on people---this isn't supposed to be "Anne of Green Gables" for Pete's sake! Seeing Leonard Nimoy---PRICELESS!!!! There BETTER damn well be a sequel!!!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

0

MichaelaG.Jul 8, 2009

Horrid film---no true fan of Star Trek would recognize this as being part of the ST legacy. It's formulated for the 2009 audience, i.e. nothing but the anger, action, violence that's demanded of the (mostly pubescent male) video Horrid film---no true fan of Star Trek would recognize this as being part of the ST legacy. It's formulated for the 2009 audience, i.e. nothing but the anger, action, violence that's demanded of the (mostly pubescent male) video gamer crowd, its intended demographic.… Expand

2 of 6 users found this helpful

9

AaronJul 7, 2009

Ignore the whining, this is one of the best sci-fi space opera films in many, many years. It may get a little silly and formulaic at times but the acting is brilliant, the story is paced wonderfully, and the action is both satisfying and Ignore the whining, this is one of the best sci-fi space opera films in many, many years. It may get a little silly and formulaic at times but the acting is brilliant, the story is paced wonderfully, and the action is both satisfying and never too over the top. This film is to 2009 as Iron Man was to 2008, the must see action flick of the summer.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

SusanY.Jul 3, 2009

I am a long time fan and know the original Star Trek stories by heart. I was skeptical but went in with an open mind. I do not go to the movies but once a year or less and do not have television anymore, but I have seen this movie four times I am a long time fan and know the original Star Trek stories by heart. I was skeptical but went in with an open mind. I do not go to the movies but once a year or less and do not have television anymore, but I have seen this movie four times and will see it once more before it leaves the theaters. I loved it that much! Although there were things that definitely bothered me, especially the first time seeing it, it was well done, consistently fast paced, with a great selection of actors to carry on the tradition, especially Jacob Kogan as the child Spock, and Karl Urban as "Bones (fantastic performance), and Zachary Quinto as Spock (very impressive and a great Spock, except for his nose). Things that did bother me that I wish they had paid more attention to, were Kirk's eyes being blue instead of brown (especially with all the close ups couldn't they have use colored contacts?), the age of Pike at this time should have been younger (even though i liked the actor and his performance), the age of Spock's mother (which at this time of his life should have been a little younger looking, though Winona Rider did an excellent job) and the casting of Chekov (Anton Yelchin) and Scotty (Simon Pegg) were very disappointing. They were too different in character than the originals. Too bad James Doohan isn't still with us to assist. His Scotty was more serious, intelligent about it all and endearing. Uhura was ok, but the original was beautiful but didn't "know" it; the new one (Zoe Saldana) was too aware of her looks, but the scenes with Spock were touching and well done. Sulu was a good cast. Great family film. If there are sequels, I hope they don't go overboard as the producers of Pirates of the Carribean did, but keep it pure, clean, fast action-paced keeping respect for the original intact and as Spock would say "logical".… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

RobertG.Jul 1, 2009

This version got the essence of the TV series, and then some. Frankly, the movie is far superior to the original.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

ChrisC.Jul 1, 2009

Everywhere this movie went, everything it did, was f'ing spot on. It's the most impressive thing someone's done with a major hollywood budget in recent years. The casting was impeccable, the performances well above average. Everywhere this movie went, everything it did, was f'ing spot on. It's the most impressive thing someone's done with a major hollywood budget in recent years. The casting was impeccable, the performances well above average. The humor was masterly executed in the script. The action brings Star Trek to a whole new level of sci-fi, solidly installing it in the sci-fi action category. It was already there, but now it's been placed at the very top. J.J. Abrams has my undivided attention. After MI:3 and this, I'll be first in line for whatever he does.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

LarrySJul 1, 2009

A HUGE disappointment! Poor acting, lousy script and the special effects were surprisingly average. The movie was so predictable and so unbelieveable. The tongue in cheek script is best suited to 13 year olds!!! WAY OVERRATED!!! Critics A HUGE disappointment! Poor acting, lousy script and the special effects were surprisingly average. The movie was so predictable and so unbelieveable. The tongue in cheek script is best suited to 13 year olds!!! WAY OVERRATED!!! Critics should be ashamed. This is a poor movie.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

9

billJun 28, 2009

The best star trek movie since ''the wrath of kahn". Good acting by an almost unknown cast. Great script. And the best special effects I have since "the lord of the rings: the return of the king" Well done J.J Abrams.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

0

HaroldPJun 28, 2009

I think I remember a movie incredibly similar to this done back in 2005. It had the same violence, the same bright special effects, and the same angry group of characters. It was called Doom. Except, I think it was better because there were I think I remember a movie incredibly similar to this done back in 2005. It had the same violence, the same bright special effects, and the same angry group of characters. It was called Doom. Except, I think it was better because there were less lens flares, the action was better paced, and Karl Urban had a bigger roll.… Expand

2 of 5 users found this helpful

9

RickAJun 27, 2009

I thought I might have a hard time reconciling the updated/changed characters in this movie but the story line helped with that and will make o k for additional movies. It is a very vibrant movie with a darn good story line.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

0

AkiRJun 25, 2009

The trailers told the truth, this is NOT your fathers trek, and it's not mine either. This movie is in no way Star Trek, save for the title and the names of the characters, and this appears to be completely coincidental. This movie is The trailers told the truth, this is NOT your fathers trek, and it's not mine either. This movie is in no way Star Trek, save for the title and the names of the characters, and this appears to be completely coincidental. This movie is built on a flimsy and well worn premise that defies logic and tells no story. It sells itself as an origin story and reboot and complete wipe of a franchise that merely needed minor resuscitation. All while still attempting to remain true to forty years of Trek with empty posturing that doesn't even fit with the preposterously inane plot and telling the audience that it's all taking place in an alternate reality. JJ Abrams, and the writers Orci and Kurtzman, clearly wanted to have their cake and eat it too. Trekkies paid for it, and all three are laughing all the way to the bank. I can't stress this enough; the plot exists only to move the action along, there's no story. But, there's plenty of action, however unlike even the atrociously silly Star Trek V, this star trek has clearly had no THOUGHT put into it, and impolitely asks it's audience not to think either. What's worse than this disservice, is the insulting nature of the camera work itself. Lens flares, blurry action, and laser shows that are more Star Wars than Trek. JJ Abrams demonstrates his inability to tell a story even through pictures in every seizure inducing scene. The only positives that come from this movie, is that many non-trekkies may become trek fans if they bother to watch what's come before, and they'll soon realize what garbage this movie was. The only actual positive point in the movie itself, was the guy who played McCoy, who should clearly be in serious movies, and not mindless action romps like this one.… Expand

3 of 6 users found this helpful

10

TopsaoJun 21, 2009

Great movie. Not exactly like the original, but in fact star trek needed a new look to attract the new generations. It's a very entertaining film, very good cast, and you can see some of star trek's common themes (like offering Great movie. Not exactly like the original, but in fact star trek needed a new look to attract the new generations. It's a very entertaining film, very good cast, and you can see some of star trek's common themes (like offering help to defeated enemys...). I look forward for another movie.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

williamc.Jun 20, 2009

In short, the new Star Trek 2009 captured some of the idiosyncratic magic that made up the original cast of 1960s Star Trek. The story was complex enough for a full-length feature but there are faults to be found in its discriminatory humor In short, the new Star Trek 2009 captured some of the idiosyncratic magic that made up the original cast of 1960s Star Trek. The story was complex enough for a full-length feature but there are faults to be found in its discriminatory humor towards difference and also it… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

9

KevinJun 20, 2009

Anyone who thinks this movie sucks is still a 40-year-old virgin. And no not the funny Steve Carell version in the movie.. the one who drives a creeper van and stares at middle school children. If you don't believe me then look at the Anyone who thinks this movie sucks is still a 40-year-old virgin. And no not the funny Steve Carell version in the movie.. the one who drives a creeper van and stares at middle school children. If you don't believe me then look at the major reviews and box office numbers. This Star Trek movie was the only good one and the only one that made a considerable amount of money at the box office. Maybe fans of the original will hate it but it's not like anyone went to see the other Star Trek movies anyways... Batman Begins was to Batman what JJ Abrams Star Trek is to Star Trek... enough said.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

NathanDJun 19, 2009

It was one of the best movies I have seen in awhile, the plot and cast were well thought out and the effects were mind blowing. The reason I didnt give it a ten was because Uhura hooked up with Spock instead of Kirk, I thought that was kind It was one of the best movies I have seen in awhile, the plot and cast were well thought out and the effects were mind blowing. The reason I didnt give it a ten was because Uhura hooked up with Spock instead of Kirk, I thought that was kind of weird.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

JCGJun 19, 2009

Action? Yes, in abundance. Special FX? Obviously, being a movie about outer space and the future. Story? NO, zero story - zilch. I mean dragging out the temporal distortion alternate future time traveling episode filler is nothing new for Action? Yes, in abundance. Special FX? Obviously, being a movie about outer space and the future. Story? NO, zero story - zilch. I mean dragging out the temporal distortion alternate future time traveling episode filler is nothing new for ST, but couldn't they come up with something more original? Lot's of eyecandy but no research into the ST universe at all. And Scotty... what ludicrous ACID-snorting twit came up with the idea to make that guy scotty? sure he's a good actor (to some extent) but he aint and never will be scotty. I mean it's one thing getting used to Syler being (a very emotional) Spock (I swear at times I could hear the ticking timepieces!) And then to end the most profound meeting there could be between the two spocks ends, not with a vulcan Live Long and prosper greeting but, with a goodbye. That's not innovation. It's heresy. All REAL trekkies should band together and go put the director (or as he will from now on be known - T.A.C.) to the torch. Or the phaser or whatever.. Ps. If they insist on adapting Star Trek into an action thrill ride for the Mindless-want-it-now! generation of today... rather call it some else and let ST die a quiet and dignified death.… Expand

5 of 12 users found this helpful

9

MaxHJun 18, 2009

I do not understand the poor reviews of this film. This movie was fun and action-packed. For those who believe that the Star Trek universe has been destroyed by this movie do not understand how intellectually vapid the old concepts were. How I do not understand the poor reviews of this film. This movie was fun and action-packed. For those who believe that the Star Trek universe has been destroyed by this movie do not understand how intellectually vapid the old concepts were. How many permutations of the same morality can a person watch? Don't get me wrong, I love STNG and DS9, but after those two shows successfully fleshed out the universe, the other shows didn't make the grade. I, for one, am grateful that JJ decided to give the timeline a 'tabula rasa' and allow the movies in the future to explore new territory. to respond to those who are complaining about gaps in the plot, you have obviously never watched JJ's TV shows. His style is to intentionally leave gaps in the plot and storyline to get you to engage your brain and postulate what happened of import during that glaring gap. Is it really that much of a stretch to imagine that he would use the same techniques in his movie? I would have given this movie a 10 except for 2 reasons - The space/sky diving. Abrams obviously forgot about the scientific concept called the 'coefficient of friction'. Those guys would have burnt up on re-entry. Second, 'Red Matter'? This has no basis in science or fiction...what is that stuff and why...never mind. I was particularly impressed by the portrayal of Spock - they did their best to incorporate his human genetic propensities much better in this iteration. It could have been done a little more tastefully, but Abrams has a certain style and is prone to cinematic and dramatic hyperbole. As a former geek in high school, I identified with the young Spock. I don't know a single geek that didn't fantasize about getting even. All of the former geeks that I know found that scene to be particularly satisfying.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

0

IanCJun 18, 2009

I could have forgiven, the non-existent plot, the time travel fallacies, the departures from cannon...I could have forgiven almost everything except bad special effects. These rank as some of the worst special effects Trek fans have ever had I could have forgiven, the non-existent plot, the time travel fallacies, the departures from cannon...I could have forgiven almost everything except bad special effects. These rank as some of the worst special effects Trek fans have ever had to endure, maybe its good that the entire movie was shot in ultra close-up so that making out the special effects is nearly impossible...no I'm just kidding that just made it worse.… Expand

3 of 6 users found this helpful

10

matthewKJun 17, 2009

BEST star trek in a long time. This movie has captured young people of today and made them interested in star trek again. I loved it.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

ArielMJun 16, 2009

Perfect casting and great special effects.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

DM.Jun 15, 2009

This Star Trek was better than the last two movies in terms of its pacing and direction. While it is a good movie this vision of Star Trek by JJ Abrams is not my cup of tea. Yes change in the Star Trek universe is possible witness the death This Star Trek was better than the last two movies in terms of its pacing and direction. While it is a good movie this vision of Star Trek by JJ Abrams is not my cup of tea. Yes change in the Star Trek universe is possible witness the death of Admiral Janeway in some recent novels. I think that JJ Abrams could have brought the original crew together w/o totally disregarding the 5 TV series. I had no problem with the actors they did a fine job. There were way too many plot holes and continuity problems. While JJ Abrams seems from interviews to a nice guy it is very obvious that he never was a Star Trek fan. He has totally disregarded the Star Trek universe. He has turned Star Trek into a video game.One of the best aspects of Star Trek was this rich history to work with and build upon. I am sorry but this movie doesn't do anything for me. So many bitched about Rick Berman and Enterprise-this movie is far worse in many ways.Considering that one of the script writers was a fan of Star Trek I have to think did they really watch the show after all?… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

7

CarlJun 15, 2009

Nice action movie. However, not in sync with the original Star Trek. Where's the science? This is Star Trek not Star Wars. Star Trek has always been (for the most part) based on plausible Science. A Scientist Science fiction. For Nice action movie. However, not in sync with the original Star Trek. Where's the science? This is Star Trek not Star Wars. Star Trek has always been (for the most part) based on plausible Science. A Scientist Science fiction. For instance, what is this red matter and how does it create a Black Hole? In the next installment I hope the Science is added back along with some depth. then it would truly be a great movie.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

0

DadBrandWhiskeyJun 13, 2009

A list of things the director was thinking -never go more than 3 minutes without a sequence of explosions. -don't skip the cheese when introducing the main characters. -get leonord nemoy in there as old spoc but also have a young spoc. A list of things the director was thinking -never go more than 3 minutes without a sequence of explosions. -don't skip the cheese when introducing the main characters. -get leonord nemoy in there as old spoc but also have a young spoc. Write the plot around that. -make every other scene an action scene, even if it has nothing to do with the plot. If you can't think of a way to get the bad guys zapping at the good guys, throw some ice monsters in there. -any characters who seem boring should have a funny foreign accent so their scenes can be entertaining -red matter looks and sounds cool -the laws of physics don't matter. Not just quantum physics but third grade you-can't-dive-through-the-atmosphere-or-you'll-burn-up-physics. -americans just want action action action. They don't think and if you throw in some sex appeal and cheap comic relief they will see your movie again and again. This is logical.… Expand

3 of 6 users found this helpful

0

ewwLifesucksJun 13, 2009

What garbage. This is true bull-sh**. It success is unknown. The same people must being going to the theater every week. The female characters in this movie are the most pathetic representation of women I've seen in a movie in a long What garbage. This is true bull-sh**. It success is unknown. The same people must being going to the theater every week. The female characters in this movie are the most pathetic representation of women I've seen in a movie in a long time. The main actor, chris pine, is really horrible and is only existing in movies cuz of his looks, like mark wahlberg. This movie is sewer with poor fans living in it. Its nothing like the original.… Expand

3 of 6 users found this helpful

4

ChiKJun 12, 2009

A mass delusion of greatness on this scale hasn't been since last summer...the Dark Knight. My opinions on last year's public darling aside, at least that film seemed to have a brain and apparent artistic aspirations. Are we so A mass delusion of greatness on this scale hasn't been since last summer...the Dark Knight. My opinions on last year's public darling aside, at least that film seemed to have a brain and apparent artistic aspirations. Are we so starved for anything with a faint pulse that we'll lionize a soulless, empty-headed, pre-fab, committee-approved product like this? Hollywood is dead.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

10

QBJun 12, 2009

I am a Trekkie/Trekker from way back ( I have all of the original cast members autographs.) And I loved this film. It ranks right up there with my favorite Star Trek Films. Either 2nd or 3rd. The clever use of time travel alleviates the I am a Trekkie/Trekker from way back ( I have all of the original cast members autographs.) And I loved this film. It ranks right up there with my favorite Star Trek Films. Either 2nd or 3rd. The clever use of time travel alleviates the issues that could contradict the cannon of the stories we already know. This was my biggest issue with Enterprise. But now the producers have free reign to go Boldly wherever the hell they want. My only issue is that Spock (Brilliantly played by Zachary Quinto) is to free with his emotions. But it is a different time, so I am willing to roll with it.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

7

ScottHJun 12, 2009

An incredibly exciting movie. From a person who knows a fair amount of Star Trek storyline, there was a good amount of references. The movie wasn't filled with references, but just enough to make you chuckle. The younger alternate An incredibly exciting movie. From a person who knows a fair amount of Star Trek storyline, there was a good amount of references. The movie wasn't filled with references, but just enough to make you chuckle. The younger alternate shipmates were done in a way that flatters the older counterparts, but still hold personality differences to be acceptable as an alternate reality. Now that I've mentioned it, this movie involves time travel and the alternate reality that is caused by it. Do not expect this to be a historically correct movie in regards to the known storyline. Now for gripes, of which I only have minor. The camera angles were amazingly showy. Always tilted, shaky, and downright annoying. The camera always caught some glare of light from somewhere, or they added it in editing for some reason. And though they correctly captured space battles in some scenes, I wish they'd done more with it. What I mean is the fact that there is no sound in space. In some scenes, they captured that point, but quickly changed back to normal. I truly wish they could have kept with that for a little longer. Overall, worth the money.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

AlanSJun 8, 2009

I have almost always been a Star Trek fan, but this 2009 is a real disappointment

0 of 2 users found this helpful

3

AaronDJun 7, 2009

Simple put, the film is a mess, the camera work is all over the place, never truly building up a scene. The script is sad, it's like they wanted to make a cheesy Hollywood action film...that would make a whole lot more sense. The music Simple put, the film is a mess, the camera work is all over the place, never truly building up a scene. The script is sad, it's like they wanted to make a cheesy Hollywood action film...that would make a whole lot more sense. The music is constant, it sounds like generic Hollywood score...it gets really annoying. This film is created with a formula that has fooled audiences for a long time, this film receiving acclaim is huge @#$% you to film as art, and a pay check for paramount.… Expand

0 of 3 users found this helpful

10

LukeAJun 4, 2009

Only the second movie that I have ever seen in the theater THREE times! Absolutely outstanding. It hits the ground running and barely gives you a breather in it's 2 hour run. I can't wait for the next one!

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

billC.Jun 3, 2009

Lots of action and for the most part the casting was very good.BUT , Why in this pre-quil are all the equipment /devices on the Enterprise way more complex and advanced? From computers to weapons everything looked very much in the furure not Lots of action and for the most part the casting was very good.BUT , Why in this pre-quil are all the equipment /devices on the Enterprise way more complex and advanced? From computers to weapons everything looked very much in the furure not the past if you consider any past Star Trek episode or movie.And the action seemed to be there not to tell a morality paly , but to pump it up. It's a botched effort. It could have been better.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

ArthurC.Jun 2, 2009

Awesome! There's nothing more I can say about it. The thing that Hollywood has missed a lot of lately is character. But this one knows that that is Star Trek's strengths and J.J. Abrams honors that.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

RichardSJun 1, 2009

Ok someone said... a big dark spiky ship comes out so they start firing at will without checking if the mysterious enemy has shields powered or weapons ready. They just go by "It's big and dark and it just appeared in front of us. We Ok someone said... a big dark spiky ship comes out so they start firing at will without checking if the mysterious enemy has shields powered or weapons ready. They just go by "It's big and dark and it just appeared in front of us. We didn't try hailing it because every ugly thing in space is obviously evil." I don't thik you paid attention at all, the "big dark spiky ship" fired first.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

CoreyMMay 31, 2009

The special effects,and acting, paired with an amazing J.J. Abrams story and a fresh, young, but surprisingly skilled group of actors made this movie one of the best in a long time. Include all the subtle (and not-so-subtle) references to The special effects,and acting, paired with an amazing J.J. Abrams story and a fresh, young, but surprisingly skilled group of actors made this movie one of the best in a long time. Include all the subtle (and not-so-subtle) references to the original series, and this is a can't miss for Trek fans, or anybody else for that matter.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

KendoJMay 30, 2009

Completely excellent. Possibly the best Star Trek movie thus far although I'm can't decide whether or not it actually -is- better than First Contact. Great story, some hilarious dialog, and obscenely awesome sfx. Here's hoping Completely excellent. Possibly the best Star Trek movie thus far although I'm can't decide whether or not it actually -is- better than First Contact. Great story, some hilarious dialog, and obscenely awesome sfx. Here's hoping this gets a direct sequel in the vein of Batman Begins -> Dark Knight.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

sheppyMay 30, 2009

I'm both a long-time Trek fan and serious SciFi (bite me, Harlan) lover, and this movie was a big-time fun for me. Sure, there were some shocking alterations (big understatement) to the continuum, but this movie was both "true Trek" and I'm both a long-time Trek fan and serious SciFi (bite me, Harlan) lover, and this movie was a big-time fun for me. Sure, there were some shocking alterations (big understatement) to the continuum, but this movie was both "true Trek" and yet just as enjoyable for non-fans (my wife, as anti-SciFi as they come, wants to go see it again, and we go to the theaters like twice/year). Anybody calling it 'implausible' must be in the non-Trek crowd, as they have never witnessed "Spock's Brain" or "We've come to find our whale-friends by destroying all in our path" ST IV or Transwarp Paris and his lizard girlfriend or ... well, you get the picture. Implausible and "breaks canon" is rote for Trek and the genre in general. This is about as clean a reboot as you could hope for, giving Trek a fresh start with lots of potential (character's and stories both), and was a pleasure to experience. Thanks J.J.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

JONCMay 28, 2009

Why the hell is this still at over 80 on Meta-fucking_critic.com????? Oh, yeah, because it is THAT fucking good. Pardon my Spanish. Oh, yes, i went, to see it again this past Tuesday, just to make sure I wasn't deluded. Or just Why the hell is this still at over 80 on Meta-fucking_critic.com????? Oh, yeah, because it is THAT fucking good. Pardon my Spanish. Oh, yes, i went, to see it again this past Tuesday, just to make sure I wasn't deluded. Or just movie-starved. And, yeah, it was soooooo good. I rest my case. This is a good movie. For very one. No matter how stupid or smart you are. I love this movie. It's good.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

R.LopezMay 27, 2009

When I walked into this movie I didn't have very high expectation's, now I'm no Trekkie but I use to watch Star Trek:The Next generation and Star trek: Voyager when I was a kid. I never really got into to them very much and When I walked into this movie I didn't have very high expectation's, now I'm no Trekkie but I use to watch Star Trek:The Next generation and Star trek: Voyager when I was a kid. I never really got into to them very much and even watching the original Star Trek I still wasn't much of a fan, but after seeing this movie I definitely am. J.J. Abrams Star Trek is basically taking us all the way back to before the U.S.S. Enterprise set out on it's first fateful voyage, it takes us back to the roots of Kirk, Spock and the rest of the crew. Giving us an in depth look at the origins of one of the most popular T.V. Series of all time. This film does tot he Star Trek series what X-Men Origins: Wolverine did for the X-Men series, it gives us a starting point, something to work from, something for fans to see how these famous character's came to be. And for people who have never seen the series, it gives them something to start with. It gives them a chance to experience a movie that is literally out of this world. Star Trek is a space tripping, mind blowing Sci-Fi adventure that is something all long time Trekkie's and non-fan's alike can enjoy and love. Star Trek will boldly take you where you've never gone before, and show you a world like you've never experienced.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

CaitlinRMay 27, 2009

There's just...no words for this film. Fantastic doesn't cover it. Awesome is too weak. Brilliant barely touches it. So damn good, then, it demands repeated viewing with a Vulcan death-grip.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

mobiusMay 27, 2009

An Excellent opening and Good introductions to the cast, some genuine funny moments and plenty of action. great film with only one issue that I just could not get my head around, WHY? does the engine room of the starship enterprise look like An Excellent opening and Good introductions to the cast, some genuine funny moments and plenty of action. great film with only one issue that I just could not get my head around, WHY? does the engine room of the starship enterprise look like a Brewery Why I ask. for the love of god if you are going to have all other shots of the enterprise look like a Apple Ipod store should the engine room look like a brewery. If someone can give me a decent reason then i will give this film a 10, the whole film had me belive in this universe only to be runied by a dam brewery.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

SeanCMay 27, 2009

When I first heard Star Trek was being remade I thought oh no but I have to say I was so impressed with it especially the reboot of the series, there was some shocking and emotional moments that sometimes lack in Star Trek films and the When I first heard Star Trek was being remade I thought oh no but I have to say I was so impressed with it especially the reboot of the series, there was some shocking and emotional moments that sometimes lack in Star Trek films and the actors did an amazing job with the characters along with the special affects and the pace this has to be the best Sci fi film I have seen since the first Starwars film A New Hope.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

KamrynSMay 26, 2009

awesome! went and saw it twice over the course of the weekend, and wouldnt mind seeing it again!

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

skinnydMay 25, 2009

It was a refreshing twist to what most would call a "prequel", in the sense that it actually twisted the plot into an alternate storyline... which I personally feel was brilliant. Not a trekkie by any means, but after watching this movie... It was a refreshing twist to what most would call a "prequel", in the sense that it actually twisted the plot into an alternate storyline... which I personally feel was brilliant. Not a trekkie by any means, but after watching this movie... I can easily see myself throwing down the cash for another pricey theater ticket to see a follow-up.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

M.AMay 25, 2009

I have to say that I originally thought that this movie wouldn't even remotely interest me. Being a fan of Star Trek TNG and DS9, and not too keen on Abrams stuff i thought we would get a movie, where the characters have the same names, I have to say that I originally thought that this movie wouldn't even remotely interest me. Being a fan of Star Trek TNG and DS9, and not too keen on Abrams stuff i thought we would get a movie, where the characters have the same names, a few things seem similar, but the rest would be just an action sci-fi movie. I wasn't that wrong, but the truth is that it is a very good sci-fi action movie, and the time-travel plot does explain the differences to a point that they don't iritate, but itself id not that overblown (particularly that it was used in the series). I don't think that people who wanted a total revamp will enjoy this as much as I did, and i think that my opinion might be overenthusiastic for hard-core TOS fans, but other than that - a top notch sci-fi action movie.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

annefMay 25, 2009

A highly satisfying "prequel," thanks in large measure to the excellent casting of the young Enterprise crew. And Spock and Uhura? Who knew? :)

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

RangeboyMay 25, 2009

Now, I've always been a Star Wars fan but admired Star Trek for its detailed depiction of wider issues and realism. Consequently I had massive reservations about Lucas' trilogy prequels and JJ Abrams seems to have done the same Now, I've always been a Star Wars fan but admired Star Trek for its detailed depiction of wider issues and realism. Consequently I had massive reservations about Lucas' trilogy prequels and JJ Abrams seems to have done the same here with ST. Taken a 'universe' with its own unique history, characters and 'feel' and tinker with it to update it to fit in with what they think modern viewers like. It DOESN'T WORK!! Product placement, contemporary music (why would a young Kirk kisten to Beatie Boys? oh yeah, h's supposd to be a rebel, thankyou JJ for pointing that out) a bar-room brawl, pathetic coincidences trying to explain character motivations/origins. Cringe inducing boy Spock fighting with other Vulcans, appauling monster chase scene on a clichéd ice-world, no real explanation of Spock and Uhura's relationship and so much more other complete crap! I enjoy a summer blockbuster, i really do, but they have to have at least some substance to get above a 5 or 6 out of 10 surely!!? 5 for the visual and audio effects but beacause are both from the same people who did Star Wars (ILM and Ben Burtt) it seems a bit too Star Wars prequel-ish. Leave your brain at the pocorn stand.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

PhilipPMay 24, 2009

It's not this generation's star wars like one reviewer said, but that said, I can't think of a single bad thing about this movie. It's just plain awesome.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

dcMay 24, 2009

Like being shot out of a cannon! This movie takes us back to the original show and really develops those characters well. The events and pacing are great. The script is awesome; there isn't any junk dialogue and every scene counts.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

NadMay 24, 2009

Hav'nt been to the movie's for a while cos of work commitments, but WOW ! Damn good movie, characters are spot on, effects are great, would definately watch this movie again. PS> definately a cinema experience !

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

EricMMay 23, 2009

One of the best, if not the best movie I have ever seen. The acting is great, and seeing different versions of the same characters is classic. Especially the new Scotty. Bottom line: This movie is fantastic. To old trekkies and to newcomers. See it.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

RobertTMay 22, 2009

Hugely satisfying reboot that is sure to please a lot of people, fans and non-followers alike, and maybe even add new converts to Star Trek's fandom. Manic movie with plot execution that borders on cornball ludicrousness to brash Hugely satisfying reboot that is sure to please a lot of people, fans and non-followers alike, and maybe even add new converts to Star Trek's fandom. Manic movie with plot execution that borders on cornball ludicrousness to brash derring-do, pulsating in a manner never seen before in the beloved franchise's previous instalments. Be sure to set your phasers on suspended disbelief over this one. Special effects are top-rate, and so is the chemistry between all the lead actors, which by the way is one of the assets of the film. Star Trek sows the seed of brotherhood and camaraderie between Kirk and Spock, a human and an alien; a unique friendship that plays a very integral part in Gene Roddenberry's universe. Because of this, and other small factors such as Spock's resolve to be himself despite what other people think, I therefore cannot say that Gene's vision of Star Trek has totally faded away. If the film can live Gene's philosophies rather than ponder on it, then so much the better.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

KarenKMay 22, 2009

My son and I are original trekkies,so was my husband but he has passed away and did not get to have the incredible joy we had watching this movie. I found the characters spot on,what a casting job! I even found myself in tears wishing and My son and I are original trekkies,so was my husband but he has passed away and did not get to have the incredible joy we had watching this movie. I found the characters spot on,what a casting job! I even found myself in tears wishing and wanting more of our beloved Star Trek,and seeing the old Spock and young Spock just did me in. What a movie,what a ride,what a wonderful job they did in in bringing this movie to us.,please let this not be the last one,I couldn't stand it. Live long and prosper.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

JEFFJMay 22, 2009

I JUST SAW IT YESTERDAY AND SPEAKING AS A LONG-TIME STAR TREK FAN: Like most movies made recently, it was a special-effects extravaganza. Also like most movies made today, the plot seems like it was written for a comic book. Star Trek I JUST SAW IT YESTERDAY AND SPEAKING AS A LONG-TIME STAR TREK FAN: Like most movies made recently, it was a special-effects extravaganza. Also like most movies made today, the plot seems like it was written for a comic book. Star Trek purists will be especially disappointed. The actors selected to portray the characters were OK, but the film suffered from an unbelievably moronic story line. I… Expand

3 of 7 users found this helpful

9

AdamCMay 22, 2009

Very well done. if you had a choice between this and Terminator, I'd see this.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

h.bMay 22, 2009

I gave this a 2 - for the 2 reasons that did make some impression. Mr. Leonard Nimoy. You are still the best, sir. And the ending of this awful movie full of contridictions of the original t.v. show. Mr. Nimoy and the ending was the only two I gave this a 2 - for the 2 reasons that did make some impression. Mr. Leonard Nimoy. You are still the best, sir. And the ending of this awful movie full of contridictions of the original t.v. show. Mr. Nimoy and the ending was the only two good things about this wannabe rip off.… Expand

3 of 6 users found this helpful

10

kurtpMay 22, 2009

I couldn't stop gripping my girlfriends hand throughout the whole movie. So much action and not a dull moment. I got a lump in my throat when George Kirk died and it stayed there until the movie finished. If you even slightly like Star I couldn't stop gripping my girlfriends hand throughout the whole movie. So much action and not a dull moment. I got a lump in my throat when George Kirk died and it stayed there until the movie finished. If you even slightly like Star Trek the origional, margionally like all the Trek spinoffs, you will want to see this movie. Wow!!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

JoradTMay 22, 2009

A generally fantastic film all round. The best thing is that you don't have to be a fan of Star Trek to appreciate this movie. The special effects were awsome, the acting was pretty good and there was a great balance between action and A generally fantastic film all round. The best thing is that you don't have to be a fan of Star Trek to appreciate this movie. The special effects were awsome, the acting was pretty good and there was a great balance between action and story. However the best thing about this movie is the fact that it isn't at all CLICHED. So many films recently just try too hard and end up really cliched however here if it there was a funny section in genuinely was quite funny. Even my mum thought this film was excellent. Certainly one of the best films that has come out so far this year!!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

NMacMay 22, 2009

Pretty movie, but weak characters and a weaker plot fail to be covered up by horrible action. Some of the most laughable action I've ever seen. And with all that lense flare it felt like a visit to the optometrist. Would not see again.

0 of 1 users found this helpful

7

ThomasRMay 22, 2009

It was a good flick, but disappointed with spocks relationship with Uhura which was not in the original series.Or Kirks reaction with the kubiaski maru senerio, which could have been made with more passion to acting like he was really It was a good flick, but disappointed with spocks relationship with Uhura which was not in the original series.Or Kirks reaction with the kubiaski maru senerio, which could have been made with more passion to acting like he was really beating it rather than just sitting and eating an apple.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

JohnHMay 22, 2009

Amazing! Great cast. McCoy, Spalk, Kirk, Lahurra, Chekov, Scotty, Sulu, and all of them. Great special affects. The plot was pretty good but was unrealistic at times, but as I have said many times, the great characters made up for it. Amazing! Great cast. McCoy, Spalk, Kirk, Lahurra, Chekov, Scotty, Sulu, and all of them. Great special affects. The plot was pretty good but was unrealistic at times, but as I have said many times, the great characters made up for it. Everyone should see this marvelous outstanding movie. I cannot wait till they make a sequal, which I think they are planning on doing. See this movie!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

bobbobaMay 22, 2009

Lost it half-way through. Kirk is entertaining but the plot turned dry and plodding. I thought Nimoy was a much better actor in his early days but here his turn was amateurish at best. What a waste.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

CarlosRMay 22, 2009

The movie was great fun with outstanding effects and performances. However, I thought the originial score was lackluster and I felt kind of sad that, through the use of time travel, the plot in effect negates the entire Star Trek story that The movie was great fun with outstanding effects and performances. However, I thought the originial score was lackluster and I felt kind of sad that, through the use of time travel, the plot in effect negates the entire Star Trek story that we know and love, including Khan, Tribbles, or Edith Keeler... (The inclusion of the original musical theme, at the end, was poignant.)… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

CzarMay 21, 2009

Wow loved it - start to finish - it was diverse it fleshed out well known characters. It was exciting. It was "realistic" - i.e. engering is a maze of pipes and tunnels rather than sparkly room with a machine that goes "bing". There were Wow loved it - start to finish - it was diverse it fleshed out well known characters. It was exciting. It was "realistic" - i.e. engering is a maze of pipes and tunnels rather than sparkly room with a machine that goes "bing". There were areas populated with a number of personnel whose job was to monitor incoming data rather than have one person do everything. Spock was super. Loved the movie - want more.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

lukehMay 21, 2009

Expecting an overly-attractive cast coupled with smug banter I was happily surprised by the portrayals of the main crew - flawed enough to like. Where the films and shows usually deal with space galleons engaged in monotonous tactical Expecting an overly-attractive cast coupled with smug banter I was happily surprised by the portrayals of the main crew - flawed enough to like. Where the films and shows usually deal with space galleons engaged in monotonous tactical decisions - this Trek creates a pace and an intensity that is really admirable. The plot doesn't really matter (REVENGE!) but the execution of the events of the film are bordering on masterful. A beautiful film. She might not write the great american novel but she is beautiful.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

andrzejrMay 21, 2009

I left disappointed. I'm by no means a Trekkie, but I am a lover of sci-fi, and I am an engineer. The delivery of the young Kirk felt a bit overzealous in its attempt at "I'm so bad I'm the Fonz". The rest of the crew felt I left disappointed. I'm by no means a Trekkie, but I am a lover of sci-fi, and I am an engineer. The delivery of the young Kirk felt a bit overzealous in its attempt at "I'm so bad I'm the Fonz". The rest of the crew felt 'right' however, at least in comparison to all the previous flicks. Overall, the movie felt a little too 'clean', but then again that is part of the Star Trek lore I suppose, so I can't blame them for at least maintaining that, even though i wish they hadn't. Definitely NOT buying a blu-ray of this one.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

DaveSMay 20, 2009

Sadly, I left this movie that was more frenetic than anything else. The plot was dense yet didn't make much sense, was sort of pointless. The production values/effects were amazing, though, but I hated the guys they cast as Scotty and Sadly, I left this movie that was more frenetic than anything else. The plot was dense yet didn't make much sense, was sort of pointless. The production values/effects were amazing, though, but I hated the guys they cast as Scotty and Chekov. A weird experience that left me a little disappointed.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

JoshGMay 20, 2009

Epically entertaining and just plain awesome. I am not a fan of the series, but I loved this movie. I laughed out loud even though I probably don't have the full context of a lot of the jokes, I nearly jumped out of my seat in suspense Epically entertaining and just plain awesome. I am not a fan of the series, but I loved this movie. I laughed out loud even though I probably don't have the full context of a lot of the jokes, I nearly jumped out of my seat in suspense at points, and when it was over I wanted to watch it again, immediately.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

JRMay 20, 2009

This is one great film. I haven't felt such Excitement during a film since Aliens & Terminator 2. Yes, to me it was that good! See it on the Big Screen!

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

DennisRMay 20, 2009

Poor excuse for a Star Trek movie, ok as a generic action/adventure flick, should be regulated to a b movie status.

0 of 1 users found this helpful

9

DanaMMay 19, 2009

Excellent entertainment and worth every penny of my ten bucks to see it. I don't normally re-see a movie but this one is a sure thing.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

HowardWMay 19, 2009

If you like a mindless story line, lots of meaningless explosions and summer stock acting, I urge you to see this thorough waste of two hours. If you are over twelve, ignore my advice and stay home.

3 of 6 users found this helpful

8

DaveHMay 19, 2009

The musical score was tiresome, and the plot holes large enough to fit a starship through, but Star Trek kept the audience engaged and entertained, even with the product placement (which was nowhere as nauseating as the advertising in The musical score was tiresome, and the plot holes large enough to fit a starship through, but Star Trek kept the audience engaged and entertained, even with the product placement (which was nowhere as nauseating as the advertising in Transformers). Worth a watch!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

7

A.NonymousMay 19, 2009

Dumb, cliche-ridden sci-fi blockbuster, which bears as much relation to the franchise as it does to any other space film.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

LayneDMay 18, 2009

It seems the consensus is that you won't like this film if you are a Star Trek fan. That may be true - I'm not a fan at all, and I really enjoyed the movie!

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

CindyDMay 18, 2009

Loved the original Star Trek, didn't really want to see this "remake", but my boyfriend talked me into it. I have to admit, it was really good, very impressive, J.J. Abrams did a great job of blending the old with the new.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

7

WalkerSMay 18, 2009

The film looks and sounds terrific, with sumptuous shots, great sound effects and visuals, and a compellingly winning ensemble of actors that, more often than not, hit the mark as ringers (in a good way) for the original cast. Too bad I had The film looks and sounds terrific, with sumptuous shots, great sound effects and visuals, and a compellingly winning ensemble of actors that, more often than not, hit the mark as ringers (in a good way) for the original cast. Too bad I had to turn off my brain for so much of it - silly pseudo-science ("Red Matter"? PLEASE!) and character backgrounds that stretch credibility (especially how Kirk enlisted in Starfleet) cheapens the grandeur of the film. I think I speak for many fans of the original series when I say that the groundwork has been laid for a potentially fantastic next Trek. Alas, in the pantheon of Star Trek movies, outside of the sheer spectacle of it all and the acting, this one lands squarely in the middle of the pack.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

TomHMay 18, 2009

Amazing movie, I have never seen a Star Trek film and only limited episodes. But after hearing all the great things about this movie and the amazing cast.... (Simon Peg as Scotty, John Cho as Sulu.) I had to see it. Was not disapointed at Amazing movie, I have never seen a Star Trek film and only limited episodes. But after hearing all the great things about this movie and the amazing cast.... (Simon Peg as Scotty, John Cho as Sulu.) I had to see it. Was not disapointed at all I am going to watch the other movies now and see if I might actually be a Star Trek fan!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

EricEMay 18, 2009

Went into the movie expecting it to be terrible and way off canon. But was pleasantly surprised by how good the movie was and how they appeased us hardcore fans. Can't wait for more.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

7

ceejMay 18, 2009

This movie was a pretty good space opera considering there were zero instances of realism. But it was more interesting than the last 3 Star Wars films by far. It wasn't as good as any season of The Wire, but nobody expects it to be that This movie was a pretty good space opera considering there were zero instances of realism. But it was more interesting than the last 3 Star Wars films by far. It wasn't as good as any season of The Wire, but nobody expects it to be that good. Buy some popcorn and enjoy the drama. Also, am I the only one that saw the introduction of Bones and was completely fooled into thinking that Jack Nicholson's disembodied ghost took over his body?… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

StanCMay 18, 2009

Engaging from start to finish. The time flew at warp speed. Great plot; interesting revelations. At times surprisingly emotional.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

0

JoeMMay 18, 2009

I approached this film with modest expectations. It did not need to be great to satisfy me, and indeed I was pleasantly entertained by Wolverine, with which the new Star Trek has been compared. But where Wolverine succeeds (satisfactorily, I approached this film with modest expectations. It did not need to be great to satisfy me, and indeed I was pleasantly entertained by Wolverine, with which the new Star Trek has been compared. But where Wolverine succeeds (satisfactorily, if not brilliantly) in filling in the back-story of its universe, Star Trek simply shirks the matter altogether. Rather than trouble themselves by displaying actual creativity, the writers immediately escape into an "alternate timeline", then flagrantly usurp aspects of several previous sci-fi movies (including Trek and Star Wars), before finally pasting them together with something called "Red Matter" -- a mysterious substance which seemingly consists of the gray matter extracted from this film's inexplicably enthusiastic audience. There are countless instances where the script contradicts itself. Perhaps more than any film I've seen in the last 20 years. A handful that would have otherwise been noticed by toddlers are patched by some haphazardly added sections of dialog, uttered by a cast perpetually drunk on Red Bull (which curiously, unlike other products, did not enjoy a shameless promo inside the film). Little, if anything, of this film's plot is ever reasonably explained: not the magical "Red Matter" that behaves one way at one moment, and another entirely just 20 minutes later; not what the villain and his crew have done for the two and a half decades during which the writers do not need them; and certainly not the reasons why a group of untested rookies with particularly juvenile behavioral tendencies immediately lands seniority on what we're told is one of the most advanced vessels ever made. Gimme a frigging break! Rather than address the film's issues, the producers simply distract viewers with frenetic pacing, applied to a disorienting cacophony of shaky cameras, gratuitous fight scenes, and explosions. These shallow gimmicks failed to hypnotize me. This is a film to make "Aladdin" feel deep and "Terminator" dull. It seems that thought, experience, hard work, and personal sacrifice mean nothing in a new Star Trek universe masterfully crafted for today's audience. Roddenberry's constant undertones regarding duty, morality, and a vision for a better future are jettisoned faster than the warp core of a doomed Enterprise. The result is simply an insult to our intelligence. SUMMARY: Nothing more than Cloverfield in space -- with an identical monster and a lot more explosions. J.J. Abrams urinates on Gene Roddenberry's grave and thanks him for the opportunity, to roaring applause.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful

9

JeremyWMay 17, 2009

Full of action and an attractive cast! Just the right amount of humor and a love story that can turn almost no one away! See it for yourself! Don't listen to the nay-sayers. Do yourself a favor and make your own call! I'm pretty Full of action and an attractive cast! Just the right amount of humor and a love story that can turn almost no one away! See it for yourself! Don't listen to the nay-sayers. Do yourself a favor and make your own call! I'm pretty sure you won't be as disappointed as some on here are saying!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

NDCMay 17, 2009

I walked in, really not knowing what to expect... I did not know the actors, except Karl Urban, who played Cupid on Xena. Did not know much about the JJ, never watched Lost. And I did not even look into the script writers.... all that I walked in, really not knowing what to expect... I did not know the actors, except Karl Urban, who played Cupid on Xena. Did not know much about the JJ, never watched Lost. And I did not even look into the script writers.... all that mattered was that it is 11th Star Trek movie and I would watch and buy it for my collection. [I am a NG person.] I was shocked. I enjoyed this movie immensely and I plan on seeing it again. They could have really messed this movie up, with all the expectations of what it represents and it does not happen. I enjoy the idea of a time/alternate reality scenario, the idea that there is a chance with bright future in a bright world [light], and the fact that someone understands that there is no sound in space. But what truly what brought this movie together was the cast. They knew how to play off each other [an aspect my mother said was reminiscent of the TV series] and they knew how to be subtle to convey their emotions. They were real people.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

DanielJMay 16, 2009

I have never seen Star Trek before and still loved it. Solid action movie.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

MeaganYMay 16, 2009

Star Trek was a very enjoyable film. The acting was terrific. Zachary Quinto was especially good as playing Spock. He was emotional, but audiences understood WHY he was emotional and could sympathize with him. Every single performance was Star Trek was a very enjoyable film. The acting was terrific. Zachary Quinto was especially good as playing Spock. He was emotional, but audiences understood WHY he was emotional and could sympathize with him. Every single performance was good. This put the Star Wars prequels to shame. My only complaints were that the lens flares were too bright and the action scenes were a little shaky, but it was a fun film that left me leaving the theater with a smile on my face.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

Star Trek

User Reviews