All Comments for: Star Trek | Christianity Today | A Magazine of Evangelical Conviction

Free Newsletters:

RSS Feeds |

Audio |

Twitter

Home > Reviews > 2009

Christianity Today Movies, 2009, reviews |

Star Trek

Reviewed by Peter T. Chattaway | posted 5/07/2009 08:56AM

The trailers say this isn't your father's Star Trek, but they could just as easily have said this isn't your grandfather's Star Trek. The series really is that old: it has been 45 years since Gene Roddenberry ...

[Reader Reviews]

Average User Rating:

Rate and Comment on this article

Displaying 1 - 25 of 37 comments.

Page: 1 2

Show All

Samuel

Posted: October 15, 2009 2:11 PM


I went to go see this movie also with my brother and two cousins. Awesome movie! Great visual effects. Oh by the way "G Dean" you seem to be in denial, Christianitytoday is a Christian website helping Christians know what to expect from todays movies. Stop hating and start being aware of whats going on!!

kjm	Posted: August 21, 2009 4:28 PM


Loved it! It exceeded my expectations.

O	Posted: June 27, 2009 8:05 PM


Loved it. This movie was one of the best Star Trek movies. One thing that did bother me was the "darkness" of the sinister character. I am also not a big fan of time travel due to the time "paradoxes" that are raised.

Dolfan

Posted: June 24, 2009 6:40 PM


This Movie stays true to the Star Trek Universe! Excellent movie for all ages whether you are a Star Trek Fan or not! Great Job!

Charlene

Posted: June 23, 2009 9:30 AM


Saw the movie 4 times. It was totally Star Trek. Buying it when it comes out on DVD if it ever leaves the movie theaters. JJ Abrams did a brilliant job of taking the disruption of timeline concept into a hole new twist. True Trekkers probably caught on to this right away. Loved the movie.

Johnny

Posted: June 12, 2009 4:10 PM

I am a lifelong fan of Star Trek and I am ambivalent about this movie. It had its fun and exciting moments but that's about all. There was no there there. Beyond the opening sequence, which ended on an extremely emotional note, I didn't see any "emotional resonance" that some of the other commenters here saw. Only a dizzying, non-stop rollercoaster ride of special effects and jokes. The characters were all two-dimensional, especially the villain who looks like he's from a different movie. And I, for one, would have appreciated at least an inkling of a social or philosophical awareness. The same people who laud it's lack of a Message keep saying it captures the spirit of the original series. But how is that possible when the original series is a string of 79 morality plays?!

Gdean

Posted: June 05, 2009 1:10 PM

I think it is interesting that people laud the great special effects, acting, and plot but completely forget that you are able to tell a great story without sexual scenes or the "colorful metaphors". If I were to tell you that I made a batch of brownies and put poop in them it wuld not matter that I only put a little in. You wuld be repulsed at the thought of eating them. Give a message to the movie makers that you can tell a story without all the "poop". I am ashamed to see people on the "christianity today" site that are able to explain away taking God's name in vain and other moral lapses("brief sexual content"). I will not see this movie nor promote this movie in any way!

Dema	Posted: June 03, 2009 1:29 PM


I thoroughly enjoyed this movie, and even my 17 year old son who does not care for this genre really liked it. The special effects were cool, the story was good, loved the characters, and we had a few good laughs - the movie was a joy ride and I would watch it again to catch some of the things that I missed first time around. I give it 4 stars!

Debbie

Posted: June 02, 2009 2:53 PM

I grew up watching Star Trek (the original TV series) with my dad, have seen all the movies and the not-so-good knock-off series that followed the original TV series. Took my dad to this movie with some trepidation, but we both left the theatre very impressed and hopeful that this movie set the stage for a new trilogy. The cast was great. My 19-year-old even wanted to see the movie with us (her first Star Trek venture) because apparently young Kirk is considered "hot" among the teens and young twenty-somethings. Looks like this movie might spawn a new generation of "Trekkies." Imagine that!!

Joyce

Posted: May 30, 2009 3:47 PM

I thought the reviewers remarks were right on target. I loved the old show, grew up on it, so I was very excited about the movie. And if all you want out of this movie is for these characters to come soaring back into your life, you've got it. But the story was rediculous. Having the old Spock make a cameo was very contrived. It just didn't work. I loved seeing him, but I think it messed up the whole story. Time travel, old Spocks, new Spocks, convenient black holes ... I could barely follow the movie for saying to myself, "What? Come on ..." I'm a fan of good stories, and this movie lacked that for me. If they weren't trying so hard to please so many people, I think they could have done a better job writing it.

Jim	Posted: May 30, 2009 7:22 AM


Overall, the movie was good on special effects. Character development was acceptable but had too many new plots: Uhurah and Spock? Urban's portrayal of Dr McCoy was the best...funny and dead on Bones. Scotty was a bit over the top. The storyline opened up too many new 'worm stories' that could end up as dead ends in future movies but at least there are the novels.

Ron	Posted: May 30, 2009 4:52 AM


Cute. Soft on science and long on action and talk . . . just like the original. Given the leap in special effects in the last forty years, it was a credible effort--balancing between genuine fun and self-parody.

Jim P.

Posted: May 27, 2009 10:18 AM

What we witnessed was the creation of a new timeline, one that unchained this movie from all previous series. No more Spock's mom, no more visit to Talos IV, no more Original series plot lines. The review brought up some good points and the new movie was light on character development. The characters won't bond normally, now all they have to do is consult Spock. The entire history is erased and the joy of new worlds gone.

Jessica S.

Posted: May 26, 2009 8:00 AM


It definitely had all the special effects you would expect but not being a huge Star Trek fan myself it had such a good story line that I left the theater vowing to see the next one as soon as it comes out! It had such real emotion behind it and the actors were phenomenal...I got completely lost in the main characters and their stories...GREAT movie!

N. Durocher

Posted: May 23, 2009 10:30 AM


I think it's a shame the reviewer spoiled what would otherwise have been a neat surprise, by revealing that the original Spock was going to appear. Please be more careful! As you edit your prose for review, think back to what were nice surprises, and leave them out. Otherwise, your reviews are accurate. Sincerely, Ms. Durocher

Glenda York

Posted: May 22, 2009 6:07 PM

I agree that this movie is by far the best Trek movie put forth so far. Casting was superb, and the emphasis was back where it belonged on the characters, especially the triad of Kirk-Spock-McCoy. Chris Pine did a fantastic job. Zachary Quinto WAS Spock. It had just the right mix of old and new. The humor was there in spades. The action was seat of your pants. The music was enhancing. It won over the old time fans and attracted a whole new audience. The best thing about it, it brought back that old feeling you got after watching the original series. That feeling that anything was possible. Great movie!

Herb	Posted: May 22, 2009 3:40 PM


Great casting. Really enjoyed the early story of the characters. Agree with Mike I think they missed the boat by promoting Kirk so soon. Special effects were terrific !!

Susan

Posted: May 20, 2009 6:39 AM


We loved this movie. It captured the total ambiance that made Star Trek able to endure for all of these years. Great for those who love the series and those who know very little about the series.

jmichael

Posted: May 19, 2009 11:23 AM


By far, the best Star Trek movie, ever. One of the best films I've seen in a long time...True to its roots, daring in its exploration of 'time travel' and 'alternate realites'...e.g. the destruction of Vulcan, is not a reality in the original Star Trek series timeline. In fact, Spock, in the original series, returns to Vulcan for the ritual of 'pon farr.' Go see this...in IMAX if you can;)

OOPIE

Posted: May 18, 2009 1:14 PM


Although my grandsons didn't agree with me, I thought the movie caught the campy attitude of Star Trek's original TV show. I did agree with them on one point: the movie had far more action and less human interaction than the TV series. But I guess they just don't appreciate it from the point of view of an original fan from 40 years ago!

Kevin

Posted: May 16, 2009 11:15 AM


I'm afraid I've never been a real fan of the trekkie movies, as they don't compare in any way to the magic of the original tv series. This latest flick to me was disappointing and the only reason why I went to see it was purely out of curiosty...as with the others. Spock and Uhura lovers!?... and the rest of the original cast were mimicked as comical. Not amused!

Brian

Posted: May 15, 2009 9:00 AM

I loved it. If anything I feel it did try as much as possible to stick to the values and even the messages of the original series. Even the characters tried to imitate their predecessors in style of speech, face characteristics, and more. And just like every Star Trek series I have seen, there always seems to be an underpinning message (that I'm sure we can claim as Christian) re character, hope, doing life with others, how the choices we make impact our now and our future, that our futures aren't yet written but are dependent upon these choices. I loved it and will watch it again some time.

John Kelly

Posted: May 14, 2009 8:17 PM

As a Star trek fan since the beginning, one of the things - perhaps the most crucial - the reviewer is leaving out, is that the film soars in the SPIRIT of Star Trek. Plot holes, smot holes, every film has 'em. The acting is first rate - especially by Chris Pine who had an incredible challenge to not imitate Shatner while still evoking Kirk. Well done, Mr. Pine. This turns out to be one of the best 'Treks' yet. And it was guided by a director who was not a Star Trek fan. But he had something better; a genuine love for story with emotional resonance and a deep respect for the characters. An amazing achievement.

Mike Dimoff

Posted: May 14, 2009 1:25 PM

I attemped to see the movie on opening night at the local IMAX Theater. It was sold out when I got there, so I went to a regular showing. I was stunned to find that I was easily the youngest viewer. That is saying a lot considering that I am 45! There were folks there that had to use walking aids! I would be very interested in the actual demographics of the opening weekend. As far as the show was concerned, well... two hours and six minutes came and went in no more than 25 minutes. The worse part of the movie was the end... cuz it, well, ended!

Tess	Posted: May 14, 2009 7:12 AM


I am a Star Trek fan as well. I have seen (or still am watching) every Star Trek spin-off, an I LOVE Star Trek. Personally, I think the movie holds true to the "spirit" of the original Star Trek. Since I always liked the Vulcans, I think they could have left outthe destruction of Vulcan. I hated that. (I am going to see it again)

Page: 1 2

E-mail this page

Write CT

Print this article

Post a comment