For the Love of Spock (2016)

When months ago I committed to catching up with The Big Bang Theory (I had seen some episodes of the first few seasons multiple times over the years but never watched the whole thing), I saw an episode in which Sheldon is asked to be a part of a documentary about Spock which was being made by Leonard Nimoy's son, Adam. That's how I learnt about For the Love of Spock and, even though I'm not a Star Trek fanatic, I was immediately interested in it.

As I mentioned above, Adam Nimoy's documentary was supposed to focus entirely on the character of Spock, but, when Leonard Nimoy passed away in 2015 while the film still was in the making, Adam decided to explore the life of his father as well, analysing both his professional and private life, putting under scope his relationship with his father as well.

Star Trek Beyond (2016)

Genre

Action | Adventure | Sci-Fi

Director

Justin Lin

Country

USA

Cast

Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Karl Urban, Zoe Saldana, Simon Pegg, John Cho, Anton Yelchin, Idris Elba, Sofia Boutella, Joe Taslim, Lydia Wilson, Sara Maria Forsberg, Deep Roy, Danny Pudi, Shohreh Aghdashloo, Greg Grunberg, Melissa Roxburgh, Anita Brown, Doug Jung, Dan Payne, Sean Whigham

Storyline

The USS Enterprise crew explores the furthest reaches of uncharted space, where they encounter a new ruthless enemy who puts them and everything the Federation stands for to the test.

Opinion

After weeks, I've finally managed to see one of the films that I've been waiting for the most this year. Just like I always do, I went in without knowing anything about the plot, I just trusted the film to be good because of the cast and previous entries. I didn't even bother checking other people's reviews or scores on websites such as Rotten Tomatoes. I just didn't want to be influenced. And it probably was a smart move, because the high rating on Rotten Tomatoes would have had my expectations soar only to see them fall down while watching the film. What am I trying to say? That "Star Trek Beyond" is a bland, flat and forgettable film.

The film does have some positive aspects, but first I'm going to talk about the enormous amount of flaws, starting from the story. It is paper thin and atrociously dull and filled with so many plot holes it would sink if it was a ship. It has no depth whatsoever - not that I was expecting a philosophical film still -, and it doesn't give you a reason to care for the good guys. Nor for the bad guys for the matter.

And since I'm talking about bad guys, I have to mention the villain, Krall. Since I'm avoiding you spoilers, I'll just say that his motivations are never really clear. Unfortunately that's not the only problem with him. He doesn't even have a proper backstory. Almost as if kids wrote the screenplay. And the worst part is that Idris Elba doesn't deliver anything but a one-dimensional villain. But at least he is not putting his face in this mess.

Next stop the action. Probably it's because everything was going too fast and there were too many different camera shots all together, but the action sequences were quite a mess and uninteresting. You can tell this film was "directed" by Justin Lin because the action is completely unrealistic, like on "Furious 7". Starships are indestructible, gravity doesn't exist anymore.

I'm finally getting to the good stuff. Well, kinda. While Chris Pine does a quite good job and manages to carry the emotional weight of the film, and Zoe Saldana acts quite well, as always, the rest of the cast is a mess. Especially Zachary Quinto and Karl Urban. They usually give solid performances but this time they were flat as a board. I won't even waste time mentioning the rest of the cast.

Now it's coming the good stuff. There are a few moments that had me smiling, some other moments that are kinda sad - like the tributes to Leonard Nimoy -, the CGI is great - definitely what one would expect from a Star Trek flick - and the music is really good.

Is that enough to make up for the cost of the ticket? I don't think so. My suggestion then? Just pretend like this film just doesn't exist and enjoy the previous two films.

Star Trek Into Darkness (2013)

Genre

Action | Adventure | Sci-Fi

Director

J.J. Abrams

Country

USA

Cast

Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Benedict Cumberbatch, Simon Pegg, Karl Urban, Zoe Saldana, Alice Eve, John Cho, Peter Weller, Anton Yelchin, Bruce Greenwood, Leonard Nimoy Noel Clarke, Nazneen Contractor Christopher Doohan, Amanda Foreman, Jay Scully, Jonathan Dixon, Aisha Hinds, Joseph Gatt, Bill Hader, Deep Roy, Sean Blakemore

Storyline

When the crew of the Enterprise is called back home, they find an unstoppable force of terror from within their own organization has detonated the fleet and everything it stands for, leaving our world in a state of crisis. With a personal score to settle, Captain Kirk (Chris Pine) leads a manhunt to a war-zone world to capture a one-man weapon of mass destruction.

Opinion

Before "Star Trek" I didn't care at all about the franchise. I knew there was Kirk, a spaceship and an alien with pointy ears (Spock), that's all. As you saw last week, I'm completely crazy about that film, and I was excited as hell when this one came out - I mean, it even stars Benedict Cumberbatch. How can it get better than that? And J.J. Abrams gave me pretty much what I wanted with "Star Trek Into Darkness", another visually spectacular, and quite solid installment in the Star Trek franchise.

If the 2009 film was the reboot of the first Star Trek, this one can be considered a modern "The Wrath of Khan". Now if you have followed my journey, you know how much I loved that film: it has a great plot, great characters development and a spectacular villain, Khan. How about this one? Well, it's a little bit weaker than the original. 

The story - which I believe it's an alternative reality - is very interesting, and focuses a lot on the love/hate relationships between the characters. Still, among friendship, love, and jealousy, the film has some plot holes. Actually there's some giant plot holes, if you think about it, and it seems like Abrams hoped, or thought that some dazzling special effects would have hidden that.

Like I just said, this one is weaker, also because the characters development could have been better. Also some of the characters are simply put in the film to appeal to older Star Trek fans, e.g. Dr. Carol Marcus. Yes, she was in the original, but she basically has no purpose here.

But it's not all bad, really. Benedict Cumberbatch is an incredible, intense villain - perhaps even better than Ricardo Montalbán -, and the film is worth seeing for his performance alone. The special effects, like I've already mentioned a bazillion times, are spectacular. The score is great, and the acting, well, once again I can't complain about that.

Hopefully "Star Trek Beyond" won't have the same problems with the script.

Star Trek (2009)

Genre

Action | Adventure | Sci-Fi

Director

J.J. Abrams

Country

USA

Cast

Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Eric Bana, Leonard Nimoy, Zoe Saldana, Karl Urban, Simon Pegg, John Cho, Anton Yelchin, Bruce Greenwood, Ben Cross, Winona Ryder, Clifton Collins Jr., Chris Hemsworth, Faran Tahir, Jennifer Morrison, Greg Ellis, Rachel Nichols, Victor Garber

Storyline

The brash James T. Kirk (Chris Pine) tries to live up to his father's legacy with Commander Spock (Zachary Quinto) keeping him in check as a vengeful, time-traveling Romulan (Eric Bana) creates black holes to destroy the Federation one planet at a time.

Opinion

J.J. Abrams accepted the challenge to bring back to the big screen the original characters of the famous franchise, and managed to make the first amazing odd numbered film in the whole saga. "Star Trek" indeed is a brilliant, thrilling adventure packed with action, humour, a strong story and stunning visuals.

The film tells of the early days of Kirk and Spock as if it is an origin story of Kirk and Spock, so it's some sort of prequel to the original saga. The roaring star narrating the birth of James T. Kirk, and how his father sacrificed himself to save James's labouring mother and other 800 crew members, is followed by the exciting, wonderfully paced story of Kirk and Spock trying to save the Federation. 

Also the part where the Romulans rely on Spock to save their planet from imminent destruction, the failure of the Vulcanian, and the subsequent destruction of the planet that leads to anger of the Romulan survivors, that travel back in time because of the back hole created, is brilliantly told.

The screenplay is just great. The idea of making a film that is both a prequel, a sequel and a reboot is nothing but brilliant. The storytelling pace is unbelievably gripping, the action is perfectly balanced with humour, and character development is great. 

Obviously, being a science fiction film, it is plenty of special effects and spectacles, but luckily this time they don't ruin the film. 

Then, for once, I can't complain about the cast. As a matter of fact, all the actors are great and they manage to capture the essence of their characters. Chris Pine, other than being eye-candy, portrays all the aspects of the Kirk brilliantly, whether is his cockiness, humour or seriousness. Zachary Quinto is brilliant as Spock, able to capture the coldness and calculated logic of the character, and he is the perfect counter for Pine. Karl Urban is fantastic as Bones, even though he mostly does an impression of DeForest Kelley's Bones. Zoe Saldana transforms the character of Uhura in something completely different, and I love it. Eric Bana is brilliant as Nero, the stubborn, merciless Romulan. Everyone else is just great from Simon Pegg to Leonard Nimoy, who appears as an older version of Spock.

Mention-Worthy Quotes

Spock: If you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.

Star Trek: Nemesis (2002)

Genre

Action | Sci-Fi

Director

Stuart Baird

Country

USA

Cast

Patrick Stewart, Jonathan Frakes, Brent Spiner, LeVar Burton, Michael Dorn, Gates McFadden, Marina Sirtis, Tom Hardy, Ron Perlman, Dina Meyer, John Berg, Kate Mulgrew, Shannon Cochran, Jude Ciccolella, Alan Dale, Wil Wheaton, Majel Barrett, Stuart Baird, Bryan Singer, Whoopi Goldberg

Storyline

The Enterprise ventures near to the Romulan neutral zone in response to a signal, a signal they find is coming from an uncharted planet where they find a prototype of Data. As the nearest ship, the Enterprise is sent to Romulus to supposedly negotiate peace with the new government of the planet. On arrival Picard (Patrick Stewart) discovers that the head of the Reman (Tom Hardy) is his clone. The Enterprise quickly finds that the peace talks are no more than the start of a planned attack on Earth.

Opinion

Even numbered films are the good ones. Oops, never mind, it seems like "Star Trek: Nemesis" is going against this theory by being really bad and really boring.

The writers didn't have a lot of work to do this time since all they did was taking "Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan" story and changed names. Shinzon, Picard's clone, is a genetically created human, just like Khan. He was abandoned on a desolate world, just like Khan. He has a weapon of ultimate destruction, just like Khan. He hates the captain of the Enterprise, and pursues him to his death, just like Khan. Data, still utterly annoying and with a utterly annoying brother because one annoying android was not enough, sacrifices himself, just like Spock did. 

The opening scene with Picard giving the wedding speech was so corny, it nearly made me throw up. And the dialogues try so hard to be philosophical they end up being just incomprehensible. 

There isn't as much action as there should have been, but the action sequences are good. The special effects are good and enhance the film a little bit. Also the music is a delight. 

Patrick Stewart and Tom Hardy are both at the top of their game, especially Hardy who convinces us that he is just like Picard, and then that he is nothing like Picard. And for once I did actually understand what he what saying. 

Star Trek: Insurrection (1998)

Genre

Action | Sci-Fi

Director

Jonathan Frakes

Country

USA

Cast

Patrick Stewart, Jonathan Frakes, Brent Spiner, LeVar Burton, Michael Dorn, Gates McFadden, Marina Sirtis, F. Murray Abraham, Donna Murphy, Anthony Zerbe, Gregg Henry, Stephanie Niznik, Peggy Miley, John Hostetter, Daniel Hugh Kelly, Michael Welch, Mark Deakins, Majel Barrett

Storyline

When the crew of the Enterprise learn of a Federation conspiracy against the inhabitants of a unique planet, Captain Picard (Patrick Stewart) begins an open rebellion.

Opinion

Captain Log's 9. I'm starting to think they used the odd number thing as an excuse to make shitty films. That's right, "Star Trek: Insurrection" is a pretty bad, and boring episode stretched to cover a feature length.

If you have read the plot, it's like you have seen the movie already. It describes exactly what happens in the whole film. Just add Mr. Worf going through puberty again, LaForge with the ability to see, and a psychological insight on Data and you're done. Oops, I almost forgot Beverly and her storyline involving her boobs firming up, and Data's saying dumb things because he's a robot. Also the amount of screen time Data has and his constant obsession with becoming more human is getting very annoying. 

Furthermore, the story is all over the place and it feels like it's being made up as it goes along. From the opening scene things are quite confused, and I really didn't understand why I should have cared at all about what was going on, or the characters.

Despite its boringness and therefore the difficulty to follow the story, I manages to notice plot holes. There are so many plot hole in this film, the Enterprise could fly through.

However, there is some good. Captain Picard falls in love with Anij, a Ba'ku woman. While it's becoming a little clichéd to have the captain having a romance with the first good-looking supporting character that comes along *coughs* Kirk in San Francisco *coughs*, and even though it could have been better explored and developed, the relationship seems quite genuine - George Lucas should have taken notes. 

The special effects are good, but nothing special, the makeup is splendid, especially F. Murray Abraham's alien face, and the soundtrack is okay, but all that karaoke is a big no. The acting is nothing special as always: F. Murray does the best he could do with such a script, and Patrick Stewart finally puts some depth in his portrayal of Captain Picard.

Star Trek: First Contact (1996)

Genre

Action | Adventure | Sci-Fi

Director

Jonathan Frakes

Country

USA

Cast

Patrick Stewart, Jonathan Frakes, Brent Spiner, LeVar Burton, Michael Dorn, Gates McFadden, Marina Sirtis, Alfre Woodard, James Cromwell, Alice Krige, Patti Yasutake, Neal McDonough, Majel Barrett, Robert Picardo

Storyline

It is the 24th century, and a collective of part-humanoid, part-machine beings face the Federation in what would be the biggest battle of all time. This collective, called the Borg, lose and desperately attempt to go back in time to April 4, 2063, to stop Earth's first contact with an alien species. Captain Picard (Patrick Stewart) and the crew of the Enterprise go back in time to make sure that Zefram Cochrane (James Cromwell) makes his famous warp flight. However, the Enterprise-E runs into unexpected trouble when the Borg start to assimilate the starship.

Opinion

After the disastrous "Star Trek: Generations", Jonathan Frakes also known as William T. Riker directs "Star Trek: First Contact", a solid, successful sci-fi film as well as one of the best entries in the series so far.

Beautifully written by Jonathan Frakes, the film has multiple storylines - Riker and part of the crew have to convince Dr. Zefram Cochrane to conduct the first human warp mission, Picard has to deal with his Moby Dick, the attack of the Borg -, all progressing at a beautiful pace, and even though the story seems a bit stretched in some parts, overall the story keeps you interested both with what the crew is going through on Earth, and what is happening on the ship. I read that the story was carried on from the TV series, and I congratulate with Frakes for providing all the background necessary to watch and enjoy the film, especially for those, like myself, who hasn't seen the TV series. 

The compelling story wonderfully balances drama and humour, and features funny and sharp dialogue.

The villains, the dreaded Borg, are very interesting, and the Borg Queen is one of the greatest Star Trek villains so far, and the best villain since Khan in "Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan".

I am not saying the film is flawless though. The scene in which the Borg Queen seduces Data is memorable, but the dialogue, actually what Data says, is a bit cheap. Also, I don't understand why Picard considers destroying the Enterprise such a big deal: that has been done so many times already, some of which without any reason at all, and now that there is a good reason, he just says no.

As for the acting, overall is great. Most of the actors give genuine performances, so genuine they conveys and invite the audience to feel the characters' feelings. 

Star Trek: Generations (1994)

Genre

Action | Sci-Fi

Director

David Carson

Country

USA

Cast

Patrick Stewart, William Shatner, Jonathan Frakes, Brent Spiner, LeVar Burton, Michael Dorn, Gates McFadden, Marina Sirtis, Alan Ruck, Malcolm McDowell, Jacqueline Kim, Barbara March, Patti Yasutake, Whoopi Goldberg

Storyline

Captain Picard (Patrick Stewart), with the help of supposedly dead Captain Kirk (William Shatner), must stop a madman (Malcolm McDowell) willing to murder on a planetary scale in order to enter an energy ribbon.

Opinion

I have to admit I was excited to see past and future Captains meet. I was also expecting something better, instead "Star Trek: Generations" is an horrible film and justifies the statement that all the odd numbered Star Trek films are poor. Only this one is so poor it defies poorness and finding something good in it it's not like looking for a needle in a haystack, but like looking for a specific chaff in a haystack.

There is a lame plot that makes no sense whatsoever where a cartoonishly villain, Dr. Soren, wants to destroy a planet with motivations that make no sense and Captain Picard choses Kirk to help him stop Soren instead of someone younger: William Shatner is overweight and too old to play an action hero. Also the subplot involving Data and an emotion chip is utterly annoying. 

But the nonsense does not stop. The original crew saved the world and avoided being killed how many times? Let me tell you, it was a lot of times. This new crew doesn't manage to accomplish a mission without getting Kirk killed. And for no good reason. The Enterprise is also destroyed again, because why not, and Picard's loved ones are killed for no good reason.

I'm a little dramatic and I like to overdo, and that's exactly what I did at the beginning because there's actually something good about this film, and it has to do with Malcolm McDowell. He proves once again that regardless of an awful script, absurd plot and an awful character, he is capable of giving a solid performance.

Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country (1991)

Genre

Adventure | Sci-Fi

Director

Nicholas Meyer

Country

USA

Cast

William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, DeForest Kelley, James Doohan, George Takei, Walter Koenig, Nichelle Nichols, Christopher Plummer, Kim Cattrall, Rosanna DeSoto, Kurtwood Smith, David Warner, Iman, Brock Peters, René Auberjonois, Mark Lenard, Michael Dorn, Christian Slater

Storyline

On the eve of retirement, Kirk (William Shatner) and McCoy (DeForest Kelley) are charged with assassinating the Klingon High Chancellor and imprisoned. The Enterprise crew must help them escape to thwart a conspiracy aimed at sabotaging the last best hope for peace.

Opinion

After the poor "Star Trek V: The Final Frontier", the production returned to entrust the direction to a more experienced director, and it shows. As expected "Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country" is a solid, engaging and thrilling sci-fi flick as well as a great sign off for the original crew of the Enterprise.

The film presents itself wonderfully from beginning to end, with a plot involving great action and political conspiracy, and Spock gets to play Sherlock on the Enterprise while some the Klingons quote Shakespeare like there is no tomorrow.

Nicholas Meyer, who is also responsible for the great "Star Trek II: The Wrath of Kahn", knows exactly what to do, he gives us more top notch space battles that aren't too far off the quality of Star Wars, but more importantly gives each character the same importance and additional characters are actually relevant. 

The screenplay is witty and has just the right amount of self-humour, and gives the villain lot of Shakespeare quotes, like it happened with Kahn.

However, the film is not perfect. The scenes in the prison are the weakest and it's where the script loses the plot. They add nothing to the plot, and they are clearly added to increase the run time.

Anyway, the performances are improved and compensates for that. The original cast, Shatner, Nimoy, Takei, Koenig and Nichols, gives great performances. Christopher Plummer is spectacular as the super-villain Chang, who isn't as good villain as Khan, but is the better performance. 

Mention-Worthy Quotes

Spock: If I were human I believe my response would be "go to hell." If I were human.

Star Trek V: The Final Frontier (1989)

Genre

Action | Adventure | Sci-Fi

Director

William Shatner

Country

USA

Cast

William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, DeForest Kelley, James Doohan, George Takei, Walter Koenig, Nichelle Nichols, Laurence Luckinbill, David Warner, George Murdock, Todd Bryant, Spice Williams-Crosby, Charles Cooper Cynthia Gouw

Storyline

Captain Kirk (Williams Shatner) and his crew has to deal with Spock's long-lost half-brother Sybok (Laurence Luckinbill) who hijacks the Enterprise for an obsessive search for God at the center of the galaxy.

Opinion

Spock is too busy trying to understand humans and humour to do all the job so he left the reins of direction to Kirk, who better stick to his job of captain of the Enterprise because he is not a good director.

"Star Trek V: The Final Frontier" unfortunately is another weak odd numbered film.

In the first part that sees Kirk, Spock and McCoy camping there is humour, and the influence of the fourth chapter is palpable. This is arguably the best part of the film and the most enjoyable. Then the crew of the Enterprise stumbles across a bad idea, poorly executed that turns into a bad film as one would expect.

While I liked the idea of Spock having a brother brother which is totally different from the other Vulcans - Sybok uses sensibility and passion instead of sense and logic -, I don't get his obssession with finding God. He probably represents the Christian missionary, but I don't see the point in a Star Trek film. And the film doesn't even explain who the fake God was in the end of the film. And the end is just terrible. A cocktail party with the Klingons? Seriously? How about no?

Most of the time the comedy seems forced instead of being natural, especially when Sulu and Chekov were lost and Chekov blows into the communicator to simulate a blizzard; that just wasn't funny. 

The badly executed, fake-looking special effect doesn't help either, but that didn't bother me so much. Some of the acting was weak and over the top though, and that did quite bother me. 

Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home (1986)

Genre

Adventure | Comedy | Sci-Fi

Director

Leonard Nimoy

Country

USA

Cast

William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, DeForest Kelley, James Doohan, George Takei, Walter Koenig, Nichelle Nichols, Robin Curtis, Catherine Hicks, Jane Wyatt, Mark Lenard, Brock Peters, Robert Ellenstein, John Schuck, Joe Lando

Storyline

To save Earth from an alien probe, Admiral Kirk (William Shatner) and his fugitive crew go back in time to 20th century Earth to retrieve the only beings who can communicate with it, humpback whales. 

Opinion

I was told there is an unwritten rule amongst Star Trek fans that the odd numbered films are never as good as the even numbered films. This fourth entry in the series proves that.

"Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home" is an exciting, charming and funny turn for the franchise, and lighter than its predecessors.

The premise of the story is kind of bizarre - a threatening alien space vessel is destroying Earth in an attempt to communicate with an extinct species - but it turned out to be very good. The story flows very nicely, and passed the first half hour made of dialogue and little else, the film is a lot of fun. Sure, there are some plot holes. A lot of plot holes to be honest - the first that comes to my mind is how come no one found the ship -, but the humour makes up for this lack.

Spock, dressed like a hippie because he lost his uniform, made me laugh out loud a lot of times as he tries to understand human behaviour, as well as the crew as they try to find their way through 21st century Earth.

Between a laugh and another, and despite the silly plot, the film makes a commentary about man's greed and selfishness, and his destruction of life. It is indeed the man the real villain.

The special effects are spectacular, and the action leaves room for humour, but who said that a great sci-fi film has to be action-packed and violent? Nobody, that's who said that.

Yet again directing, Leonard Nimoy does a terrific job and brings some depth to the plot; he also does a great job as Spock. William Shatner has the biggest role but has the least of fun as he has to carry an unlikely love interest. The rest of the cast does a good job as well.

Live long and prosper

Star Trek III: The Search for Spock (1984)

Genre

Action | Adventure | Sci-Fi

Director

Leonard Nimoy

Country

USA

Cast

William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, DeForest Kelley, James Doohan, George Takei, Walter Koenig, Nichelle Nichols, Christopher Lloyd, Merritt Butrick, Robin Curtis, Mark Lenard, James B. Sikking, Robert Hooks, Judith Anderson, Stephen Liska, Cathie Shirriff, Miguel Ferrer

Storyline

After their return on Earth, Kirk (William Shatner) and the crew of the Enterprise are shocked to discover that the Enterprise is to be decommissioned. Even worse, Dr. McCoy (DeForest Kelley) is, seemingly inexplicably, being driven insane, and Scotty (James Doohan) is being reassigned to another ship. When a visit from Sarek (Mark Lenard), Spock's father, reveals that McCoy is carrying the living spirit of Spock (Leonard Nimoy), Kirk is forced to steal back the Enterprise and fly across space to the Genesis planet.

Opinion

Presumed dead, Spock directs Kirk and company in this third installment of the saga, a disappointing follow-up to the great "The Wrath of Khan".

Short of action, dazzling special effects and plot, "Star Trek III: The Search for Spock" is a mediocre chapter with some moments filled with tension.

Unlike its predecessor, the plot is a little thin here - it doesn't get any deeper than the rescue and recovery of Spock, interrupted along the way by some Klingons passing by -, and it isn't particularly interesting, but at least it's coherent. The plot would have been fine if the subplot with the Klingons was the main plot, and the whole search for Spock was the subplot.

Because of the plot's lack of interest, something exciting had to happen to keep the audience from falling asleep. So the writers decided to blow up the Enterprise. I'm not a Trekkie so that wasn't a major issue for me, but I can't imagine what it might feel like for a fan of the franchise. It has to be terrible. 

However, the film has inherited something from the second Star Trek film. Such as the quite intelligent dialogue, and the characters - those that used to be secondary now are primary characters.

The action does not abound and it's definitely not the greatest - especially the rescue of Bones, one of the highlights yet so poorly shot -, and the special effects, even though they turned out pretty well, aren't as good as episode two's. But I guess the film makes up for that with the theft of the Enterprise, a wonderful sequence loaded with tension, and humour from McCoy.

William Shatner gives his best performance as Kirk so far, but also pulls some of the best overacting on Genesis planet, and DeForest Kelley gets some great material as the 'possessed' McCoy. Once again, the standout performance comes from the villain wonderfully portrayed by Christopher Lloyd.

Live long and prosper

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982)

Genre

Adventure | Sci-Fi | Thriller

Director

Nicholas Meyer

Country

USA

Cast

William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, DeForest Kelley, James Doohan, Walter Koenig, Kirstie Alley, George Takei, Nichelle Nichols, Bibi Besch, Merritt Butrick, Paul Winfield, Ricardo Montalbán, Ike Eisenmann, Kevin Rodney Sullivan

Storyline

In the 23rd century, while the Enterprise is on routine training maneuvers, Admiral James T. Kirk (William Shatner) seems resigned to the fact that this may be the last space mission of his career, But Khan Noonien (Ricardo Montalbán), an infamous conqueror from late 20th century Earth, is back, and with the assistance of the Enterprise crew, Kirk must stop him from using the life-generating Genesis Device as the ultimate weapon.

Opinion

If "Star Trek: The Motion Picture" left you empty, prepare to live long and prosper with "Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan", an excellent and thrilling sci-fi film featuring a strong plot, great acting and incredible special effects.

Like its predecessor inspired by an episode of the original Star Trek (thank you Wikipedia!), the first thing you notice about this film is the plot: there's actually one, a pretty strong one. Despite some minor plot holes, both plot and subplots are compelling, and very entertaining, and the use of revenge as a plot point is brilliant.

The script also contains great character development and insights into their behavior: the introduction of Khan is effectively done, and the origin of the conflict between Khan and Kirk is quickly yet very well explained, so that the excellent pace doesn't suffer from it, and everyone, especially those unfamiliar with the Star Trek universe, can fully understand what's going on and why it's going on.

That, however, does not nullify the film's flaw(s). There is one non-sense scene about Scotty being proud of Peter Preston when introducing him to Kirk during the inspection. It does have no use, other than making you feel sympathy for him later in the film on his deadbed, another pointless scene to be honest. But, again, I'm not a Trekkie, so there might be something I'm missing, like some kind of relationship between Scotty and Preston.

Speaking of scenes, there's one really emotional and moving at the end of the film that had me in tears, and I'm sure I wasn't the only one.

Along with everything else - I almost forgot to mention the impressive special effects, especially Genesis, the beautiful score and the redesigned uniforms that doesn't look like pyjamas anymore -, the acting has also improved: while some members of the cast still are mediocre, Ricardo Montalbán gives a great performance as Khan, and I will remember forever his portrayal of one of the greatest villains I've seen so far. 

And the best hasn't come yet: you don't need to see the first Star Trek to see and fully enjoy this one. 

Of all the souls I have encountered in my travels, his was the most... human. - Kirk

Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979)

Genre

Adventure | Mystery | Sci-Fi

Director

Robert Wise

Country

USA

Cast

William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, DeForest Kelley, James Doohan, Walter Koenig, Nichelle Nichols, George Takei, Persis Khambatta, Stephen Collins, Majel Barrett, Grace Lee Whitney, David Gautreaux, Mark Lenard

Storyline

When an alien spacecraft of enormous power is spotted approaching Earth, Admiral Kirk (William Shatner) resumes command of the Starship Enterprise in order to intercept, examine and hopefully stop the intruder.

Opinion

I've never been a Star Trek fan, I don't know, probably the lack of charm. But the new saga directed by J. J. Abrams, that was good, and it made me change my mind about this cinematic universe and I decided to give a try to the originals. I'm not sure that was a good idea.

Mostly like a motionless picture, "Star Trek: The Motion Picture" is a tedious and emotionless waste of time.

The basic and rather thin plot is dragged - almost literally because the pace is probably the slowest in Sci-Fi films history - for more than two hours, and nothing happens other than the Enterprise trying to stop V'ger from destroying the Earth. I kept watching because there was this voice inside my head saying, "Something exciting is gonna happen, trust me", but guess what, nothing happened.

The opening wasn't great: a black screen with some music playing for 1 minute and 45 second before anything happens was quite annoying. Unfortunately, that's not the only pointlessly long shot. There are long, very long shots of the Enterprise when Captain Kirk first goes on it, and other than that we see Kirk admiring the ship.

However, there's some great highlights, you know, like the scene where Kirk stares at the Enterprise, or that other one, even greater, where Scotty stars at the Enterprise. Oh, I almost forgot to mention that spectacular scene where Bones stares at the Enterprise. If those aren't memorable scenes, I don't know what they are.

Have I mentioned the breathtaking shot of the Enterprise moving out of the space dock? That scene is so beautiful, they decided to show it again later in the film, only this time is coming from the west.

Okay, now I'm not being sarcastic. The special effects really are impressive, and they still hold up quite well over the decades. But I'm afraid visual appeal can't make up for the lack of solid basis.

The acting is very poor: nothing but wooden performances are given and there's not even good chemistry between the members of the cast.