(CHRISPINE.ORG) - Why just name it Star Trek? I think Paramount Pictures can learn from Starbucks and call any of the TV shows "Star Trek Tall" then "Star Trek Grande" for anything shown in theaters and finally "Star Trek Venti" for IMAX. We were due for a reboot after Star Trek Nemesis (2002) earned a paltry grand total of $43 million at the box office. Clearly, Paramount had diluted the "Star Trek" mark and put into question any fan's willingness to compromise their couch, television and comfort of their parent's basement.
Though I'm no purist, not even a closet Trekkie that runs off to secret conventions, I found the film touching. Emotions run universal and Star Trek just reaches into your human fiber and gets you choked up at times.
The film is also a visual spectacle shot with great vision and invites the viewer into the grandiose point of view of the characters themselves. The film invests in good screen play and character development of the main core of characters - or those that appear on the Burger King promotional glasses (Kirk, Spock, Nero and Uhura). Outshining these individuals are Bones and Scotty that really light up the screen attributed to great casting by J.J. Abrams.
Would I see it again? I already have in both film and digitally rendered IMAX - with neither format detracting from the enjoyment of the film. My audience actually clapped at the end which is something I haven't heard in ages. And no, it wasn't cheering by 45 year olds dressed in Klingon uniforms. I'll give it 4 out of 5 stars - with 5 stars reserved only for Best Picture of the Year type nominations. I do fully expect this film to gain Oscar considerations for visual effects and musical score.
| Comments |
|
