Trekkies thought the last Star Trek film was the worst in the franchise’s history. Will the new movie blast off? Nicholas Barber finds out.
Call me old-fashioned, but I’d like to see some more star-trekking in the Star Trek films. I’d like to see Captain Kirk (Chris Pine) and his crew explore strange new worlds.
They could even seek out new life and new civilisations. I’d go so far as to say that they could boldly go where no one has gone before, just as their forebears did in the 1960s television series and subsequent spinoffs.
The first two films in the rebooted franchise were fizzing with energy and lens-flaring pizzazz, but neither of them had the programme’s awe-inspiring sense that every extra-terrestrial encounter could bring puzzling ethical challenges and unorthodox perspectives in addition to green-skinned girlfriends for Kirk.
The phaser-gun battles that JJ Abrams served up instead were all well and good, but if they are the franchise’s raison d’etre then it should have a different title. Star Wars, for instance.
Reuters, AFP, Paramount Pictures, startrek.com
The third instalment, Star Trek Beyond, brings back some of the TV series’ hope and wonder.
In a witty opening scene, Kirk bumbles through a diplomatic expedition that goes comically wrong, and we’re then told, via his Captain’s Log, that the USS Enterprise is three years into its five-year outer-space mission.
Poking affectionate fun at the series, we hear that Kirk is finding the mission “episodic”: there is nothing in his cupboard but a rack of identical, mustard-coloured sweatshirts.
What’s so delightful about these scenes is that they pick up from where the 1960s’ Star Trek left off.
They encourage you to forget the two recent films, with their revived villains, tortuous origin stories and gratuitous underwear shots.
You can imagine that the reboot started with Star Trek Beyond instead.
Read the full article here
