AndrewBloom

4/10

Spoilers

What happens when you give the keys to the *Star Trek* kingdom to the director of the *Fast and the Furious* movies? You get a franchise known for its thematic depth and attention to character reduced to a series of whiz-bang action sequences and only the shallow veneer of theme or character development on top of it. Make no mistake, *Star Trek Beyond* is a film that can barely get the surface-level details right, and stumbles in its abbreviated attempts to go beyond them. And the result is a generally dull action film that could have its serial numbers shaved off and thus be wholly unrecognizable as anything related to *Star Trek*. The film is most striking in how it fails where its predecessors succeeded. It's true that there was little of the heady optimism at play in the 2009 *Star Trek* reboot, but what the movie lacked in thematic heft, it made up for in terms of giving the audience a journey focused on character. The greatest conflicts in the film are not between the Enterprise and the Romulans, but within and between the film's two biggest characters. Kirk starts out as a good-for-little scoundrel and through his experiences in the film, evolves into an officer, albeit one who is still charmingly rough around the edges. Spock starts out as a man unable to reconcile his human side and his Vulcan side, and through his experiences in the film's adventure, he find balance and peace. Most importantly, those two character arcs intersect in meaningful ways and make us invested in those in charge of the enterprise. By contrast, *Beyond* suggests a similarly intriguing start for both Kirk and Spock, but peters out between the beginning of their journey and the intended destination. The idea of a somewhat jaded James T. Kirk, having lost some of his passion, wondering if his mission even matters given the enormity of space, and contemplating whether to hang up his spurs, is a superb one that made me think director Justin Lin and writer Simon Pegg (who also plays Scotty) and Doug Jung (who plays Sulu's husband) were following the 2009 film's lead in this regard. Similarly, the notion that Spock, rattled by his alternative timeline counterpart's death, also feels inclined to give up Starfleet to focus on carrying on the elder Spock's goal to rehabilitate the Vulcan people, creates numerous storytelling possibilities and a parallel sense of restlessness to the character that mirrors Kirk's. The state of play as *Beyond* begins seems poised to tell another compelling, character-focused story of growth and change. Instead, by the end of the film, Kirk has decided to stay in active duty; Spock stays a part of his crew, and the reasons for their change of heart are fuzzy at best. Whereas the 2009 film spent ample time showing events that marked the changes in Kirk and Spock's mentalities and perspective, *Beyond* amounts to something along the lines of, "They wanted to leave. They went on an adventure. Now they don't" without nearly enough connective tissue to get at the *why* of the shift in their plans. It's an Underpants Gnomes approach to character development that falls flat. There are vague concepts of "unity" as an important principle floating the film, but *Beyond* does little to tie it into concrete incidents that motivate Kirk and Spock to be in a different place at the end of the film than they were at the beginning. Instead, they just go on an adventure and come back different, which makes their supposed evolution narrative unsatisfying and ultimately unearned. It doesn't help that the whole "unity is good" concept underlying the film is dramatized in about as shallow and trite a manner as one could imagine. It's a fluffy theme to begin with, and *Star Trek Beyond* doesn't do much to make it any more weighty or meaningful in how its realized in the conflict of the film or the characters' actions, especially in the context of on-the-nose dialogue to that effect. Say what you will about *Star Trek Into Darkness*, and there's plenty to say, but at least the film had the moxie to explore, as its hallowed predecessors did, some of the major social and political issues of the day. There's room to criticize *Into Darkness*'s approach, and other flaws derivative elements that hobbled the film out of the gate, but tackling concepts of militarization and the security state feels of a piece with the politically-charged spirit of The Original Series and its successors. Its reach exceeded its grasp, but there was a nobility in the attempt. *Beyond*, on the other hand, is content to coast on a vague *Barney*-esque notion of teamwork as a guiding principle and theme that barely feels worthy of a generic space adventure, let alone a franchise like *Star Trek*. The new ally introduced in the film is a lone wolf, wayward traveler brought into the Starfleet fold, whereas it's villain is motivated by a rejection of unity and the benefits of collective action, in a skin-deep realization of that contrast meant to be the film's focal point. Idris Elba is completely wasted in the latter role, an outstanding actor reduced to snarls and platitudes that do not do him justice. In fact, few cast members are given material worthy of their talents. What little they're given to work with in terms of expressing this theme, undercooked though it may be, is lost in a sea of stock beats and action set pieces that feel almost wholly disconnected and inadequate to convey what the film is shooting for. Those set pieces, which ought to be the saving grace of bringing in a director like Justin Lin, are also a surprising weakness for the film. While there's no shortage of action, almost all of it is shot and directed in a nigh-incoherent fashion that makes it difficult to follow what's happening from scene to muddled scene. Lin and cinematographer Stephen F. Windon pay little mind to ideas of geography or scope, rendering what ought to be a strength of *Beyond*, instead a collection of occasionally-cool moments with little to put them in context with one another. The film can boast an enjoyable anti-gravity sequence, and its Beastie Boys-fueled excitement is enjoyable if silly, but for the most part, the visual fireworks of *Beyond* fizzle out into a hodgepodge of undifferentiated combat and explosions. The film does have its merits. The dynamic between Spock and Bones is the best realized element of the film and lives up to the humor and endearing qualities that Leonard Nimoy and DeForest Kelley imbued into that relationship. And for however much the film's action falters, its design work is impeccable, from the unique look of newcomer Jaylah to the geometric wizardry of the Yorktown Space Station. But they pale in comparison to the fundamental elements of *Star Trek*, whether they be from the pre-2009 shows and movies or the Abrams films, where *Beyond* totally misfires. At its best, *Star Trek* features the focus on character that drove the original series, bolstered the 2009 reboot, and is realized in only a meager, perfunctory fashion in *Beyond*. The franchise can soar in its examination of meaningful social and political issues in a fantastical setting, in keeping with its science fiction roots, a virtue *Beyond* sacrifices in favor of a generic message about working together. This film skips the heavy lifting of showing us how the characters at the core of the franchise develop and grow, and the burden of telling a story that can be both heady and thrilling, in favor of an easy, unambitious action film that has a handful of good moments, but only the patina of what made *Star Trek* special. *Star Trek Beyond* is like any other middling cinematic sci-fi adventure of the past decade, with only a Trek-inspired coat of paint to distinguish it, and that's the film's greatest sin. **Edit:** On rewatch nearly five years later I...still agree almost completely with my previous review. I probably wouldn't rate it as poorly, but even knowing where everything is heading, this film is a narrative mess that substitutes bland platitudes and indiscriminate action for having an actual story or character or point with any genuine depth. With Simon Pegg as a credited screenwriter, there's more charming references to *The Original Series* (e.g. Kirk ripping his shirt, Chekov claiming that scotch is Russian) and even some homages to *Star Trek: Enterprise* (a mention of the Xindi!). But those cute callbacks don't make up for this flashy, indiscriminate clump of a movie. The one thing I would revise is that there's at least a decent arc for Spock here. he thinks that living up to Spock Prime's legacy means leaving Starfleet to help Vulcans, only to see how much his friends and colleagues need him and realize that Spock Prime's legacy was helping and standing by his friends. It's bare bones, but it's there, and the movie deserves credit for it. Still, a rewatch does this no favors. If anything, it just confirms the film's Underpants Gnomes approach to storytelling, the jumbled pacing and lumpy structure, and the unavailing action sequences that make it something less than the fun success of *ST'09* and less even than the noble failure of *Into Darkness*. I'd probably upgrade it to a [5.5/10], but it's still a real low-light among the reboot films.

saundrew

7/10

The best thing about this movie is that it is actually a fully contained story. This feels like an episode from the TV show blown up to be a bigger deal. They don't make you need any backstory, or hope for some future movie's story. I think this is something a lot of franchises need to stick with. The main cast is still great together. I think this is one of the biggest upsides to the whole new Star Trek universe. They cast perfectly and write great dialogue for their interactions. The actors do a great job balancing the comedy of their personas along with serious moments. I don't have any acting gripes at all. The issues I do have with this though, is when the film pushes the comedy into ridiculousness. There are times when the laughter takes precedent over realism. Don't get me wrong, I know this is science fiction. I'm not judging the space tech here. But sometimes the comedy flies in the face of any logic at all. A big part of that for me is the music sequence in the climax. I didn't hate what was happening, but I certainly rolled my eyes. Overall though, really good watch. Not as good as the first reboot film, but certainly better than the last one. I can't even remember the last one, put it out of my mind.

FinFan

7/10

Spoilers

Interesting how there seem to be more negative reviews here than in the ones before whereas I think this was the best one of the series. Or maybe I´m just getting used to it. Anyway, I´ve critizised the Abramsverse a lot but this one was a small step in the right direction. I would attribute this largely to the fact that Abrams isn´t involved directly in this movie. Yes, it is still more like blockbuster cinema but there is improvement. We finally get rid of that annoying lensflare and this is something new not just a twisted old story [spoiler] (althought the crash of the saucer on the planet.....nah, it´s allright.) [/spoiler]. Gone is the sometimes silly behavior and unnessessary stupid humor. There is one part of the movie I didn´t like and that was [spoiler] the part where to music kills the bees [/spoiler] that is the kind of > let us do something cool < factor I didn´t like in the first two movies but the rest was really solid. Still not comparable with the old, and it never will be, but for now enough to convince me to give the next one a try. As I mentioned before - even if those new trek franchise would do nothing for me it generated interest and, more important, revenue that led to another tv show. Here´s hoping that it will do well.

dgw

4/10

Spoilers

How the mighty franchise falls. I've been a Star Trek fan since catching my first partial episode of _Voyager_ with my dad, during the original run. I followed the broadcasts on UPN (remember them?) for the last couple years leading up to the series finale. Meanwhile, I got caught up on the rest of the shows, and several of the movies. I should have seen _Nemesis_ for the omen it was. Other reviewers have already covered the flaws in impeccable detail (see https://trakt.tv/comments/90923 by @abstractals and https://trakt.tv/comments/91751 by @andrewbloom for starters), and I don't feel the need to rehash the details, but… The defining adjective for this film is "muddy". The cinematography is muddy; the writing is muddy; the acting is muddy; the message is muddy. Makes me wonder just how much it rained when they were out shooting on location. Only a few minutes in, the film's tone goes off the rails and ceases to feel like Star Trek. It coasts along at breakneck speed through firefight after firefight, in space and on land, barely ever stopping to let boring details like character motivation get in a word. As a result, I honestly don't care about anyone. Not a single character. There was a moment on [spoiler]the _Franklin_[/spoiler] late in the film when I thought (for some reason) that [spoiler]Krall had killed Scotty[/spoiler]… I was wrong, but it would have been completely unsurprising. Maybe I'd been primed not to care by the [spoiler]dozens (at leasT) of crew members that were shown getting sucked into space as Krall's "bees" tore the _Enterprise_ apart[/spoiler]. Really, it's hard to find a scene in which nobody dies—or at least gets shot, with ambiguous outcome at best—for much of the film. The _Star Trek_ I know really makes you feel the weight of deaths, even if they're "just" redshirts. This…whatever it is…doesn't. It's all action movie porn. And they can't even stick to how "Treknology" is supposed to work—what starship captain in his right mind would [spoiler]give the order to go to warp after the deflector dish has been destroyed[/spoiler]? It would be suicide. I hope there are no more reboot films, because I'll feel obligated to see them at some point and by now I know I'll just be disappointed.

Whitsbrain

6/10

It's kind of dishonest for the Star Trek series to keep saying "Where no one has gone before" because it's not true. There's nothing new about "Star Trek Beyond". The J.J. Abrams movie franchise is now a full on Action series. There's nothing wrong with that, really. It just doesn't differentiate itself from most everything else anymore. Everyone loves the crew of the Enterprise. My own personal favorites are Chris Pine as Kirk and Karl Urban as Dr. McCoy. The rest of the cast is solid as well and there's nothing in "Star Trek Beyond" that will change anyone's affection for the feisty crew. The problem is that for as big as the Universe is, the stories are sure getting same-y. For the third straight Abrams installment, we get another insane criminal who manages to pull together the resources to threaten the Federation. Another issue is that the characters are so loved that you never really believe that anyone is in danger. Somehow everyone (other than the red shirts) comes through largely unharmed, no matter how remote the odds. Overall, this movie was good. But there are so many annoying things about it. First on the list had to be wiping out an entire fleet of millions of attacking fighter craft with the song "Sabotage". Now, this isn't accompanying music that plays WHILE the bad guys are being defeated, it's the actual song that's making them explode. So, the Beastie Boys are to thank for saving the Federation's outpost. Yeah...okay. And setting aside yet another rant, Kirk on the motorcycle...the less said about that silliness the better. There's a new character named Jaylah introduced here. She's yet another tougher than nails female character that twirls around, swinging a stick like some Martial Arts master. Later, she engages in a bit of kickboxing or something resembling it. This type of character is becoming tiresome. "Rogue One" also featured Jyn Erso as it's main character and guess what she was good at? Yep. Twirling around kicking everyone's tail like a ninja. What an overused, boring trope this has become. It's doesn't matter if it's a Science Fiction, Horror, Superhero, or Sword-and-Sandals flick, there's always a women beating everyone up in the exact same way. Ripley, where are you when we need you? It's got to take a ton of effort to make a movie like this. One thing that shouldn't be overlooked is that this features good performances from actors that have managed to become appreciated while trying to fill the shoes of aging Star Trek legends. It really is remarkable and as much as "Star Trek Beyond" can be knocked for its outrageous action and lack of serious danger, it continues to earn props for always being entertaining and amazing to look at.