Star Trek 3: Looking For Spock (1984)

Star Trek 2: Khan’s anger is a worldwide success (well, except in France, as usual). So much so that very shortly after its release to the cinema, producer Harve Bennett has the green light to floor on the sequel. Remember: at the end of Star Trek 2, an unbearable suspense: the Spock icon dies, sacrificing itself for the survival of the crew of the Enterprise. Leonard Niamey, having resumed his taste for this character who has made his reputation, wants to be involved in this suite which he will be the main subject: very early, Harve Bennett indeed decides that the main theme of the film will be the resurrection of Spock. Another legacy of the previous film: the creation of the planet Genesis, thanks to a terraforming device. This planet, on which is sent the sarcophagus containing the remains of Spock, is at the center of the plot: its realization is imperfect, and its reprieve will be short-lived. Nimoy also wants to include the Klingons, Starfleet’s historical opponents, in the case.

If the majority of the film follows directly from the previous one, there is some novelties: Kirstie Alley does not take again its role, being probably too greedy question salary. Actress Robin Curtis takes over until the next episode, Return to Earth(Leonard Niamey, 1986). Similarly, this opus marks the return of Sarek, the father of Spock, interpreted by Mark Lenard, as in the original series. Vulcan manners take on considerable importance in this episode, legitimizing even more Nimoy, become one of the greatest “vulcanologists” (dixit Harve Bennett). However, the change of actor to director does not please everyone, and Nimoy was tested by his fellow travelers. Wiliam Shatnar did not return, proclaiming to anyone who wants to hear that all that Nimoy knows about staging, he must … Shatner will also benefit from the renegotiation of his contract for the episode IV to demand the post of director for the future best star trek movie V (reminder, the worst episode, by far,

Another matter to follow, the destiny of James Kirk’s son, David: The threads are woven, remain to make a beautiful work. The main narrative arc, despite its richness for the mythology of the saga, is still quite weak and takes a good time to conclude, even if it is the opportunity of the historic crew of the Enterprise to form a gallery of renegades sympathetic sympathetic. One always plays the card of the old ones who always have under the sole, against young people who do not seem to have the same spirit of fighting spirit. To note, the ship For this, the special effects, designed by ILM for the second time in the history of the saga, are very well made. The ship Excelsior, supposed to succeed the aging Enterprise, is successful,

Finally, and even if Christopher Lloyd is good in all the excessiveness of a Klingon leader, Star Trek 3 is much more focused on mysticism than on action and space prowess: the Spock spirit investing Bones, the ritual of young Vulcan on the planet Genesis, finally the return of the spirit of Spock in his body. A true center of an untried trilogy, Star Trek 3, Nimoy’s first achievement, is a good-looking best star trek movie¬† but shines more in its introspection than action sequences.

Star Trek Into Darkness (2013)

It will finally be necessary until 2013 to see my first Star Trek on the big screen! Yet, it was far from won: the false reboot / remake of Abrams had disappointed me during his viewing on DVD. I was going a little backwards, but at the same time, a space opera like best star trek movie must be seen in the cinema … Dont act.

Abrams is now the geek filmmaker par excellence, his films having at the moment still related to a popular culture furiously eighties . Super 8 recalls Goonies youth movies , Impossible Mission III(the least successful) is part of a series of consistent film series; just like Star Trek , and soon Star Wars . As a connoisseur of mythology, anxious both to satisfy the fans of the first hour as the younger generation who know that Star Trek fame (and often not very good reputation), the kit an actionerand a thundering blockbuster, which does not hide its lack of staging quality. The camera moves, all the time, very quickly, no doubt taken by the urgency to give a stirring result for a saga that is often pilloried for its slowness. On this side, nothing transcendent, no scene stands out from the whole, and, one will be tempted to affirm, will not remain in the annals. However, this follows without displeasure.

It is astonishing to see that, in its perilous exercise of ni-suite-ni-remake-ni-reboot, the film is stuck in the wake of the second film of the film sagaof the 1980s, himself referring explicitly to an episode of the original TV series. Where strangely the film works best is in his attitude to constantly look in the rearview mirror without letting go of the neophyte. As if no best star trek movie could exist without invoking the sacrosanct original mythology. Is it only to flatter the geek? For the moment, I do not believe it; this dimension is successful, just like his villain, played by a very charismatic Benedict Cumberbatch (most prominent of the film, most certainly).

Otherwise, I always many doubts about -Captain Kirk Chris Pine, which boils down to a face of Yankee chubby which is struggling to play. Spock’s position – Zachary Quinto – is more enjoyable, in its constant detachment from external events; the best scenes are often for him. In supporting roles, Simon Pegg is quite good, even if it loses some of its natural wanting to emulate its emphasis on original Scotty (even criticizes worse for the poor Anton Yelchin, rolling like a caricature of R Russkov).

If the scenario shines by some rather complex detours, the visual invoice is common to shovels of blockbusters flooding screens every summer. Many close-ups, never composed a sequence very graphically, but still a nice tempo, which spares few breaks in the middle of pyrotechnic outburst at work (Kirk / Spock scene in the last part, even if the fan will recognize the same scene in Khan’s anger , simply reversed). So, for now, there is little evidence of Abrams’ talent, except in terms of marketing. The intentions are good, the execution less convincing, even if it gives the show. Regarding his next film, which will already be the success of the year 2015, we are waiting for him at the turn, without much

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *