Just got back from seeing it in 3-D. I am still chewing on it; I won't talk about it in detail until others have seen it (so no spoilers). However, I will mention a few things:

1) It was entertaining and fun. I liked the "parallel universe" nuggets and what they did with some of the character arcs. However, I have concluded that the Spock-Uhura thing does not work for me. In future movies I would take it out completely. It serves no purpose.

2) Visually I really liked the space scenery. However (sorry MJ), the lens flares HAVE TO STOP. It was really intrusive throughout the film for me and I am sick of it. In 3-D it's really bad at times on the bridge to where it made the scene seem "blurry"...enough of this crap already! Too much is too much.

3) Musically, I think the score is very unmemorable and sub-par, much like the first film. During a docking sequence moment (when we get a view of the Enterprise in space dock), I remember clearly thinking how much I miss Jerry Goldsmith's work for the ST franchise. I think the ST theme was played maybe once or twice in the whole film, which I suppose is fine, but Giacchino (whatever his name is) failed to provide an alternative that sticks out.

4) The story is interesting, and things are left open on a couple of plot points. But I agree with Andy in that they waited too long to push this out - we should already be on the third installment by now, and with the way the film ends one hopes that they will start cranking them out now. I guess the box office will determine whether they do or not. The bottom line is that they now have the opportunity to explore a lot of stuff, and I hope they do on a regular basis. Grade-wise I would be between 6-8/10, probably falling on 7/10.

8/10

Highly enjoyable sequel marred only by the pandering to past Trekkie lore...it's a completely different universe, did we really need to be served plot leftovers (albiet skillfully, unpredictably reheated ones) from a notable previous film? Still, a lot of fun (at least they didn't go all Grimdark on us and have kept plenty of humor in the mix, unlike a lot of sequels), and I too hope that future films will be released at a faster clip. J.J. Abrams did a great job setting up a new Trek universe, now it's time to let another filmmaker play around in it.

Going tonight...I will say this: I haven't seen this kind of a spread in reviews in a long, LONG time. EW gave it an A. Couple of different critics, from the AP to Michael Medved, gave it 2 stars out of 4 (Medved gave it 1.5 stars!). So there's a really large gap.

Very strange. Guess I'll see why later!

One of the reasons I want to see them jettison the Uhura-Spock thing is because it is taking away from relationships developing between Kirk, Spock, and McCoy. I have no problem with Spock being more emotional but I honestly don't want to see a love story line develop between him and Uhura since it isn't significant to the meta-narrative...unless Uhura becomes a "damsel in distress" type which forces Spock to do this or that...which would be unbearable.

One of the things I did like about the film was its pandering to past Trekkie lore and how they manipulated it within the context of an alternate timeline universe (can't be more specific without giving it away). HOWEVER, I feel it is time for the franchise to move on and start to develop its own identity with a few nods to the original series universe. The last thing I want to see from this series is it being solely a reimagining of TV episodes and films.

And I don't want to wait four years to see the next one...lol...I agree with MJ that it's time for someone else to take the franchise to other places. Besides, if we have to wait for JJ Abrams to finish the next Star Wars film, then they will need new cast members for the next Star Trek film!

Yeah, no. This one didn't quite do it for me - the movie was not great, but somewhat serviceable and entertaining. I think it was a cop out to throw in a "retired" Nimoy again to serve as your plot point.

And when the hell is Giacchino going to stop using that really fey arrangement of Courage's theme over the end credits. When is the Abrams Star Trek "brand" going to establish its own identity?

There were some good moments - and certainly there was a foundation. Like with anything, a better writer (ahem Nicholas Meyer) would have added more depth and better plot points to the proceedings.

And now I know why some critics hated it...

I disliked it even more than you Ed. (My full review is up on the front page and in the Rate the Last movie thread)

Nimoy's cameo -- the point of that was....?

Giacchino's score -- horrifically loud. The end title Courage arrangement was cringe-inducing in the original and just as bad here. Doesn't fit at all with his minor-key theme.

Hated the shrillness of it -- the lack of dramatic tension, the ADD leveled editing, Abrams' constant whirling camera -- and the ultimate "fallback" on THE WRATH OF KHAN dialogue and plot points...and yet, I felt NOTHING emotionally from this film. Ever. During any point.

A big mistake of a film across many levels...I was actually hoping for it to end

And that's what I get for passionately arguing in Abrams' defense!! lol. Oh well. Now I'm having second thoughts about STAR WARS...but as long as his pals Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof aren't writing it, I'll remain cautiously optimistic. Kinda.

Admittedly, Spock's cameo was very awkward. I don't understand why some people are raving about Giacchino's score...last night I had to listen to scores from TOS because his was just so bad! Lol...

I wasn't as disappointed with the rehash of KHAN - I liked that the shoe was on the other foot in the alternate timeline so that it was Kirk who had to save the ship rather than Spock. I also didn't mind the rehash of dialogue here and there. But here's the difference: I never once thought that Kirk would truly be dead (meaning that he would get revived somehow). It was entertaining to me but not moving, a la KHAN. The story certainly did not have the depth of the best Trek films, including KHAN.

I did like that they kind of set up the possibility of a future story with the alien race they violated the Prime Directive with. But I didn't like that Bones took a back seat to Uhura. It seems to me, with the angle of the romance between Spock and Uhura (though not deeply explored in this film), that Bones is going to be less and less significant unless someone decides to end this madness.

Maybe I need to clarify my review, but I didn't mind that they "remixed KHAN" so much as I minded that the movie sucked lol. Like I've said, I don't care that they're "treading over canon" -- because I LIKED the 2009 film -- my problem with this movie is solely on the basis of its craptastic script.

KHAN plays out like a Shakespearian drama compared to this frenetic, two-hour bubblegum chase movie. There's no substance to the film, there's scarcely any stop from the loud, bombastic pacing -- I even felt the "we need a message, because it's STAR TREK" element to be totally patronizing. (I noticed Pine's "commencement speech" was totally redubbed, none of it matching what was on-screen)

None of it felt authentic to me, and that includes the KHAN aspects of the second half. This film wasn't remaking KHAN until the latter stages, and then when it did, it just ripped dialogue wholesale.

I wouldn't have minded if it worked -- but it didn't. It was if they ran out of material, and fell back on what came before -- but it was empty. I felt nothing during the reprisal of the "reactor death scene". I felt the pacing died when Khan "teamed up" with Kirk. And I disliked the entire Peter Weller "Starfleet conspiracy" angle on top of it.

I should also add I nearly laughed outloud when the "chanting chorus" started belting out the "Klingon music." Giacchino has all the subtlety of a sledgehammer -- but then again, so does the film. His end credits music, the same exact piece as the first movie, is just ridiculous as it awkwardly reprises the Courage theme (sticking out like a sore thumb in its major key) with his "frenetic chase music"...and people like this music? Want to hear it apart from the film? Wow.

..and one more thing: yet again, we have Politically Correct casting right down the middle in this film.

Khan is supposed to be of Indian descent, no? Granted Montalban was of Mexican descent, but he generated a number of "ethnic" roles back in the heyday of old Hollywood and certainly did an amazing job in the part.

Who do they cast here? Yep, a white British guy. For a role of Indian descent! Aren't there any good Indian actors out there pissed off that they placed another Anglo actor into this part? (Just like IRON MAN...it HAS to be the white guy. Preferably of English or Australian descent lol).

They have become so preoccupied with sensitivity for the global market that it borders on the absurd. Cumberbatch is a fine young actor, but...does he look like Khan Noonien Singh to you? Don't they think the Indian market could've handled one of their own actors getting a big chance on-screen instead of seeing just another British guy in the part? Or are they SO sensitive to the "possible fallout of an ethnic villain" that they had to do something ridiculous like casting Cumberbatch as Khan? I guess we know the answer.

AndyDursin wrote:And now I know why some critics hated it...

I disliked it even more than you Ed. (My full review is up on the front page and in the Rate the Last movie thread)

Nimoy's cameo -- the point of that was....?

Giacchino's score -- horrifically loud. The end title Courage arrangement was cringe-inducing in the original and just as bad here. Doesn't fit at all with his minor-key theme.

Hated the shrillness of it -- the lack of dramatic tension, the ADD leveled editing, Abrams' constant whirling camera -- and the ultimate "fallback" on THE WRATH OF KHAN dialogue and plot points...and yet, I felt NOTHING emotionally from this film. Ever. During any point.

A big mistake of a film across many levels...I was actually hoping for it to end

And that's what I get for passionately arguing in Abrams' defense!! lol. Oh well. Now I'm having second thoughts about STAR WARS...but as long as his pals Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof aren't writing it, I'll remain cautiously optimistic. Kinda.

No, I think we're on the same level of dislike. Yes, there were moments that seemed good - but those are only moments. I left the movie not wanting to see it again, which was not the feeling I got with IRON MAN 3.

The more I had a chance to think about it overnight, the more I am disliking it.

1. What was the logical purpose of the convoluted use of that Starfleet officer by "Harrison" - and then developing this heart-tug dying child sub-routine to blow up the London Starfleet site near the beginning? By reason of creating writing, Harrison could have done it all by himself in stealth mode.

2. Torpedoes. You mean to tell me after 79 episodes, 6 movies, and a TNG episode, Scotty suddenly has a moralistic objection to photon topedoes and resigns? Convenient way to get him off the ship only to set up later plot points.

3. The Kirk-Spock reversal-of-death fortune sequence. Really? Was this intended to strengthen their bond or add a really cool hat-tip from the producers to the ST "fans" that we know Abrams so preciously loves.

4. Music. I was expecting better from Giacchino since I loved what he did with JOHN CARTER, but this just puts me back in that same opinion before JOHN CARTER.

I'm sure I will be "bothered" by more today. Oh, and the theater was not "packed" like the first movie. This theater was half empty, but completely full for IM3.

AndyDursin wrote:I should also add I nearly laughed outloud when the "chanting chorus" started belting out the "Klingon music." Giacchino has all the subtlety of a sledgehammer -- but then again, so does the film. His end credits music, the same exact piece as the first movie, is just ridiculous as it awkwardly reprises the Courage theme (sticking out like a sore thumb in its major key) with his "frenetic chase music"...and people like this music? Want to hear it apart from the film? Wow.

Excellent point...I remember that moment in the film and thinking how tacky and silly it was to put that music under the Klingon sequence. I don't even remember the end credits music from the first film, so I would have never known it was the same. It saddens me that the music is so bad and another opportunity has been missed.

I totally agree. I hate to be one of those people who breaks down every logical gaffe, but this movie had more than its fair share -- and almost all of them out stemmed from lousy writing.

Beyond that, what was the point of the whole heart-tugging girl in the hospital anyway? So he could be a suicide bomber? And I have to tell you, that sequence made me cringe given what happened in Boston. Not sure how well that played in these parts. On a larger point, I dislike it when filmmakers making 'popcorn flicks' feel the need to be 'gritty and realistic,' which is how those sequences played for me. I go for an escape -- not to be reminded of reality, and it hit too close to home there. Tasteless given the kind of film it was (and yes it was made before Boston, but the whole concept of introducing "realistic terror attacks" in these types of movies I find tasteless in general).

And the "evil Starfleet" angle flew in the face of Star Trek itself. The optimism of Roddenberry's vision -- that in the future, different groups, collectively working together, formed the greater good -- is why Star Trek was fundamentally upbeat and inspiring. Yet in this movie, Weller's fuddy duddy old commander is the REAL bad guy. I found that portion spectacularly disappointing.

3. The Kirk-Spock reversal-of-death fortune sequence. Really? Was this intended to strengthen their bond or add a really cool hat-tip from the producers to the ST "fans" that we know Abrams so preciously loves.

That's all it was, which is why it ticked me off. This film wasn't a KHAN re-do until the latter portions, and then it was like, "see, we've got you! It was Khan all along! Here's a scene you remember....but WOW, IT HAS DIFFERENT CHARACTERS SPEAKING THE SAME LINES!" As if that's going to make us get all warm and tingly inside?

That's what I meant to them being desperate. Would've meant ANYTHING if you hadn't seen the actual WRATH OF KHAN?

And I nearly laughed when Spock delivered his KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN line. Sorry!

4. Music. I was expecting better from Giacchino since I loved what he did with JOHN CARTER, but this just puts me back in that same opinion before JOHN CARTER.

I also liked Giacchino's JOHN CARTER score, but this was another empty vessel from him. Too bad, seeing as he's one of the last salvations left for straight orchestral music on screen.

As far as the cast goes, Pine -- who I was mostly upbeat on -- did nothing for me here. I like Quinto's performance alright under the circumstances (his Nimoy-like speech patterns are dead on target), but nobody else really had the opportunity to do much of anything.

Box office results are coming in and they're not pretty.

Right now looks like a $75 million 4-day opening -- well under the 1st movie, and nowhere near the $100 mil they were initially projecting.

Add in that this one has 3-D and IMAX associated with inflation, and it's a big disappointment.

Mark my words: with a crash next weekend, this might be the end of this series, with Abrams moving on to Star Wars and all. And once again Paramount will need to sit down and figure out what draws people to Star Trek, because this ain't it...

I'm avoiding the plot discussion here, but in looking at the other descriptions, it sounds like my fears about this franchise were well founded.

If anything, this sounds like they dashed off the script pretty quickly and assumed that it would all hang together on the action beats. Does this sound accurate to people who have seen the movie?

Either way, I'm not planning on seeing it in the movie theater. The fact that Abrams clearly hasn't learned his lesson about the shaky cam and the lens flares makes such a thing really difficult for me to watch. And I do like Giacchino's music - in the right setting. It never felt right in the 2009 movie for me. On the other hand, I've always liked Giacchino's music on LOST, where I found it moving and effective.

Maybe for a third movie, if they make one, they'll assemble a stronger writing/directing team with experience actually making good movies with this franchise. I'm sure that Nicholas Meyer is available, and if they would have only included him here, they could easily have avoided the pitfalls in which it appears they fell.

If they do make a third film, it has to be without Abrams and his team. Time to move on to someone else. If they don't make another one, Paramount screwed up again (but this time we can't blame Rick Berman).