As though summer’s blow-em-up blockbuster season isn’t “Screenie’s” worst nightmare, today I went kicking and screaming to see “Star Trek” only to be pleasantly surprise. It turns out to be this year’s “Iron Man” and possibly the year’s best movie to date. Having no history with Star Trek or ‘trekkies’ I immediately got a sense of what happened long before Spock worked the U.S.S. Enterprise almost fifty years ago. And after talking to some deep dark fans, they seemed pleased with the movie’s delivery in setting up “Trek through time.”
Back in the 60s we were a nation of a charismatic young president, war, financial woes and much controversy, so it only seems fitting that J. J. “Lost” Abrams would direct a movie that’s reflective of that time (again) today. Saving the planet is where it’s at and that theme also fits nicely into today’s ecological concerns. (By the way, the young actors in this how-it-all-began prequel have already signed on for two more movies. Smart decision.)
In this, the movie opens with Captain Nero (Eric Bana) a Romulan, wanting to find Captain Spock but nobody on the ship knowing (yet) who Spock is. James Kirk (Chris Pine) is being born on one ship, while his father dies on another. No sooner he takes his first breath of air, and baby Kirk Jr. has a lot to live up to for just a wild boy out of Iowa. Enter Spock (Zachary Quinto) as the perfect Vulcan student, who feels no emotion except for the conflict of a Vulcan father and a human mother (Winona Ryder.) Nevertheless, he’s capable of deciding his own destiny which by today’s superhero standards means underdog with a dose of radical. This movie defines their early-on ambitions, inhibitions and competitions but nothing matches Leonard Nimoy who makes a sentimental appearance in explaining the future and how the U.S.S. Enterprise will prosper. That said, Nimoy neglected to mention how well Star Trek will prosper at the box office. Four tiaras