Saturday, August 15, 2009
Success!
Was finally able to watch Sleepers, but am feeling a little woozy (not because of the film), so I will put it up tomorrow.
Friday, August 14, 2009
It has happened
I was afraid this would happen at some point. I don't like some of the movies I have to watch. Though the vast majority of the movies were bought by and for me, there are a few that were not. Sleepers is one of them. I feel about Sleepers the same way I do about From Hell: well made, but not something I ever want to see again. I have been avoiding it for a day and a half. After writing this, I think I'll be able to put it in the DVD player. We'll see.
Deep Impact
Deep Impact
Robert Duvall
Téa Leoni
Elijah Wood
Morgan Freeman
Vanessa Redgrave
James Cromwell
Maximilian Schell
I remember that after seeing this in theaters back in 1998 I walked out liking it. Today is the first time I’ve watched it since, and while I don’t think it’s the good movie that I remembered it being, I know why I walked out feeling that way. Deep Impact is an odd little movie. It is an end of the world disaster film, but besides a few scenes with some mostly bad special effects, and Elijah Wood trying to hunt down the girl he loves, there’s really no action at all. The scientific explanations for the disaster and attempts at rescue are laughable. The plot itself is simple to the extreme, and not a single character is written with any depth. Indeed, there are so many characters, so many story threads, that the films ends up being little more than a collage of scenes. The weird thing is, it works. Not on any level of greatness. Not as a popcorn movie. Not even as a good movie. But on an emotional level, this film is moving.
Disaster films have always been popular. The idea that something so dangerous and so overwhelming happens that endangers thousands or millions, or in this film billions, of peoples’ lives is pretty intense. Throw in some cool action scenes and some great special effects, and voila, you’ve got the perfect popcorn film. But the one thing these movies make sure not do is give the audience too much time to think. Deep Impact offers time to think in spades.
I could go through and describe to you the details of the plot, tell you about all the different characters, but there’s really no point. The story is generic, and the characters are paper thin, largely due to the monstrous size of the cast. In fact, two seconds after the film was over I realized I couldn’t remember the name of a single character. None of that matters. This movie goes out of its way to force an American audience to honestly think about what they would do if a comet was coming towards earth, and the President of the United States tells you that only 1 million Americans can be saved.
Unlike Armageddon, which is about the people that save the world, this film is more interested in the people left back on Earth, waiting for the heroes to finish the job. It is much easier to identify with these people. Though we all would love to be the hero, the fact is I don’t know anyone that would qualify as capable to fly a ship to a comet, land on it, sink some nukes into it, and fly back out again. I barely felt a connection to the heroes at all, other than an affection for Robert Duvall. But the people left behind, waiting to hear their fates? I could relate to those people.
It takes a little over an hour to get there, but once it looks like the astronauts have failed, the president starts talking about making sure humans live on. This is when I started to become emotionally invested in the outcome. Without letting the people know, the government had spent months quietly building a shelter, the Ark, that is capable of keeping one million Americans alive. 200,000 scientists, doctors, artists, etc. have already been handpicked, but the other 800,000 will be picked at random by using the handy dandy Social Security Number. Oh, and if you’re over 50, you won’t get picked at all unless you’re part of the 200,000 professionals and experts.
The film sets very strict parameters, too. None of those “If I knew I was going to die I’d go out with a bang” ideas are permitted. The president declares marshal law, freezes all wages, and prices. The military runs the show, and those that step out of line will be met with a violent response. At one point, a character is watching television and sees a man lying down in the dirt, killed by a US soldier because he had raised his prices to make a profit and tried to complain at the violent way in which he was forced to end it. So, what do you do? You still have to survive. The comet isn’t coming for a while yet. You need money to eat, and as the president says, “you will pay your bills.”
And this is where the film excels. Every character in the movie starts finding out whether they are going to live or die. In each scene, I found myself thinking about how I would handle the different outcomes. What if I was too old? What if my neighbor was going to survive but not me? What if I was going to survive but not my neighbor? What if I was supposed to survive but there was a mistake on the list, and I was prevented from getting on the Ark. How would I live the remaining days of my life if I knew the world as I know it was coming to an end? What about the people that have to make the decisions about which scientists, doctors, artists and other necessary professionals get to live? Would I be able to live with myself after doing something like that? And what if I happened to be in the army? What would it do to me having to treat my fellow citizens the way the soldiers are forced to do in the film?
It is possible to ponder this because there are so many scenes where it looks like the characters are quietly struggling with these same questions. And it doesn't hurt that this film features two of the greatest actors of our time. Morgan Freeman does an outstanding job playing the president. Though he is not technically the main character, much of the movie rests on his shoulders. He is able to show a man who has been saddled with the greatest burden a leader can ever shoulder. He handles it not just with compassion, but with a sense of calm backed with steel that made me believe that he could keep a country from an all out panic. Vanessa Redgrave is barely given anything to do at all, yet I found her profoundly moving. There were entire scenes where all she did was sit and watch what was happening on television – her daughter, played by Téa Leoni, was the anchor of the news show that apparently everyone watched. Watching how she wordlessly reacted to hearing the president say that because of her age she wouldn’t even have the hope of being saved was one of the most powerful moments of the movie for me. Redgrave is a real treasure. The question that permeates the last half of the film is, “Would I be able to face knowing when I was going to die with dignity, or would I fall to pieces?” I am still trying to answer that, but a large part of me hopes that I would be able to deal with it as gracefully as Freeman and Redgrave.
The moment when I knew this film was different came during the death of two characters. Téa Leoni is standing on a beach in the arms of her estranged father, played by Maximilian Schell, watching a gigantic wave coming towards them. In most disaster flicks, I would be thinking about how awesome that wave looked. In this film, all I could think about was how scared I would be, and how much it would mean to me to be there facing the end with my own estranged father.
Oh, and there was one more question that kept going through my mind: “How on earth did Tea Leoni get so lucky as to have parents played by Vanessa Redgrave and Maximilian Schell!”
Robert Duvall
Téa Leoni
Elijah Wood
Morgan Freeman
Vanessa Redgrave
James Cromwell
Maximilian Schell
I remember that after seeing this in theaters back in 1998 I walked out liking it. Today is the first time I’ve watched it since, and while I don’t think it’s the good movie that I remembered it being, I know why I walked out feeling that way. Deep Impact is an odd little movie. It is an end of the world disaster film, but besides a few scenes with some mostly bad special effects, and Elijah Wood trying to hunt down the girl he loves, there’s really no action at all. The scientific explanations for the disaster and attempts at rescue are laughable. The plot itself is simple to the extreme, and not a single character is written with any depth. Indeed, there are so many characters, so many story threads, that the films ends up being little more than a collage of scenes. The weird thing is, it works. Not on any level of greatness. Not as a popcorn movie. Not even as a good movie. But on an emotional level, this film is moving.
Disaster films have always been popular. The idea that something so dangerous and so overwhelming happens that endangers thousands or millions, or in this film billions, of peoples’ lives is pretty intense. Throw in some cool action scenes and some great special effects, and voila, you’ve got the perfect popcorn film. But the one thing these movies make sure not do is give the audience too much time to think. Deep Impact offers time to think in spades.
I could go through and describe to you the details of the plot, tell you about all the different characters, but there’s really no point. The story is generic, and the characters are paper thin, largely due to the monstrous size of the cast. In fact, two seconds after the film was over I realized I couldn’t remember the name of a single character. None of that matters. This movie goes out of its way to force an American audience to honestly think about what they would do if a comet was coming towards earth, and the President of the United States tells you that only 1 million Americans can be saved.
Unlike Armageddon, which is about the people that save the world, this film is more interested in the people left back on Earth, waiting for the heroes to finish the job. It is much easier to identify with these people. Though we all would love to be the hero, the fact is I don’t know anyone that would qualify as capable to fly a ship to a comet, land on it, sink some nukes into it, and fly back out again. I barely felt a connection to the heroes at all, other than an affection for Robert Duvall. But the people left behind, waiting to hear their fates? I could relate to those people.
It takes a little over an hour to get there, but once it looks like the astronauts have failed, the president starts talking about making sure humans live on. This is when I started to become emotionally invested in the outcome. Without letting the people know, the government had spent months quietly building a shelter, the Ark, that is capable of keeping one million Americans alive. 200,000 scientists, doctors, artists, etc. have already been handpicked, but the other 800,000 will be picked at random by using the handy dandy Social Security Number. Oh, and if you’re over 50, you won’t get picked at all unless you’re part of the 200,000 professionals and experts.
The film sets very strict parameters, too. None of those “If I knew I was going to die I’d go out with a bang” ideas are permitted. The president declares marshal law, freezes all wages, and prices. The military runs the show, and those that step out of line will be met with a violent response. At one point, a character is watching television and sees a man lying down in the dirt, killed by a US soldier because he had raised his prices to make a profit and tried to complain at the violent way in which he was forced to end it. So, what do you do? You still have to survive. The comet isn’t coming for a while yet. You need money to eat, and as the president says, “you will pay your bills.”
And this is where the film excels. Every character in the movie starts finding out whether they are going to live or die. In each scene, I found myself thinking about how I would handle the different outcomes. What if I was too old? What if my neighbor was going to survive but not me? What if I was going to survive but not my neighbor? What if I was supposed to survive but there was a mistake on the list, and I was prevented from getting on the Ark. How would I live the remaining days of my life if I knew the world as I know it was coming to an end? What about the people that have to make the decisions about which scientists, doctors, artists and other necessary professionals get to live? Would I be able to live with myself after doing something like that? And what if I happened to be in the army? What would it do to me having to treat my fellow citizens the way the soldiers are forced to do in the film?
It is possible to ponder this because there are so many scenes where it looks like the characters are quietly struggling with these same questions. And it doesn't hurt that this film features two of the greatest actors of our time. Morgan Freeman does an outstanding job playing the president. Though he is not technically the main character, much of the movie rests on his shoulders. He is able to show a man who has been saddled with the greatest burden a leader can ever shoulder. He handles it not just with compassion, but with a sense of calm backed with steel that made me believe that he could keep a country from an all out panic. Vanessa Redgrave is barely given anything to do at all, yet I found her profoundly moving. There were entire scenes where all she did was sit and watch what was happening on television – her daughter, played by Téa Leoni, was the anchor of the news show that apparently everyone watched. Watching how she wordlessly reacted to hearing the president say that because of her age she wouldn’t even have the hope of being saved was one of the most powerful moments of the movie for me. Redgrave is a real treasure. The question that permeates the last half of the film is, “Would I be able to face knowing when I was going to die with dignity, or would I fall to pieces?” I am still trying to answer that, but a large part of me hopes that I would be able to deal with it as gracefully as Freeman and Redgrave.
The moment when I knew this film was different came during the death of two characters. Téa Leoni is standing on a beach in the arms of her estranged father, played by Maximilian Schell, watching a gigantic wave coming towards them. In most disaster flicks, I would be thinking about how awesome that wave looked. In this film, all I could think about was how scared I would be, and how much it would mean to me to be there facing the end with my own estranged father.
Oh, and there was one more question that kept going through my mind: “How on earth did Tea Leoni get so lucky as to have parents played by Vanessa Redgrave and Maximilian Schell!”
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom
I have been struggling with a cold for the past few days, which has been slowing me down quite a bit. This resulted in me taking a little longer to polish this and post it than I thought it would.
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom
Harrison Ford - Is an introduction really necessary?
Kate Capshaw - Willie
Another movie that isn’t that serious, so I figured I would just go with the notes I made again, and give a short summary at the end.
Notes:
Oh. My. God. How on Earth could I have forgotten that it starts off with Kate Capshaw singing “Anything Goes” in Cantonese? Spielberg and Lucas seem to have a hidden passion for 1930s musicals. Of course, that wasn’t all Spielberg had a passion for.
Harrison Ford gets a great entrance. And in a white suit no less. It makes his eyes look the bluest I’ve ever seen them. Since his eyes are actually hazel, they normally look brown, so this surprised me. I was instantly reminded why he was the first man I ever had a crush on.
The prologue serves an interesting purpose: it shows that Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull’s first thirty minutes of ridiculousness was not a fluke. While the first fifteen minutes are not as over the top in slapstick humor as the last film, it has its moments. I was depressed to realize that this is proof positive that if Harrison Ford had shown an interest in doing anything but standing in front of the camera to collect a paycheck in the last film, it may have been all right.
Noticed for the first time that the sign outside the club says “Club Obi Wan.”
I am hard-pressed to decide which is more ridiculous: Indiana Jones surviving a nuclear bomb by hiding in a fridge, or Indiana Jones and tagalongs surviving the fall from a plane in a life raft. Could go either way.
The Vietnamese kid played a fairly amusing character in Goonies the year after this was released, which makes sense since it was a kids’ movie. It is surprising that he’s pretty amusing in this one, too. That’s very rare for a child actor. The only real misstep was when he tried to cry, but it only lasts for a few seconds, so it was endurable.
I am very conflicted about Kate Capshaw in this film. On the one hand, she plays one of the dumbest, shrillest, annoying, and offensive female characters to come out of Hollywood in the last 25 years. On the other hand, it was clear from the very first scene of the film that she was deliberately modeled after the dumb blondes that were very popular in films back in the 1920s and 30s. It’s not her fault. And there are a (very) few scenes where Capshaw moves away from that and shows that she probably would have been better used as a more serious character. She wasn’t that bad of an actress. Her response to being told to hold on in the cool bridge scene at the end is one of the funniest moments in the film. Plus I love her in Space Camp (that's right, I said it), so it's hard for me to criticize her too much.
Hollywood seems to have been interested in India in the 1980s. James Bond spent some time there in Octopussy the year before.
The chilled monkey brains still makes me smile. Ick.
The relationship between Indy and Willie is just not believable. I cringed during all their intimate scenes. Ford and Capshaw have little to no chemistry, and considering the fact that Indiana Jones showed nothing but annoyance with her for the first 40 minutes, his sudden interest makes no sense. Well, it coinciding with her arriving at dinner dressed in beautiful Indian clothing may have played some part. I don’t think my dislike of their relationship was completely the fault of the actors, though. Kate Capshaw was given the unpleasant task of trying to follow up Karen Allen’s Marion, who was feisty, independent and self-reliant woman. And it didn't hurt that Ford and Allen had chemistry. I believe Marion to be one of the greatest love interests of all time. Willie is the exact opposite of all that she represented, and it just doesn’t seem to be a good match for Dr. Jones.
I have always found this film to be a bit underwhelming. I think the the two screenwriters must take much of the blame for this. This opinion was strengthened when I looked up their credits on imdb. Though they did write American Graffiti, they also wrote Howard the Duck. I will admit to having an affection for that film (What? So I like bad 80s films. Sue me). But there is a reason it is universally acknowledged as a bad film.
The scene where Willie has to stick her hand through a hole with insects crawling all over the place is still one of the creepiest moments of all time. As much I love Harrison Ford, I would think twice about sticking my hand through that as well.
Oh, that’s right. I remember now why Spielberg was responsible for the PG-13 rating. The sacrifice scene. Wohoo!
The mine shaft scene is one of the coolest action scenes ever, and quite obviously inspired the designers of a few video games.
*checks imdb*Ha! I knew that guy was Dan Akroyd. It’s the first time I ever noticed. He never gets a close-up, and you only ever see his profile, but he was still recognizable.
I never paid to Indiana Jones' motivations in this film, until now. Though I have known for a long time that this film is a prequel to Raiders of the Lost Ark, I never thought that the film conveyed this to the audience. I admit, it never seemed important enough for me to even look for any evidence because one doesn't need to in order to enjoy the film. This time, the clues seemed fairly obvious. Most noticeably, Jones shows no interest in collecting items for museums. He hunts artifacts for profit. There is even a nod to this at the end when Willie and Ford discuss putting the relic they have in a museum. Considering how unsubtle all the Indiana Jones movies are, it surprises me that this aspect of his character doesn't stand out that much.
The worst I can say about this movie is that there were several boring parts, especially once Indy and the other two are captured. I mean, Indy was getting tortured, and I couldn't bring myself to care. The best that I can say is that it is far better than The Kingdom of the Skull. It was fun, and the acting was good. Harrison Ford still looked incredibly hot, and was still interested in the character. The action scenes were great, despite the silly one with the life raft. Overall, I think my reaction to this movie can best be summed up with this: I can’t wait to watch The Last Crusade.
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom
Harrison Ford - Is an introduction really necessary?
Kate Capshaw - Willie
Another movie that isn’t that serious, so I figured I would just go with the notes I made again, and give a short summary at the end.
Notes:
Oh. My. God. How on Earth could I have forgotten that it starts off with Kate Capshaw singing “Anything Goes” in Cantonese? Spielberg and Lucas seem to have a hidden passion for 1930s musicals. Of course, that wasn’t all Spielberg had a passion for.
Harrison Ford gets a great entrance. And in a white suit no less. It makes his eyes look the bluest I’ve ever seen them. Since his eyes are actually hazel, they normally look brown, so this surprised me. I was instantly reminded why he was the first man I ever had a crush on.
The prologue serves an interesting purpose: it shows that Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull’s first thirty minutes of ridiculousness was not a fluke. While the first fifteen minutes are not as over the top in slapstick humor as the last film, it has its moments. I was depressed to realize that this is proof positive that if Harrison Ford had shown an interest in doing anything but standing in front of the camera to collect a paycheck in the last film, it may have been all right.
Noticed for the first time that the sign outside the club says “Club Obi Wan.”
I am hard-pressed to decide which is more ridiculous: Indiana Jones surviving a nuclear bomb by hiding in a fridge, or Indiana Jones and tagalongs surviving the fall from a plane in a life raft. Could go either way.
The Vietnamese kid played a fairly amusing character in Goonies the year after this was released, which makes sense since it was a kids’ movie. It is surprising that he’s pretty amusing in this one, too. That’s very rare for a child actor. The only real misstep was when he tried to cry, but it only lasts for a few seconds, so it was endurable.
I am very conflicted about Kate Capshaw in this film. On the one hand, she plays one of the dumbest, shrillest, annoying, and offensive female characters to come out of Hollywood in the last 25 years. On the other hand, it was clear from the very first scene of the film that she was deliberately modeled after the dumb blondes that were very popular in films back in the 1920s and 30s. It’s not her fault. And there are a (very) few scenes where Capshaw moves away from that and shows that she probably would have been better used as a more serious character. She wasn’t that bad of an actress. Her response to being told to hold on in the cool bridge scene at the end is one of the funniest moments in the film. Plus I love her in Space Camp (that's right, I said it), so it's hard for me to criticize her too much.
Hollywood seems to have been interested in India in the 1980s. James Bond spent some time there in Octopussy the year before.
The chilled monkey brains still makes me smile. Ick.
The relationship between Indy and Willie is just not believable. I cringed during all their intimate scenes. Ford and Capshaw have little to no chemistry, and considering the fact that Indiana Jones showed nothing but annoyance with her for the first 40 minutes, his sudden interest makes no sense. Well, it coinciding with her arriving at dinner dressed in beautiful Indian clothing may have played some part. I don’t think my dislike of their relationship was completely the fault of the actors, though. Kate Capshaw was given the unpleasant task of trying to follow up Karen Allen’s Marion, who was feisty, independent and self-reliant woman. And it didn't hurt that Ford and Allen had chemistry. I believe Marion to be one of the greatest love interests of all time. Willie is the exact opposite of all that she represented, and it just doesn’t seem to be a good match for Dr. Jones.
I have always found this film to be a bit underwhelming. I think the the two screenwriters must take much of the blame for this. This opinion was strengthened when I looked up their credits on imdb. Though they did write American Graffiti, they also wrote Howard the Duck. I will admit to having an affection for that film (What? So I like bad 80s films. Sue me). But there is a reason it is universally acknowledged as a bad film.
The scene where Willie has to stick her hand through a hole with insects crawling all over the place is still one of the creepiest moments of all time. As much I love Harrison Ford, I would think twice about sticking my hand through that as well.
Oh, that’s right. I remember now why Spielberg was responsible for the PG-13 rating. The sacrifice scene. Wohoo!
The mine shaft scene is one of the coolest action scenes ever, and quite obviously inspired the designers of a few video games.
*checks imdb*Ha! I knew that guy was Dan Akroyd. It’s the first time I ever noticed. He never gets a close-up, and you only ever see his profile, but he was still recognizable.
I never paid to Indiana Jones' motivations in this film, until now. Though I have known for a long time that this film is a prequel to Raiders of the Lost Ark, I never thought that the film conveyed this to the audience. I admit, it never seemed important enough for me to even look for any evidence because one doesn't need to in order to enjoy the film. This time, the clues seemed fairly obvious. Most noticeably, Jones shows no interest in collecting items for museums. He hunts artifacts for profit. There is even a nod to this at the end when Willie and Ford discuss putting the relic they have in a museum. Considering how unsubtle all the Indiana Jones movies are, it surprises me that this aspect of his character doesn't stand out that much.
The worst I can say about this movie is that there were several boring parts, especially once Indy and the other two are captured. I mean, Indy was getting tortured, and I couldn't bring myself to care. The best that I can say is that it is far better than The Kingdom of the Skull. It was fun, and the acting was good. Harrison Ford still looked incredibly hot, and was still interested in the character. The action scenes were great, despite the silly one with the life raft. Overall, I think my reaction to this movie can best be summed up with this: I can’t wait to watch The Last Crusade.
Tonight will be a twofer
I have watched Temple of Doom, but after spending a day and a half writing that ridiculously long Generations review, I need to clear my head. And watch last night's Cubs game. Plus I need some serious sleep. I'll have the Indy review up by 9 tonight, and Deep Impact some time around midnight.
Generations (very, very long review)
Star Trek: Generations (long review)
Captain Picard: Patrick Stewart
Lt. Commander Data: Brent Spiner
Captain Kirk: William Shatner
Soran: Malcolm McDowell
I need to preface this review by stating that I am a huge Star Trek fan. I grew up on the original and Next Generation series, and love Deep Space Nine. By the time I was 7 or 8 I had every single episode of the original series memorized. I have had a crush on Spock since I was 10. I know who the two female Klingons in this film are. I know that the sole black actor (who plays a human) with dialogue in the film is Tim Russ, and that he has appeared in three of the Star Trek series, co-starring in one of them. I not only know that there is a joke about Deanna Troi crashing the Enterprise, I know why it is funny. While I don’t dress up in full Star Trek regalia and congregate with others at the many conventions (all right, I have been to a couple, but I never wore a costume!), it is safe to say that I can be considered, perhaps, somewhat of an expert on Star Trek. As such, it can only be expected that my review will be slightly (ok, very) biased, and very long.
So here we go.
After a rather boring span of opening credits, the movie immediately shifts into high gear. A champagne bottle floating through space crashes into the brand spanking new Enterprise B, commemorating its maiden voyage. On board as a guest, to the media’s excitement, is the retired Captain James T. Kirk, there to watch as a brand new captain take the first Enterprise Kirk will not command. It is clear that neither the retired captain nor the young, new captain are comfortable with this situation. Both Scotty and Chekov are along for the ride, providing moral support. They also gently tease him about the nauseating hero worship he is forced to endure. After nearly 30 years , the chemistry between these three actors is so strong, and their interaction so effortless, it is as much fun to watch them as it seems to have been for them to be in this movie. Of course, within minutes, Kirk is put into a situation where he can save the day, and another Enterprise, once more. Only this time, he sacrifices his own life in the process. It is a hero’s death worthy of Captain James T. Kirk. The entire fifteen minutes that Kirk is on the screen at the beginning features a combination of light humor, intense action and a bit of serious drama. It is also the high point of the movie.
My disappointment in the rest of the film has nothing to do with Kirk being a better actor, or that I love him more than the Next Generation crew. He isn’t and I don’t. It’s that while the writers seemed to have had no problem writing for the original characters, they had no clear idea how to transfer the newer characters to the big screen while also bridging the two generations. This is a bit shocking since they had been writing for the Next Generation characters for four years by that point. There are various problems big and small that permeate the movie, not all of it connected to the writing.
The technical aspects were a mixed bad. A surprising misstep is the music. Even the worst Star Trek movies feature, at the very least, interesting and memorable music. Some have great music. An hour after watching this film, I couldn't remember a single note. I do remember that it was boring. On the other hand, I was surprised to find the lighting of the movie, particularly the contrasts of dark and light in Picard's Ready Room to be stimulating, and one my favorite aspects of the film. The worst technical feature is undoubtedly the combination of direction and editing, resulting in something that looks like an extended television episode rather than a film that belongs on the silver screen.
A minor annoyance is the genesis of an embarrassing tradition: Worf is turned into little more than a joke. Pavel Chekov was made to look like a bit of an idiot in the original Star Trek show for comic relief, but in the films, he was written as a mature character. It worked very well because by the time the second film was released, Walter Koenig was noticeably older. Worf moved in the opposite direction, despite Michael Dorn looking older, even under a ton of makeup. While the Klingon did provide some comic relief in the show, as well as on Deep Space Nine later, Worf was always treated with respect. In the movies, he is written as a buffoon half the time. Some of the things he had to do in the succeeding movies are too embarrassing to think about. I hope he got well paid. Ironically, one of the writers of this film went on to write the best Worf episodes on Deep Space Nine. He also went on to be the show runner of the new Battlestar Galactica. Proof positive that one bad movie does not necessarily reflect on a writer’s skill.
The only other source of humor in the film is much more pervasive, and one of the two major problems with the film: Data. I think Brent Spiner did a terrific job playing a tricky character in the television series. He imbued the android with a subtle mixture of curiosity, grace, and a sweetness that worked well in the Star Trek world. And unlike most of the characters on the show, Data was allowed to really grow. By the end of the series, he was barely recognizable as the emotionless, naïve and slightly clueless android who escorted the very elderly Dr. McCoy down a corridor of the new Enterprise in the pilot episode. The writers (and Spiner who had a lot of control over his parts in the script) threw out every single thing that defined who Data was for seven years, and created a loud, obnoxious and irritating android. In the film, Data decides to install his emotion chip he keeps on display (he got it in a very bad episode – a sign?). This could have been an interesting aspect of the movie. It wasn’t. I have seen Spiner in interviews; he is hilarious and has excellent comedic timing. For some reason, none of that comes across here. There are times he even seems to be uncomfortable. Data is supposed to be struggling with his emotions, but Spiner plays Data so over-the-top that those around him, for the most part, are reduced to little more than tapestries. Less than an hour into the movie, I actually felt sorry for every actor unfortunate enough to be standing next to him. Patrick Stewart is the only one who manages to hold his own, but it clearly took all of his tremendous skills to overcome that much melodrama. I found myself wondering how a scene between Data and Kirk would have played out in this film. Brent made Shatner look like the epitome of subtlety. I wonder what effect exposure to this overacting would have had on the Shat. It might have been epic.
Still, despite both my dislike of Data in this movie and the weird lack of good humor among the new crew, this movie still could have been salvaged. Watching the Enterprise D crash onto the planet (thanks, Deanna) is one of the greatest thrills I've ever had in a theater. The majority of the Kirk scenes are great, including The Scene where he meets Picard, which is highly entertaining. Even Malcolm McDowell managed to contain his tendency towards overacting. These could have offset how annoying Data was, and certainly the minor technical disappointments. But in order to do so, the movie needed one essential ingredient: a well-executed story. Unfortunately, the story is the movie’s greatest weakness.
The original movies often had a lot of humor in them. Everyone involved was smart enough to realize that the stories being written often had a trace of ridiculousness in its stories. They knew that the movies, just like the show, would work best if the writers and actors didn’t take themselves too seriously. It also helped that the actors worked well with this. The Generations script was primarily forcing the crew to play it straight and serious. In order for it to work it needed to execute one heck of a dramatic punch. Star Trek: Deep Space Nine excelled at this. That show featured the darkest, most powerful plots in all of Star Trek. While there was comedy, it was often of the darkest kind, and there were episodes that had none at all. But they were so well written, and so well executed, that several were nothing short of excellent. In order for there to be a dramatic punch, the audience has to care deeply for the characters. This is incredibly difficult for Star Trek films to pull off. They have to be accessible to audiences new to Star Trek while trying to stay within the framework of the vast, intricate Star Trek universe. There’s very little time to explain back stories that took years, sometimes decades, to create. If Generations could have pulled that off, it likely would have been a good film. In fact, it could have been one of the best. Unfortunately, it just wasn’t to be.
The key plot of the movie is Picard’s story. It is this pivotal plot around which everything revolves, the story on which the overall quality of the movie depends. It is literally what determines whether or not Picard will not only be able, but even want to save the universe. There, of course, is a bad guy, but the key struggle for Picard in this film is internal. As with all the Next Generation stories, there is some external force that causes the conflict. In this case, the force is called the Nexus, an energy ribbon that transports beings into a dimension in which their every wish and desire is catered to. As Guinan, adequately played by Whoopie Goldberg, tells her friend Picard, time and space have no meaning in the Nexus. You can be taking breakfast to the love of your life, only to walk through the door and find yourself in a barn standing next to the horse you happened to be thinking about. It is so enticing and overwhelming that one of the characters spends nearly a century obsessed with finding a way back in, having no problem killing hundreds of millions of life forms in the process. The plot depends on Picard not only getting caught in the Nexus, but more importantly, facing a personal crisis so powerful that having the Nexus sooth his emotional pain makes returning to his time and space very difficult. This was always going to be a difficult sell. Like Kirk, Picard has always shown more dedication to his career than anything or anyone else. What could possibly make him even think about giving it up? Patrick Stewart lobbied hard for the motivation to be that Picard is informed right before the Nexus is found that his three remaining family members are killed, burned alive. The intention was for Picard to feel devastated that he had sacrificed not just his entire life, but now his entire family line, to the job. Stewart felt that Picard’s fresh wounds would have the effect of his desire to continue his family’s legacy, helped along by his shame at having pushed that responsibility on to his recently deceased brother, becoming as powerful as the pull he feels to his career.
This type of heavy drama hinged on the audience being able to connect with Picard’s pain. It is here where the tight confines of all Star Trek movie plots collided with a terrible decision by the writers. Although character development wasn’t exactly a defining feature of the television show, because of the character back story restrictions forced on all Star Trek movies, not to mention there being too many characters, there is even less time for it in Generations. As such, every second of it needed to count. For some reason, the writers wasted time that could have been used carefully developing Picard's story by focusing more than they should have, more than they needed to, on Soran. The result of this decision sank the film. Both story arcs ended up being unsatisfying. The writers spent just enough time hinting that Soran was a complex, interesting guy, but not enough for the audience to make an emotional connection. Picard's internal agony never makes much of an impression on the audience, other than a sense that it is highly melodramatic. There was just too much time between each scene specifically designed to show how much he was hurting. The audience doesn't even find out the cause until more than 45 minutes into the film. Not only that, but his indecision in the Nexus is practically nonexistent. He spends most of his time trying to convince Kirk to come back with him. This all resulted in making Picard's story arc seem completely useless, and worse, making him pale in comparison to Kirk. The writers tried to have their cake and eat it, too. What they ended up with is a film that is shallow and a waste.
It is easy to see why the writers didn’t want to choose. On the one hand, there is Malcolm McDowell who, somehow, some way, managed a subdued, interesting performance. There are hints throughout the film that the writers had a fascinating idea for how this character worked. Here was a man who lost everything, but for a brief moment was able to live as if he had gotten it all back. Then to his horror, he is jerked back without his consent to his own time. Unable to face it, he spends decades doing nothing but trying to find a way back. There are aspects to that that would have been interesting to explore. On the other hand, you have Patrick Stewart, who is a great actor, not to mention the star of the film. The best episodes of the show were ones that featured Picard struggling internally. Starting off the chain of Next Generation movies by showcasing the tremendous acting skills of the star would have made for a hell of an entrance to the big screen. The writers could have highlighted that this crew was different, more serious, precisely because it was led by an actor who could keep the drama from turning into melodrama. Instead, the writers made the amateur mistake of not choosing which angle to fully explore, probably thinking they could do both. This one mistake condemned the film to mediocrity.
One final point about the film, and this one has upset me since the first night I saw it back in 1994. Kirk’s first death is vastly more heroic and fitting than his second one. Going out while single-handedly saving the new Enterprise that was next in line after the one he cared so deeply about is poignant. Being brought back and not directly, single-handedly saving anyone was not worthy of a man such as James T. Kirk. Not to mention that his death the first time got it right: he died alone. Another example of the film's inability to offer any type of real meaning to the audience.
This review is long not (only) because I’m a huge Star Trek fan. For the past few years, I have been lamenting how the Next Generation movies just aren’t that good, and trying to figure out why. First Contact performed the best, but even that one isn’t great. I certainly wouldn’t put it in the same category as Star Trek II. This disappoints me because I think this crew could have been used well enough to make some really good movies. The problem is that the writers tried to follow the same formula used in the first six movies with a cast of characters that wasn’t designed for that. The best Next Generation episodes were far more cerebral, and allowed Patrick Stewart’s, and to a lesser extent Brent Spiner’s, acting to really shine. In the films, Picard was forced into being more of an action hero than he really was, Data remained coarse and Spiner a little awkward, and the rest of the crew became completely interchangeable.
Except Generations. I really think that the writers for this film meant to create a script that wrote the Next Generation characters the way they were designed to be. Unfortunately, because of the major writing mistakes with the script, they just couldn’t pull it off. So, the writers, and I suspect even more the producers, decided to just stick with the tried and true formula of keeping Star Trek lightly humorous and full of action. I think this is why all of the movies headlined by Captain Picard, even First Contact, don’t stand out. They’re barely even Star Trek, and they are definitely not marked by what defined the television show: a good balance between a morality-focused story, good, subtle acting, and action. The Next Generation did have action, but it rarely ever overpowered the dramatic power of the story. At least the best episodes didn’t. And finally, frankly, the cast seems to have been incapable of handling the type of humor every single actor in the original show handled effortlessly.
I firmly believe that if the writers had turned in a better script, chosen to focus less on Soran and more on Picard's emotional trauma, and reduced the number of characters, the movie could have established a different model for the Next Generation movies. If that had happened, I think we would have seen some excellent movies that played to the talents of Patrick Stewart and Brent Spiner. They would have been very different from the first six Star Trek films, but they also would have had their own identity. It’s sad that we never got this.
Captain Picard: Patrick Stewart
Lt. Commander Data: Brent Spiner
Captain Kirk: William Shatner
Soran: Malcolm McDowell
I need to preface this review by stating that I am a huge Star Trek fan. I grew up on the original and Next Generation series, and love Deep Space Nine. By the time I was 7 or 8 I had every single episode of the original series memorized. I have had a crush on Spock since I was 10. I know who the two female Klingons in this film are. I know that the sole black actor (who plays a human) with dialogue in the film is Tim Russ, and that he has appeared in three of the Star Trek series, co-starring in one of them. I not only know that there is a joke about Deanna Troi crashing the Enterprise, I know why it is funny. While I don’t dress up in full Star Trek regalia and congregate with others at the many conventions (all right, I have been to a couple, but I never wore a costume!), it is safe to say that I can be considered, perhaps, somewhat of an expert on Star Trek. As such, it can only be expected that my review will be slightly (ok, very) biased, and very long.
So here we go.
After a rather boring span of opening credits, the movie immediately shifts into high gear. A champagne bottle floating through space crashes into the brand spanking new Enterprise B, commemorating its maiden voyage. On board as a guest, to the media’s excitement, is the retired Captain James T. Kirk, there to watch as a brand new captain take the first Enterprise Kirk will not command. It is clear that neither the retired captain nor the young, new captain are comfortable with this situation. Both Scotty and Chekov are along for the ride, providing moral support. They also gently tease him about the nauseating hero worship he is forced to endure. After nearly 30 years , the chemistry between these three actors is so strong, and their interaction so effortless, it is as much fun to watch them as it seems to have been for them to be in this movie. Of course, within minutes, Kirk is put into a situation where he can save the day, and another Enterprise, once more. Only this time, he sacrifices his own life in the process. It is a hero’s death worthy of Captain James T. Kirk. The entire fifteen minutes that Kirk is on the screen at the beginning features a combination of light humor, intense action and a bit of serious drama. It is also the high point of the movie.
My disappointment in the rest of the film has nothing to do with Kirk being a better actor, or that I love him more than the Next Generation crew. He isn’t and I don’t. It’s that while the writers seemed to have had no problem writing for the original characters, they had no clear idea how to transfer the newer characters to the big screen while also bridging the two generations. This is a bit shocking since they had been writing for the Next Generation characters for four years by that point. There are various problems big and small that permeate the movie, not all of it connected to the writing.
The technical aspects were a mixed bad. A surprising misstep is the music. Even the worst Star Trek movies feature, at the very least, interesting and memorable music. Some have great music. An hour after watching this film, I couldn't remember a single note. I do remember that it was boring. On the other hand, I was surprised to find the lighting of the movie, particularly the contrasts of dark and light in Picard's Ready Room to be stimulating, and one my favorite aspects of the film. The worst technical feature is undoubtedly the combination of direction and editing, resulting in something that looks like an extended television episode rather than a film that belongs on the silver screen.
A minor annoyance is the genesis of an embarrassing tradition: Worf is turned into little more than a joke. Pavel Chekov was made to look like a bit of an idiot in the original Star Trek show for comic relief, but in the films, he was written as a mature character. It worked very well because by the time the second film was released, Walter Koenig was noticeably older. Worf moved in the opposite direction, despite Michael Dorn looking older, even under a ton of makeup. While the Klingon did provide some comic relief in the show, as well as on Deep Space Nine later, Worf was always treated with respect. In the movies, he is written as a buffoon half the time. Some of the things he had to do in the succeeding movies are too embarrassing to think about. I hope he got well paid. Ironically, one of the writers of this film went on to write the best Worf episodes on Deep Space Nine. He also went on to be the show runner of the new Battlestar Galactica. Proof positive that one bad movie does not necessarily reflect on a writer’s skill.
The only other source of humor in the film is much more pervasive, and one of the two major problems with the film: Data. I think Brent Spiner did a terrific job playing a tricky character in the television series. He imbued the android with a subtle mixture of curiosity, grace, and a sweetness that worked well in the Star Trek world. And unlike most of the characters on the show, Data was allowed to really grow. By the end of the series, he was barely recognizable as the emotionless, naïve and slightly clueless android who escorted the very elderly Dr. McCoy down a corridor of the new Enterprise in the pilot episode. The writers (and Spiner who had a lot of control over his parts in the script) threw out every single thing that defined who Data was for seven years, and created a loud, obnoxious and irritating android. In the film, Data decides to install his emotion chip he keeps on display (he got it in a very bad episode – a sign?). This could have been an interesting aspect of the movie. It wasn’t. I have seen Spiner in interviews; he is hilarious and has excellent comedic timing. For some reason, none of that comes across here. There are times he even seems to be uncomfortable. Data is supposed to be struggling with his emotions, but Spiner plays Data so over-the-top that those around him, for the most part, are reduced to little more than tapestries. Less than an hour into the movie, I actually felt sorry for every actor unfortunate enough to be standing next to him. Patrick Stewart is the only one who manages to hold his own, but it clearly took all of his tremendous skills to overcome that much melodrama. I found myself wondering how a scene between Data and Kirk would have played out in this film. Brent made Shatner look like the epitome of subtlety. I wonder what effect exposure to this overacting would have had on the Shat. It might have been epic.
Still, despite both my dislike of Data in this movie and the weird lack of good humor among the new crew, this movie still could have been salvaged. Watching the Enterprise D crash onto the planet (thanks, Deanna) is one of the greatest thrills I've ever had in a theater. The majority of the Kirk scenes are great, including The Scene where he meets Picard, which is highly entertaining. Even Malcolm McDowell managed to contain his tendency towards overacting. These could have offset how annoying Data was, and certainly the minor technical disappointments. But in order to do so, the movie needed one essential ingredient: a well-executed story. Unfortunately, the story is the movie’s greatest weakness.
The original movies often had a lot of humor in them. Everyone involved was smart enough to realize that the stories being written often had a trace of ridiculousness in its stories. They knew that the movies, just like the show, would work best if the writers and actors didn’t take themselves too seriously. It also helped that the actors worked well with this. The Generations script was primarily forcing the crew to play it straight and serious. In order for it to work it needed to execute one heck of a dramatic punch. Star Trek: Deep Space Nine excelled at this. That show featured the darkest, most powerful plots in all of Star Trek. While there was comedy, it was often of the darkest kind, and there were episodes that had none at all. But they were so well written, and so well executed, that several were nothing short of excellent. In order for there to be a dramatic punch, the audience has to care deeply for the characters. This is incredibly difficult for Star Trek films to pull off. They have to be accessible to audiences new to Star Trek while trying to stay within the framework of the vast, intricate Star Trek universe. There’s very little time to explain back stories that took years, sometimes decades, to create. If Generations could have pulled that off, it likely would have been a good film. In fact, it could have been one of the best. Unfortunately, it just wasn’t to be.
The key plot of the movie is Picard’s story. It is this pivotal plot around which everything revolves, the story on which the overall quality of the movie depends. It is literally what determines whether or not Picard will not only be able, but even want to save the universe. There, of course, is a bad guy, but the key struggle for Picard in this film is internal. As with all the Next Generation stories, there is some external force that causes the conflict. In this case, the force is called the Nexus, an energy ribbon that transports beings into a dimension in which their every wish and desire is catered to. As Guinan, adequately played by Whoopie Goldberg, tells her friend Picard, time and space have no meaning in the Nexus. You can be taking breakfast to the love of your life, only to walk through the door and find yourself in a barn standing next to the horse you happened to be thinking about. It is so enticing and overwhelming that one of the characters spends nearly a century obsessed with finding a way back in, having no problem killing hundreds of millions of life forms in the process. The plot depends on Picard not only getting caught in the Nexus, but more importantly, facing a personal crisis so powerful that having the Nexus sooth his emotional pain makes returning to his time and space very difficult. This was always going to be a difficult sell. Like Kirk, Picard has always shown more dedication to his career than anything or anyone else. What could possibly make him even think about giving it up? Patrick Stewart lobbied hard for the motivation to be that Picard is informed right before the Nexus is found that his three remaining family members are killed, burned alive. The intention was for Picard to feel devastated that he had sacrificed not just his entire life, but now his entire family line, to the job. Stewart felt that Picard’s fresh wounds would have the effect of his desire to continue his family’s legacy, helped along by his shame at having pushed that responsibility on to his recently deceased brother, becoming as powerful as the pull he feels to his career.
This type of heavy drama hinged on the audience being able to connect with Picard’s pain. It is here where the tight confines of all Star Trek movie plots collided with a terrible decision by the writers. Although character development wasn’t exactly a defining feature of the television show, because of the character back story restrictions forced on all Star Trek movies, not to mention there being too many characters, there is even less time for it in Generations. As such, every second of it needed to count. For some reason, the writers wasted time that could have been used carefully developing Picard's story by focusing more than they should have, more than they needed to, on Soran. The result of this decision sank the film. Both story arcs ended up being unsatisfying. The writers spent just enough time hinting that Soran was a complex, interesting guy, but not enough for the audience to make an emotional connection. Picard's internal agony never makes much of an impression on the audience, other than a sense that it is highly melodramatic. There was just too much time between each scene specifically designed to show how much he was hurting. The audience doesn't even find out the cause until more than 45 minutes into the film. Not only that, but his indecision in the Nexus is practically nonexistent. He spends most of his time trying to convince Kirk to come back with him. This all resulted in making Picard's story arc seem completely useless, and worse, making him pale in comparison to Kirk. The writers tried to have their cake and eat it, too. What they ended up with is a film that is shallow and a waste.
It is easy to see why the writers didn’t want to choose. On the one hand, there is Malcolm McDowell who, somehow, some way, managed a subdued, interesting performance. There are hints throughout the film that the writers had a fascinating idea for how this character worked. Here was a man who lost everything, but for a brief moment was able to live as if he had gotten it all back. Then to his horror, he is jerked back without his consent to his own time. Unable to face it, he spends decades doing nothing but trying to find a way back. There are aspects to that that would have been interesting to explore. On the other hand, you have Patrick Stewart, who is a great actor, not to mention the star of the film. The best episodes of the show were ones that featured Picard struggling internally. Starting off the chain of Next Generation movies by showcasing the tremendous acting skills of the star would have made for a hell of an entrance to the big screen. The writers could have highlighted that this crew was different, more serious, precisely because it was led by an actor who could keep the drama from turning into melodrama. Instead, the writers made the amateur mistake of not choosing which angle to fully explore, probably thinking they could do both. This one mistake condemned the film to mediocrity.
One final point about the film, and this one has upset me since the first night I saw it back in 1994. Kirk’s first death is vastly more heroic and fitting than his second one. Going out while single-handedly saving the new Enterprise that was next in line after the one he cared so deeply about is poignant. Being brought back and not directly, single-handedly saving anyone was not worthy of a man such as James T. Kirk. Not to mention that his death the first time got it right: he died alone. Another example of the film's inability to offer any type of real meaning to the audience.
This review is long not (only) because I’m a huge Star Trek fan. For the past few years, I have been lamenting how the Next Generation movies just aren’t that good, and trying to figure out why. First Contact performed the best, but even that one isn’t great. I certainly wouldn’t put it in the same category as Star Trek II. This disappoints me because I think this crew could have been used well enough to make some really good movies. The problem is that the writers tried to follow the same formula used in the first six movies with a cast of characters that wasn’t designed for that. The best Next Generation episodes were far more cerebral, and allowed Patrick Stewart’s, and to a lesser extent Brent Spiner’s, acting to really shine. In the films, Picard was forced into being more of an action hero than he really was, Data remained coarse and Spiner a little awkward, and the rest of the crew became completely interchangeable.
Except Generations. I really think that the writers for this film meant to create a script that wrote the Next Generation characters the way they were designed to be. Unfortunately, because of the major writing mistakes with the script, they just couldn’t pull it off. So, the writers, and I suspect even more the producers, decided to just stick with the tried and true formula of keeping Star Trek lightly humorous and full of action. I think this is why all of the movies headlined by Captain Picard, even First Contact, don’t stand out. They’re barely even Star Trek, and they are definitely not marked by what defined the television show: a good balance between a morality-focused story, good, subtle acting, and action. The Next Generation did have action, but it rarely ever overpowered the dramatic power of the story. At least the best episodes didn’t. And finally, frankly, the cast seems to have been incapable of handling the type of humor every single actor in the original show handled effortlessly.
I firmly believe that if the writers had turned in a better script, chosen to focus less on Soran and more on Picard's emotional trauma, and reduced the number of characters, the movie could have established a different model for the Next Generation movies. If that had happened, I think we would have seen some excellent movies that played to the talents of Patrick Stewart and Brent Spiner. They would have been very different from the first six Star Trek films, but they also would have had their own identity. It’s sad that we never got this.
Star Trek: Generations (Short Version)
Star Trek: Generations
Captain Picard: Patrick Stewart
Captain Kirk: William Shatner
My long, geeky review will be after this one, so I will keep this short for those who have no interest whatsoever in that type of thing. For those who read the next one, if any do (I have my doubts about this), I still recommend reading this. It is a good counterpoint for the things I complain about in the next one.
This was the first Star Trek film to feature the crew from the second series. It was actually being written in the final season of the show. A show that I really liked (though not so much anymore). Sadly, I think this movie is flawed. It is the only Star Trek DVD I had that was still unopened, including all 7 seasons of Deep Space 9 and the 3 seasons of the original series. It just doesn’t excite me. Despite all this, I think it is a decent popcorn movie. A lot of the film is fun, there are a few very good moments, and the first 15 minutes are fantastic.
The primary flaw, around which everything else rotates, is that the film is mediocre. The characterizations of everyone who is not in the first 15 minutes feel incomplete. Unfortunately, “everyone” includes the entire crew of the second series. Much of the movie is less like a film than a television episode. The direction is static, and the editing often makes the acting look worse than it likely was. The writers never found a good way to bridge the new crew to the silver screen, and it damages the movie severely. In short, much of the movie wanders from scene to scene, very few reaching anything other than functional.
A major problem is that, unlike the original Star Trek movies, the cast of this one is huge, resulting in several being used as little more than set pieces. The characters with dialogue in the first 15 minutes are given more meaningful things to do than some of the characters from the Enterprise D, who were supposed to be the focus of this film. None of the movies with the original crew featured more than 9 or 10 characters. This one tries to fit 14. As much as it pains me to admit, three or four of the characters probably should have just been dropped from the film. Keeping them dragged the entire film down.
The key reason to see this film is for the first 15 minutes. Kirk, Scotty and Chekov are a lot of fun to watch. Indeed everything about the beginning of the movie is fun to watch. It manages in that short amount of time to effectively (being the key word) put more humor, action, drama (not melodrama), and pathos than the rest of the film does in more than 90 minutes. What’s more, the writers were able to pack a more dramatic punch with these actors than they were able to do with all the others combined. They are easy to identify with, even the new ones, so you feel their worries and fear quite strongly. It is a shame that these characters, and not just the three from the original series, could not have been the entire cast. The writers clearly had a better grasp of how to write for them than anyone in the rest of the film. This is ironic because the two writers had written for Star Trek: The Next Generation for about four years by then; they should have been experts with the new crew. Alas, it was not to be.
Captain Picard: Patrick Stewart
Captain Kirk: William Shatner
My long, geeky review will be after this one, so I will keep this short for those who have no interest whatsoever in that type of thing. For those who read the next one, if any do (I have my doubts about this), I still recommend reading this. It is a good counterpoint for the things I complain about in the next one.
This was the first Star Trek film to feature the crew from the second series. It was actually being written in the final season of the show. A show that I really liked (though not so much anymore). Sadly, I think this movie is flawed. It is the only Star Trek DVD I had that was still unopened, including all 7 seasons of Deep Space 9 and the 3 seasons of the original series. It just doesn’t excite me. Despite all this, I think it is a decent popcorn movie. A lot of the film is fun, there are a few very good moments, and the first 15 minutes are fantastic.
The primary flaw, around which everything else rotates, is that the film is mediocre. The characterizations of everyone who is not in the first 15 minutes feel incomplete. Unfortunately, “everyone” includes the entire crew of the second series. Much of the movie is less like a film than a television episode. The direction is static, and the editing often makes the acting look worse than it likely was. The writers never found a good way to bridge the new crew to the silver screen, and it damages the movie severely. In short, much of the movie wanders from scene to scene, very few reaching anything other than functional.
A major problem is that, unlike the original Star Trek movies, the cast of this one is huge, resulting in several being used as little more than set pieces. The characters with dialogue in the first 15 minutes are given more meaningful things to do than some of the characters from the Enterprise D, who were supposed to be the focus of this film. None of the movies with the original crew featured more than 9 or 10 characters. This one tries to fit 14. As much as it pains me to admit, three or four of the characters probably should have just been dropped from the film. Keeping them dragged the entire film down.
The key reason to see this film is for the first 15 minutes. Kirk, Scotty and Chekov are a lot of fun to watch. Indeed everything about the beginning of the movie is fun to watch. It manages in that short amount of time to effectively (being the key word) put more humor, action, drama (not melodrama), and pathos than the rest of the film does in more than 90 minutes. What’s more, the writers were able to pack a more dramatic punch with these actors than they were able to do with all the others combined. They are easy to identify with, even the new ones, so you feel their worries and fear quite strongly. It is a shame that these characters, and not just the three from the original series, could not have been the entire cast. The writers clearly had a better grasp of how to write for them than anyone in the rest of the film. This is ironic because the two writers had written for Star Trek: The Next Generation for about four years by then; they should have been experts with the new crew. Alas, it was not to be.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)