07 July 2010

127 Minutes I Won't Get Back

So, I got bored and decided to watch the 2009 version of Star Trek, aka Lens Flare in Space, aka Twilight in Space.

Well... I just don't know where to start really. I'm not sure what was worse, the over acting, the insane amount of lens flare, the inconsistencies explained away by it being an "alternate reality", or the bald face bullshit they've used instead of science.

I suppose I'll start with the lens flare. Really... it needed THAT much? I finished watching it and felt my eyes hurting. I've NEVER watched a movie or played a game and had my eyes hurt like this. Never when I was semi-pro and played Counter-Strike for 16 hours a day did I have such eye discomfort. It added NOTHING to the movie at all. Abrams has this to say on the subject:

"I know there are certain shots where even I watch and think, 'Oh that's ridiculous, that was too many.' But I love the idea that the future was so bright it couldn't be contained in the frame."
Holy shit, did he say that? Yes, he did. It was one reason I avoided watching this. I mean, the guy is a complete moron, and this can be seen from his claims to fame ("What about Brian" & "Felicity"). How can you be that stupid to think that aiming flashlights down barrel will give you some sort of mystery to the film. It just adds to the discomfort of the viewers, who are already feeling cheated by the complete disregard for canon.

Which brings me to another gripe. Inconsistencies. Suddenly the team of idiots at Paramount know better than Gene Roddenberry, they can change what they want at a whim. So long as it gets the tweenies in. No longer is Kirk a strong forthright man, but a whiny kid who has nothing better to do than pick fights in bars. McCoy is no longer Kirk's closest friend, Spock is. The Enterprise is somehow the most modern design. The Romulan ships no longer look like Romulan ships. The list goes on. I'm no HUGE Star Trek fan, but I like it and enjoy the consistencies. All of these inconsistencies are explained away in one phrase... alternate reality. What The Fuck?

I could rage on for pages about the raping of Star Trek, but I won't. I want to get on to my biggest gripe. The lack of ANY scientific research done prior to writing the plot.

This is immediately obvious from the first few minutes of the young Kirk being introduced. Somehow the Enterprise is being built within Earth's atmosphere. How a space craft designed to be optimised for space, and space alone, can be built on Earth and gain escape velocity without being ripped apart is beyond me. This is no space shuttle, this is a ship that's over 2km long (now that Abrams decided to change it... hold the rage, hold the rage).

Apart from this, somehow a supernova can destroy a galaxy, a black hole is completely visible, and ejecting your warp core into said black hole can cause an uncontrolled explosion to help you escape. I'm no astrophysicist, but to my knowledge if you can't beat an event horizon with controlled use of energy, you can't beat it with uncontrolled use of said energy. Actually, to my knowledge, you can't beat an event horizon point blank. If light, space, and time can't escape, neither can your explosion.

There's a lot to be picked apart that doesn't even require you to research any science. How can you find wood to light a fire on a frozen planet? How do you climb a sheer ice cliff without any sort of ice pick or ice boots? It's the magic of JJ Abrams.

This all said, the plot is weak, the acting is so bad I almost stopped watching about 15 minutes in. I pushed on just to make sure I can say "I've seen that piece of shit, and you can go fuck yourself if you want me to watch it again".


Post a Comment