"Why are you taking a photograph of me?" "Because you're funny" "Ok" This makes no sense. But it's blinking hilarious, it was out of nowhere and if we got an explanation other than "you're funny" it would have ruined the element of surprise! I absolutely love Mark Kermode reviews.
I always thought the real dynamic was between Kirk, Spock AND McCoy - essentially three elements of a single character: rational (Spock), emotional (McCoy), with Kirk providing the decision-making glue that ties them together.
The Leonard Nimoy moment he was talking about that he compared to Austin Powers could be any one of the following: "I am not our father." "Since my customary farewell seems oddly self-serving, I shall simply say 'Good luck'." "Thrusters on full...." "And yet you can be in two places at once."
this was my introduction to Star Trek- I thought it would be rubbish but I really loved it. The sets and CGI were very well judged, which is a nice change in sci-fi ;)
A loyal Trekkie when it played on TV from 1966 to 1969 (though not so much since) I agree with Kermode and Mayo. "Star Trek" is a blast, especially (for me) an explosively funny bit between Scotty and his reptile-like assistant, Keenser, and the end titles which were big-smile-inducing wonderful. The best popcorn movie I've seen in years. I felt like a kid again. And, no, I'm not a stinking nitpicker.
I'm really pleased that he also picked up on this. Great movie, but for me this was the moment that nailed it and caused me to reframe my perception of Kirk/Shatner in the original series. Quite some achievement! :o)
True, Undiscovered Country FTW. One thing I loved about this film is even though it doesn't have an over-riding villain the film still carries incredibly well with it's smooth script and wonderful characters. Character driven... you just couldn't say that about TNG's feature films. The only disappointing thing is I didn't even know Undiscovered Country existed till recently let alone how good it was. It is such a shame most people don't know what a classic this is.
I am not a Star Trek fan but I thoroughly enjoyed the film too, however the issue with saying what you said is that it implies that a film that appeals to the largest amount of people possible is the primary objective in film - more important than artistic value. This isn't true. I can appreciate that Star Trek means much more to Star Trek fans than it does to me and I can understand that it would be annoying if your favourite show ever has been dumbed down and spit-polished for the masses.
I feel that the new one is probably less cheesy compared to some of the old ones, though not by much but it is a good cheese :D The action sequences are done much better. But the heart of the story seems to be much simpler than previous movies. You have to understand that previous movies built off many seasons of TV. Eg. Picard was already an established character in his movies while the new Kirk and Spock needed new introductions so the story had to be shorter to accomodate IMO.
If Kermode likes it and loads of other people like it... maybe you should consider giving it another chance. It is not as good as many of the original Star Trek films but one reason it does so well is that it tries so hard to imitate them and comes quite close. The original Star Trek series and films were so good not for the obvious reasons of the sci-fi theme and special effects but the endearing characters and good script... something lacking from most of the TNG films.
A more apt comparison would be, someone who doesn't eat any burgers in any way shape and form because they had preconceived notions that eating a cheeseburger somehow classifies you in to a category of people that has slightly negative connotations. Then, said person eats a cheeseburger from a very convenient and affordable and popular location, realises that in fact cheeseburgers are actually quite good, there are many many other types of cheeseburgers to be tried. What's bad about that?
All of the die hard star trek fans need to realize that if the movie was designed to satisfy your desire for a carbon-copy movie, then it would most likely only appeal to a small population of people. Instead of nitpicking every aspect of the movie, and claiming it doesn't stay true to the original, can't you just be happy that it has introduced star trek to many more people, like myself. Star Trek was not created for ONLY you fan boys to enjoy. Can't we all enjoy it together? It is a good movie
@Kotowboy why does Nero go after Spock by destroying his planet which is not really his since it's another timeline, when Spock was trying to help him?
I'm a big fan of the old show, next gen and DS9 and this film (and the sequel) really aren't for the diehard fans but its still a good film in itself, full of plot holes but still good entertainment. If Star Trek had carried on the way that it did, it would have just been digging down a hole instead of building a ladder to climb out which is what this film has done, it has saved star trek, sacrificing some die hard fans along the way.
That's like saying you're glad people were introduced to the cheeseburger by way of McDonalds...I've had some great cheeseburgers in my life, none of which came from McDonalds...all they do is dumb down and neuter what they cook...so it may be a cheeseburger but it's a terrible one, and just because it introduces it to more people doesn't mean it should exist. Maybe people need to find better places to eat.
I would completely agree with you if the antagonist made any sense in the movie. He just sits around for 25 years doing nothing? Why doesn't he warm the Romulans? Why does he blame the federation? Not explored in the film to any decent level. I don't have a problem with it as a Star Trek film (star trek has had many styles over time after all) I have a problem with it being flashing lights that fall apart half way to the water cooler. We cant enjoy it together because it makes no sense.
@TURBODORK2 Speaking as someone who grew up on ST, I'd say it's better than most of them. It's certainly the one I'd most like to see again, even though it's the one I saw most recently.
Thanks. lol. Here's a question though; Not being a Trek fan myself, would you say the film was dumbed down? Or if anything more mature and sophisticated than the original series which - although beloved like the old Doctor Who series - isn't/wasn't as good as the recent depiction? I am curious as to what your opinion is.
Well, Kirk literally is promoted to Captain right out of Starfleet Academy, which he didn't even graduate (say what you will about Gene Roddenberry as a writer, but he WAS ex-Military & understood why you didn't hand out Command Slots to Brave Bold Kidz!); Spock is too emotional by several orders of magnitude, even before his planet and his human mother die in front of him (what makes Spock a great character is NOT that he lacks emotion, it's that he's been trained to know how emotions cloud your judgment and how not to let them get in the way of your thinking, even when you desperately want them to); Nero's plot for vengeance is so out there Bond Villains are going "Oh, Puh-Leeze!"... Like I said above - it's a Fun Crashy-Bangy Adventure set in outer space, But It's Not STAR TREK.
Yeah there was a lot of nods to the Star trek Franchise. The Actors did a great job. But there was something wrong about it, the feel of the picture was for a different demographic then the originals. A younger audience, and tho there an eye for details. it seemed shallow.
@SurlyCalifornia most of the best sci-fis dont conform to our laws. There ultimately about ideas and exploring them in a fantastical universe. Not that hard sci-fi is'nt good. I loved moon, but the Director's follow up 'Souce Code' was also great, and that was anything but 'hard'
Well Star Trek 2: Wrath of Khan of course, if you will only watch one then that is it. If there was a runner up, then I'd Say Star Trek 6: The Undiscovered Country, which is my personal favourite. As a rule of thumb, avoid the odd numbered movies which tend to be either too ponderous or just underwhelming.
If you liked Star Trek 2009 at all I HIGHLY recommend the Star Trek films: Pretty much any of the films that used the original cast will do... though ST1 may be a bit uninspired and number 5 is just awful (that was the one directed by Shatner). I mean you HAVE to see them just for the "KHAAN!" scene, it is as famous as Vader saying "I am your father". Everyone has seen the Original Star Wars trilogy, I suggest Star Wars 2, 3, 4, (NOT 5!) and 6 as well as the first if you are still interested.
i love star treck but outside of the casting i think the movie sucked. chris pine, zach quinto and Karl urban were all great. but the fact that you had a new Zealand actor playing a young mccoy made that role even cooler.
Star Trek was a great move, invigorating a stagnant mythos, that was as trapped by it's history as it was enriched by it. Cutting the ties to continuity will allow the conceptual strengths of the franchise to be explored in new and relevant ways, something even the best episodes have not been able to do in a long time, let alone the largely terrible movies. If not a reboot, then what? An 'Enterprise' movie? Fuck THAT.
@SurlyCalifornia This film bothered to do the whole summer blockbuster thing exactly the way it used to be done. PROPERLY. There's this new school of thinking everyone's getting away with now where a film with only all the appeal of its trailer hasn't come short. Before, we used to get all the trailer stuff AND then all the great character stuff and all the witty script stuff (a much better deal, don't you think?). Now that can't go unappreciated can it? That's filmmaking by people who care.
Well lots of things. ST5 isn't the worst film ever made... see it as like Phantom Menace No one can quite explain why but in 10 movies a pattern somehow appeared where you'd have one good, one bad. Of course by the time the pattern was noticed and popularised it didn't work any more a la Nemesis. I think it is due to the Director Nicolas Meyer would not work on a direct sequel to any of his works. Also the actors quite frequently tried to direct or write the films... with inconsistent success.
I saw it, decent script, nice special effects, usuall bad guys who seem incapable of making the decisive blow despite being in an excellant position to do so. As far as blockbusters go its head and shoulders above alot of films but its not a classic. Best trek film though.
Kermode, the Undiscovered Country is death, not the future. Jeez, how could you get that wrong? It's from Shakespeare before it showed up on Star Trek.
Yeah it is certainly got more going for it than the latest nonsense. I can't understand why so many people like the latest film. Have people become zombies?
while the movie was entertaining and flashy, the plot made no sense at all. you gotta discuss the stupidity of Nero's motivation. It was an okay space adventure movie, but it really did not feel like star trek except the cliches they threw in
for a Action sci-fi its well made but its a horrid dumb down water star trek. The best Star Trek always had sumthing to say about the present world and not be preachy, this was hollow in the end at best paying lip service.
I don't think I will ever like it. It's more of a homage than a star trek movie. The characters aren't endearing, it has a lame villain and a silly storyline. First contact was a brilliant film.
Hmm, I'm talking about Star TREK not Star Wars. Anyhoo, Empire is my fav Star Wars film and IMHO all the films of the Original Trilogy are classics. Can't say the same for the New Trilogy.
2 problems with this film: 1) the really annoying over-usage of lense flares 2) the clumsy humor that didn't fit on any level. In fact is was so bad, that not even Simon Pegg managed to make me grin, let alone laugh. Aside from that it was fine and definitely entertaining.
Oh dear... a Troll that thinks it can think. You enjoy the nice shiny new Trek. They've taken all the difficult stuff out and made it instantly forgettable so your head won't hurt at all. Oh, and you can thank Paramount for the pile of crap that Nemesis ended up as. Slash the budget, rip off 'Wrath of Khan', and hire a third rate director no one ever heard of. Now that was smart thinking...
The effects, the crew, the acting were all great. Shame the fucking script was complete shit. Seriously, so full of holes, so inconsistent, so lacking.
'Why are you taking a photograph of me?'
'Because you're funny'
haha, classic
kermode - "Why are you taking photo`s of me...?"
mayo - "Because you`re funny"
:)
Big kudos to kermode for acknowledging the importance of the Kirk/Spock relationship in the franchise
He said that five minutes after saying he hated Kirk and wished Captain Pike had continued to skipper the Enterprise.
"Why are you taking a photograph of me?"
"Because you're funny"
"Ok"
This makes no sense. But it's blinking hilarious, it was out of nowhere and if we got an explanation other than "you're funny" it would have ruined the element of surprise!
I absolutely love Mark Kermode reviews.
I love how enthusiastic he is ^^
I always thought the real dynamic was between Kirk, Spock AND McCoy - essentially three elements of a single character: rational (Spock), emotional (McCoy), with Kirk providing the decision-making glue that ties them together.
Scotty switching to English from Scottish was the result of the beaming onto a ship at warp speed
The Leonard Nimoy moment he was talking about that he compared to Austin Powers could be any one of the following:
"I am not our father."
"Since my customary farewell seems oddly self-serving, I shall simply say 'Good luck'."
"Thrusters on full...."
"And yet you can be in two places at once."
@SurlyCalifornia That's why we love this film, we can see the genuine appreciation and respect the filmmakers have for film goers.
this was my introduction to Star Trek- I thought it would be rubbish but I really loved it. The sets and CGI were very well judged, which is a nice change in sci-fi ;)
He's right about the guy playing bones. Me and my brother were watching this movie and before bones even said anything my brother said "thats bones!"
I'm thinking it's Scotty mentioning how he'd like to get his hands on Enterprise's "ample nacelles".
A loyal Trekkie when it played on TV from 1966 to 1969 (though not so much since) I agree with Kermode and Mayo. "Star Trek" is a blast, especially (for me) an explosively funny bit between Scotty and his reptile-like assistant, Keenser, and the end titles which were big-smile-inducing wonderful. The best popcorn movie I've seen in years. I felt like a kid again. And, no, I'm not a stinking nitpicker.
“You have just sat in the right way for that character”
I'm really pleased that he also picked up on this. Great movie, but for me this was the moment that nailed it and caused me to reframe my perception of Kirk/Shatner in the original series. Quite some achievement! :o)
I seen Pulp Fiction when it came out (I was 4). People take age certificates too seriously.
True, Undiscovered Country FTW.
One thing I loved about this film is even though it doesn't have an over-riding villain the film still carries incredibly well with it's smooth script and wonderful characters. Character driven... you just couldn't say that about TNG's feature films.
The only disappointing thing is I didn't even know Undiscovered Country existed till recently let alone how good it was. It is such a shame most people don't know what a classic this is.
Fantastic review, Mark! Star Trek was my favorite movie of 2009 - just a brilliant piece of entertainment.
I am not a Star Trek fan but I thoroughly enjoyed the film too, however the issue with saying what you said is that it implies that a film that appeals to the largest amount of people possible is the primary objective in film - more important than artistic value. This isn't true. I can appreciate that Star Trek means much more to Star Trek fans than it does to me and I can understand that it would be annoying if your favourite show ever has been dumbed down and spit-polished for the masses.
The film is A well casted, well acted, stylish, effective & A refreshing rebooted take on the hit space opera series. (86%) (4.5/5 stars) (positive)
woo!!! Sound!! I must watch Star Trek at some time.
Weird, I came straight to this from Mark's Frost/Nixon review.
This show is my favourite podcast
I feel that the new one is probably less cheesy compared to some of the old ones, though not by much but it is a good cheese :D The action sequences are done much better. But the heart of the story seems to be much simpler than previous movies. You have to understand that previous movies built off many seasons of TV. Eg. Picard was already an established character in his movies while the new Kirk and Spock needed new introductions so the story had to be shorter to accomodate IMO.
If Kermode likes it and loads of other people like it... maybe you should consider giving it another chance.
It is not as good as many of the original Star Trek films but one reason it does so well is that it tries so hard to imitate them and comes quite close.
The original Star Trek series and films were so good not for the obvious reasons of the sci-fi theme and special effects but the endearing characters and good script... something lacking from most of the TNG films.
A more apt comparison would be, someone who doesn't eat any burgers in any way shape and form because they had preconceived notions that eating a cheeseburger somehow classifies you in to a category of people that has slightly negative connotations. Then, said person eats a cheeseburger from a very convenient and affordable and popular location, realises that in fact cheeseburgers are actually quite good, there are many many other types of cheeseburgers to be tried. What's bad about that?
Nah, just 2 will do. And 4 if your pushed. I quite liked first contact but i was 15 and borg obsessed at the time.
All of the die hard star trek fans need to realize that if the movie was designed to satisfy your desire for a carbon-copy movie, then it would most likely only appeal to a small population of people. Instead of nitpicking every aspect of the movie, and claiming it doesn't stay true to the original, can't you just be happy that it has introduced star trek to many more people, like myself. Star Trek was not created for ONLY you fan boys to enjoy. Can't we all enjoy it together? It is a good movie
Yeah. It's a good thing I actually watched it otherwise I would have continued to think the same thing
I agree! I love all the Star Trek series and movies! No one can force me to say otherwise!
@Kotowboy why does Nero go after Spock by destroying his planet which is not really his since it's another timeline, when Spock was trying to help him?
I'm a big fan of the old show, next gen and DS9 and this film (and the sequel) really aren't for the diehard fans but its still a good film in itself, full of plot holes but still good entertainment. If Star Trek had carried on the way that it did, it would have just been digging down a hole instead of building a ladder to climb out which is what this film has done, it has saved star trek, sacrificing some die hard fans along the way.
Possibly the one " A linguist? that means you have a talented tounge"?
saw the movie today. it was awesome!
That's like saying you're glad people were introduced to the cheeseburger by way of McDonalds...I've had some great cheeseburgers in my life, none of which came from McDonalds...all they do is dumb down and neuter what they cook...so it may be a cheeseburger but it's a terrible one, and just because it introduces it to more people doesn't mean it should exist. Maybe people need to find better places to eat.
Good point, I really don't know what I was thinking.
sorry.
It's actually 'bawdy', so yeah as the other replies mentioned it'll be the raunchier ones
I would completely agree with you if the antagonist made any sense in the movie. He just sits around for 25 years doing nothing? Why doesn't he warm the Romulans? Why does he blame the federation? Not explored in the film to any decent level. I don't have a problem with it as a Star Trek film (star trek has had many styles over time after all) I have a problem with it being flashing lights that fall apart half way to the water cooler. We cant enjoy it together because it makes no sense.
@TURBODORK2 Speaking as someone who grew up on ST, I'd say it's better than most of them. It's certainly the one I'd most like to see again, even though it's the one I saw most recently.
What was the 'one joke' that would be difficult to explain to a 6 year old?
Thanks. lol. Here's a question though; Not being a Trek fan myself, would you say the film was dumbed down? Or if anything more mature and sophisticated than the original series which - although beloved like the old Doctor Who series - isn't/wasn't as good as the recent depiction? I am curious as to what your opinion is.
Well, Kirk literally is promoted to Captain right out of Starfleet Academy, which he didn't even graduate (say what you will about Gene Roddenberry as a writer, but he WAS ex-Military & understood why you didn't hand out Command Slots to Brave Bold Kidz!); Spock is too emotional by several orders of magnitude, even before his planet and his human mother die in front of him (what makes Spock a great character is NOT that he lacks emotion, it's that he's been trained to know how emotions cloud your judgment and how not to let them get in the way of your thinking, even when you desperately want them to); Nero's plot for vengeance is so out there Bond Villains are going "Oh, Puh-Leeze!"...
Like I said above - it's a Fun Crashy-Bangy Adventure set in outer space, But It's Not STAR TREK.
Definitely one of the best films of the year.
Splendid entertainment!
Yeah there was a lot of nods to the Star trek Franchise. The Actors did a great job. But there was something wrong about it, the feel of the picture was for a different
demographic then the originals. A younger audience, and tho there an eye for details. it seemed shallow.
Just saw earlier tonight, awesome trek movie! Ranks up there with Wrath of Khan but is a completely different type of movie.
I 100% agree. More trek movies like this please
@SurlyCalifornia most of the best sci-fis dont conform to our laws. There ultimately about ideas and exploring them in a fantastical universe. Not that hard sci-fi is'nt good. I loved moon, but the Director's follow up 'Souce Code' was also great, and that was anything but 'hard'
Well Star Trek 2: Wrath of Khan of course, if you will only watch one then that is it.
If there was a runner up, then I'd Say Star Trek 6: The Undiscovered Country, which is my personal favourite.
As a rule of thumb, avoid the odd numbered movies which tend to be either too ponderous or just underwhelming.
A brilliant review. A proper film unlike the trashy Transformers
Lol 'Ipod shop' so true. The thing that annoys me is that the masses lap these type of films up.
The Wraith of Kain? Wow.You know your stuff.
Star trek 6 is the best in my opinion, a great send off for the original crew.
If you liked Star Trek 2009 at all I HIGHLY recommend the Star Trek films:
Pretty much any of the films that used the original cast will do... though ST1 may be a bit uninspired and number 5 is just awful (that was the one directed by Shatner).
I mean you HAVE to see them just for the "KHAAN!" scene, it is as famous as Vader saying "I am your father". Everyone has seen the Original Star Wars trilogy, I suggest Star Wars 2, 3, 4, (NOT 5!) and 6 as well as the first if you are still interested.
@SurlyCalifornia You have your genuine hard sci-fi film. It's called Star Trek and was released in 2009. I suggest you watch it.
i love star treck but outside of the casting i think the movie sucked. chris pine, zach quinto and Karl urban were all great. but the fact that you had a new Zealand actor playing a young mccoy made that role even cooler.
Star Trek was a great move, invigorating a stagnant mythos, that was as trapped by it's history as it was enriched by it.
Cutting the ties to continuity will allow the conceptual strengths of the franchise to be explored in new and relevant ways, something even the best episodes have not been able to do in a long time, let alone the largely terrible movies.
If not a reboot, then what? An 'Enterprise' movie? Fuck THAT.
@SurlyCalifornia This film bothered to do the whole summer blockbuster thing exactly the way it used to be done. PROPERLY. There's this new school of thinking everyone's getting away with now where a film with only all the appeal of its trailer hasn't come short. Before, we used to get all the trailer stuff AND then all the great character stuff and all the witty script stuff (a much better deal, don't you think?). Now that can't go unappreciated can it? That's filmmaking by people who care.
It made up for the mess that was Star Trek: Nemesis.
The Empire Strikes back was my fave, whats so wrong with it?
Yes, I agree the fist films were so bad that anything that doesn't suck seems good by comparison.
6:01 Leo Nard Knee Moy 😂
I'm not sure why people focus on Kermode liking Twilight when he just said that he has no problem with homoerotic startrek fan ficiton
I thought the undiscovered country was death not he future.
That's what I thought was cool about this movie. It's not a reboot where they pretend everything before didn't happen.
Well lots of things. ST5 isn't the worst film ever made... see it as like Phantom Menace
No one can quite explain why but in 10 movies a pattern somehow appeared where you'd have one good, one bad.
Of course by the time the pattern was noticed and popularised it didn't work any more a la Nemesis.
I think it is due to the Director Nicolas Meyer would not work on a direct sequel to any of his works. Also the actors quite frequently tried to direct or write the films... with inconsistent success.
Lol, I don't know why I read that as as SW. Alright then, I'll bite, what's wrong with Star TREK!!!! No 5?
I saw it, decent script, nice special effects, usuall bad guys who seem incapable of making the decisive blow despite being in an excellant position to do so.
As far as blockbusters go its head and shoulders above alot of films but its not a classic. Best trek film though.
Kermode, the Undiscovered Country is death, not the future. Jeez, how could you get that wrong? It's from Shakespeare before it showed up on Star Trek.
@mspirit In what way was it stupid?
I love that film
@ilpalozzo I think he's just saying it in a jokey way, as Nemoy actually speaks that way.
I like Mark Kermode but he has a weird way of pronouncing Leonard as Leo Nard which was kinda jarring
Karl Urban was perfect as bones
JJs best film
STAR TREK I,II,III,IV,V,VI enough said.
Why not?
Totally agreed.
I seemed like a paint by numbers movie to me.
Yeah it is certainly got more going for it than the latest nonsense. I can't understand why so many people like the latest film. Have people become zombies?
Undoing the last forty years of star trek isn't clever, Mark. It's fucking infuriating!
It's an ok movie. But it's a hell of a lot better then most of the other Star Trek movies that's for sure. All the TNG ones are god awful.
while the movie was entertaining and flashy, the plot made no sense at all. you gotta discuss the stupidity of Nero's motivation. It was an okay space adventure movie, but it really did not feel like star trek except the cliches they threw in
I think you mean re-boots, not re-writes.
for a Action sci-fi its well made but its a horrid dumb down water star trek. The best Star Trek always had sumthing to say about the present world and not be preachy, this was hollow in the end at best paying lip service.
at 5:43 if you look close enough you can actually see Simon’s face muscles clenching and twitching under the weight of a thousand homophobic slurs
why you taking a photograph of me?
coz your funny
First Kermode video I have ever disliked, traveling back in time in order to ignore canon is not a great idea.
great movie, 2nd best trek film.
no way. this movie was amazing. I do not know of one person, apart from you who does not like it.
I don't think I will ever like it. It's more of a homage than a star trek movie. The characters aren't endearing, it has a lame villain and a silly storyline. First contact was a brilliant film.
Hmm, I'm talking about Star TREK not Star Wars.
Anyhoo, Empire is my fav Star Wars film and IMHO all the films of the Original Trilogy are classics. Can't say the same for the New Trilogy.
So true.
@verty87 they've been doing this for 10 years, and Kermode jabbers away this much every week!
The new star trek is an entertaining film, but it is forgetable just 10 minutes after watching it.
2 problems with this film:
1) the really annoying over-usage of lense flares
2) the clumsy humor that didn't fit on any level. In fact is was so bad, that not even Simon Pegg managed to make me grin, let alone laugh.
Aside from that it was fine and definitely entertaining.
@swinsty08 It was dumbed down from the intellectual high of going back in time to save a whale to sing to a spaceship to stop it destroying the world?
It was ok-forgotten a few days later tho. Not a classic
Oh dear... a Troll that thinks it can think. You enjoy the nice shiny new Trek. They've taken all the difficult stuff out and made it instantly forgettable so your head won't hurt at all.
Oh, and you can thank Paramount for the pile of crap that Nemesis ended up as. Slash the budget, rip off 'Wrath of Khan', and hire a third rate director no one ever heard of. Now that was smart thinking...
I guess you are right, because tip-toeing around a bunch of pedantic nerds for the rest of the series lifetime makes so much more sense right?
The effects, the crew, the acting were all great.
Shame the fucking script was complete shit. Seriously, so full of holes, so inconsistent, so lacking.
Guy on the left seems bored stiff.
its good but NOT better than the other trek movies including star trek V