Posts Tagged ‘movie’

My review of Alice in Wonderland (Spoiler Free)

Saturday, March 6th, 2010

I'm not sure what to say about this movie. I'll start with the visuals. It was beautiful. A perfect Tim Burton world, realized down to every little detail. I could watch full scenes without paying attention to the dialogue and just enjoy how damn pretty it looked, all with its own skewed twist.

The story, however, needed a lot of work. It was written like someone read Lewis Carroll's work, pulled out some key phrases, and tried to write a script around them. It didn't have the feel of Carroll, of his illogical logic and random strangeness. Rather than expand on the universe, using the same rules set forth by Carroll, it was a poorly made Xerox of Wonderland, with some smudges right where the important parts were.

I don't know what genius decided to name this "Alice in Wonderland" but make a Hook-like return to Wonderland. I don't know why anyone thought that watching Tim Burton work his mad genius on the original works would be a poor idea. I don't know why this movie existed other than to give Johnny Depp a ridiculous Scottish accent and a bigger role than he really needed.

I liked it, but it should have been named something different. And the dialogue should have been rewritten by someone with a brain. And the gorgeous actress who played Alice, Mia Wasikowska, should have done some full frontal nudity.

I give it three out of five vorpal blades.

(And for those of you who haven't read the original works, the poem I posted yesterday is verbatim from Carroll's works.)

If you're new to the horrors of Avitable.com, don't miss out. Subscribe to my RSS feed!

My Top Ten Movies of 2009

Monday, December 28th, 2009

If all goes according to plan, the last four posts of the decade (I'm one of those contrary folk who start my decades with the ought year) will be top ten lists. Because there's nothing more interesting than some random person's idea of what constitutes the best, right?

My inaugural post will focus on movies. I can only choose from the movies that I've seen, obviously, so here is the list of the 52 theatrical releases from 2009 that I saw, in the theaters, with On Demand, or on Blu Ray (in alphabetical order):

  1. 2012
  2. (500) Days of Summer
  3. Adventureland
  4. Avatar
  5. The Blind Side
  6. Bruno
  7. District 9
  8. Drag Me To Hell
  9. Duplicity
  10. Extract
  11. Fame
  12. Fanboys
  13. Fantastic Mr. Fox
  14. Fast and Furious
  15. The Final Destination: 3D
  16. Funny People
  17. GI Joe: The Rise of Cobra
  18. The Hangover
  19. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
  20. He's Just Not That Into You
  21. I Love You, Man
  22. Inglourious Basterds
  23. Jennifer's Body
  24. Julie & Julia
  25. The Last House on the Left
  26. My Bloody Valentine 3D
  27. Observe and Report
  28. Orphan
  29. Pandorum
  30. Paranormal Activity
  31. Post Grad
  32. The Proposal
  33. Public Enemies
  34. Push
  35. Sherlock Holmes
  36. Star Trek
  37. State of Play
  38. Surrogates
  39. The Taking of Pelham 123
  40. Taken
  41. Terminator Salvation
  42. The Time Traveler's Wife
  43. Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen
  44. The Twilight Saga: New Moon
  45. The Ugly Truth
  46. Up
  47. Watchmen
  48. Where the Wild Things Are
  49. Whip It
  50. X-Men Origins: Wolverine
  51. Year One
  52. Zombieland

And here are the 16 movies that I haven't seen yet but plan to in the next year:

  1. 9
  2. Antichrist
  3. Away We Go
  4. Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call new Orleans
  5. The Boondock Saints II: All Saints Day
  6. The Brothers Bloom
  7. Everybody's Fine
  8. The Hurt Locker
  9. The International
  10. Invictus
  11. It's Complicated
  12. Me and Orson Welles
  13. Moon
  14. Nine
  15. Precious
  16. Up in the Air

So, without further ado, gauging primarily by rewatachability and sheer entertainment value, here are the movies that I've seen that I consider to be the best theatrical releases of 2009:

10. Observe and Report: This darkly humorous look at the pathetic life of a security guard with an inferiority complex is equal parts disturbing to watch and completely compelling. Anyone who went into the theater expecting a riff on "Paul Blart: Mall Cop" was in for a rude surprise, as Seth Rogen manages to transform himself from a lovable comic foil into a sad, angry, pathetic man. If the humor in this movie was only about schadenfreude, it wouldn't be nearly as good – instead, the writer/director managed to make us root for this despicable character at the same time that we despise him.

9. Funny People: Another Seth Rogen movie that wasn't quite a comedy makes my top ten list. This bittersweet take on the dark and sad life of a stand up comedian cum movie star, played by Adam Sandler in his best role since Punch Drunk Love, was a movie that I wish was even better. It was a bit uneven and needed some editing – I could see a director's cut or, alternatively an unedited longer version being one of my favorite movies of all time.

8. Zombieland: It's funny, gory, fast-paced, and has the best unbilled cameo of the last few years. Every actor, from Woody Harrelson to Jesse Eisenberg (playing the Michael Cera role better than Cera could have) to Emma Stone to Abigail Breslin, seemed perfect for their roles, and given the zombie nature of the film, the fact that none of the characters seemed safe made it a more enjoyable ride. I'm looking forward to watching this one again once it comes out on DVD/Blu Ray in February.

7. Inglourious Basterds: This movie might be Quentin Tarantino's best to date. It would be higher on my list if it weren't for a few elements that jarred me so badly – the Samuel L. Jackson's fourth-wall breaking narratives, which were completely unnecessary, and the introductions of a few of the Basterds in a completely anachronistic and stupid way. Other than these few occurrences, Tarantino's maturation as a creative force is highly evident, and I can't wait to see what he could do if he stopped with some of the amateurish flourishes that he is prone to use. Even if you're not a Tarantino fan, you should watch this movie. The opening scene will take your breath away.

6. Sherlock Holmes: I'm conflicted about how low this movie is on my list, but the fact is that it didn't make my jaw drop like the top 5 did. I still want to go see it again in the next week or so to give myself a chance to take it all in, because there were times when Robert Downey, Jr.'s Holmes spoke so quickly that I know I missed some of the excellent dialogue. Since I just reviewed it on Saturday, there's not much else I can say.

5. Avatar: Yet another movie that I've reviewed in the last week, so there's not much more to add. With fifteen years of planning, this movie could have not only blown me away with the immersive 3D graphics, but also wowed me with a complex, fascinating plot that avoided cliches and standard movie conventions. And while I'm willing to enjoy the journey, even when I know where the story's destination, what I heard about the original script's morally conflicted characters and gray areas explored leads me to wish for just a little more. The top four movies all demonstrated that you can have an amazing visual experience without sacrificing a great story, but maybe James Cameron needed another 15 years for that.

4. District 9: A great concept, a great story, and amazing graphics on a minuscule budget, District 9 managed to entertain me and make me think. It devolved in the third act a little, relying more on melodrama and blunt hammers of emotion instead of subtlety, but I was along for the whole ride and loved every minute of it.

3. Where The Wild Things Are: With the exception of a slow beginning that had me looking at my watch, I spent the rest of my time in the theater with a huge grin on my face. This movie took me back almost 30 years, remembering seeing this book for the first time. The illustrations quite adeptly came to life on the screen, and the voice acting, which I thought was all wrong when I walked into the theater, was absolutely pitch perfect. Here is an excellent example, only surpassed by the next movie on the list, of how a film can be for adults and kids at the same time. It's not hard to make a movie that doesn't talk down to kids, but also has enough subtext, beauty, and intelligence for adults to enjoy it, too, yet so many studios decide to go the stupid route because it's easier (See Alvin & The Chipmunks: The Squeakquel).

2. Fantastic Mr. Fox: There's just something about the combination of the jerky stop-motion animation, the voice acting, and the delightful story that made me beam throughout the entire movie. This is Wes Anderson's version of Ocean's Eleven, and it works perfectly. I can't think of a single element of the movie that I disliked or thought should be changed. The only reason that this movie is not my number one movie of the year is that my other choice marginally came ahead in the category of repeat viewings.

1. Star Trek: I am not a fan of Star Trek. I've never seen any of the series, and the only movie I've seen is the one where they went back in time to save the blue whales. And yet the revamp of Star Trek is my favorite movie of 2009 – not something I would have predicted last year! Sure, I knew that it was likely going to be enjoyable, due to the director and writers, but I never thought it would be so good. I saw it three times in the theater and have seen it an additional three times since buying it for home viewing. And it is just as good every single time. In fact, the second time I saw it, I enjoyed it more than the first time. I rarely look forward to sequels, but this is one movie where I cannot wait until they come out with a sequel, something that still at least a year or two off.

Honorable Mentions: (500) Days of Summer, The Blind Side, Paranormal Activity, Taken, and The Time Traveler's Wife.

And here are the five worst movies of 2009:

5. Year One – What the fuck was Harold Ramis thinking? Or Jack Black? Or Michael Cera? This could have been hysterical yet it missed the mark so badly. So, so badly.
4. The Ugly Truth – Hearing Gerard Butler do an American accent was painful, because apparently he feels the need to talk like he has a mouth full of marbles. The predictable story and the flat emotion between Butler and Katherine Heigl just made this hard to sit through without getting frustrated at missed opportunities for smart writing or cliche avoidance.
3. Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen – From the hour-long run through the desert to the racist ghetto bots to the humanoid Transformer to fucking robot heaven, this movie was so far from the fun romp of the original that Michael Bay should be ashamed of himself as he rolls around naked in his big fat piles of money.
2. X-Men Origins: Wolverine – If you're going to make a movie about a mutant who pops fucking metal claws out of his hands, which causes him extreme pain, makes him very cranky, and his origin is that he killed a lot of people, make it an R-rated movie.
1. Post Grad – Oh, Rory.

My review of Sherlock Holmes

Saturday, December 26th, 2009

I'm a fan of Sherlock Holmes. I've read every story written by A. Conan Doyle, and as a kid, would look up each word I didn't understand in the dictionary until I had reread the stories over and over again. I bought the .99 Kindle collection that has all of them so I can read them again. I've watched movies like The Zero Effect, which place someone with Sherlock Holmes's sensibilities and abilities in modern society. As someone who is relatively intuitive and deductive, I see Sherlock Holmes as one of my heroes. So it was with some trepidation that I sat down in a crowded theater at 7 PM on Christmas to watch the latest film incarnation of Baker Street's finest.

And I thoroughly enjoyed it. Robert Downey Jr.'s Holmes feels right. Jude Law's Watson may be a bit burlier and more assertive than the stories led on, but they were written by Watson himself, so you can surmise that maybe he practiced some humility and self-editing. The mystery was a good one, the action was excellent yet believable (I'm not an expert on the details of the era, so I can't argue whether or not there were anachronisms. I don't care.), and when they showed Holmes's deductive skills at work, I found myself laughing giddily.

It's smart, but it's broad enough for the general audience. It's funny, and I can forgive the few base jokes that do jar you out of the movie. It's exciting, and I never felt bored for a second. This movie is definitely one of my favorites for the year – how wonderful, between Sherlock Holmes and Avatar, to have two such amazing films to finish off the last decade!

I give it 4 and a half out of five pinches of snuff.

My review of Fantastic Mr. Fox (spoiler free)

Sunday, December 6th, 2009

fantastic-mr-fox

Who knew that two of my favorite movies from 2009 would be purportedly created for children by auteur directors? Spike Jonze's "Where The Wild Things Are" and Wes Anderson's "Fantastic Mr. Fox" are based on children's books but have appeal to all audiences and maybe are even better suited for older children and adults than the youngest set.

A quirky, funny, bittersweet look at the lives of a fox family, replete with father/son issues, husband/wife issues, and quasi-sibling rivalry, this film will make you laugh, gasp, and feel sad. The animation is beautiful and painstakingly created, and it's directed wonderfully with all of the feel of a comic heist movie, yet in a heartfelt way.

It might be a little too dark for kids under 6 or so, but anyone else with a soul should appreciate this touching adaptation of a classic book. It expands on the story and even departs considerably from the Roald Dahl feel and rhythm, but that wasn't a distraction or a negative feeling. It just felt like its own story, or maybe the real story upon which Dahl's short tale was based.

I give it five out of five cussin' stars.

My Review of Surrogates

Saturday, September 26th, 2009

surrogates-movie-posterSurrogates is a movie that takes place in a not-too-distant future where all interaction between humans is done through surrogate robots. From the safety of your home, you control a body that sees, hears, smells, tastes, and feels for you, allowing you to do all of the things you wanted to do in life without the fear of being injured or killed. You can have a surrogate that is a different sex, race, age, or even something that's brand new and unique. It's painted as an utopian future.

And, of course, in any utopian future, there is the faction of people who are unhappy with it. In this instance, the people who refuse to use machines to interact with other humans but who relish the human experience. And then there's the murder of a surrogate's user through the destruction of a surrogate, something that's supposed to be impossible. And Bruce Willis plays the FBI agent who investigates it all.

The movie had some really interesting concepts and in the hands of a better writer, or even as a movie longer than 88 minutes (or maybe a television series), it could have touched on some of the more fascinating aspects of this society. Have restaurants and hair salons gone out of business? Have surrogates gone to different planets and under the ocean? Could you make surrogates that are giant sized or microscopic? How do people keep from having their muscles atrophy?

Unfortunately, this movie just skimmed along and barely broke the surface of the ocean of possibilities. It was rather predictable, especially if you saw the previews that ruined the entire ending, and while everyone did a decent job acting, it was too heavy handed while being simultaneously shallow to really work well.

I'd give it a C.

My review of The Time Traveler's Wife (Spoiler Free)

Saturday, August 15th, 2009

Eric Bana notices a booger.

Eric Bana notices a booger.

Make no mistake about this film. It is a chick flick. It's a love story with science fiction elements. It's like if you took Steel Magnolias and made Julia Roberts's character a cyborg with laser beam eyes. Yeah, it's fucking cool, but don't expect her to go all flash fry killer robot on anyone.

Even though it was pointed directly at the female audience, I really enjoyed the movie. Eric Bana's Henry and Rachel McAdams's Clare have genuine feeling chemistry when the moment is right and have that sense of awkwardness when the moment isn't. As far as a love story and romantic movie go, it's clever and unique. It never felt really cliched or obvious (like in The Ugly Truth), and even the tearjerker moments weren't telegraphed a half hour ahead of time (like in The Ugly Truth). And Eric Bana could teach The Ugly Truth's Gerard Butler some lessons on speaking with an American accent.

This movie is sad. It's dark. It may make you cry. And if that's the type of movie that you're in the mood to see, go see this. If you want a fun romcom romp through time, rent Back to the Future.

Oh, and if I have to see another preview for that fucking idiot Tyler Perry's "I Can Do Bad All By Myself", I may stab my eyes out. It's unbelievable to see yet another black producer/writer/director make money by preying on stereotypes and cliched writing rather than trying to write stories about people.

What Not to Do When Watching Harry Potter

Friday, July 17th, 2009

Today, for Movie Friday, I'm taking my employees to go see "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince". There's a lot of hysteria surrounding the Harry Potter movies, and in order to avoid any funny business on the part of some of my crazier employees, I've created this quick reference list of things not to do when watching a Harry Potter movie. Whatever you do, don't . . .

  • Shout "Harry, show me your broomstick" every time Daniel Radcliffe appears on screen.
  • Dress like Dumbledore in the traditional wizard way, which means going commando under those magical robes.
  • Wave your wand (or iPhone or penis or pencil or whatever) at the screen and scream "Expecto Patronum" to call forth a Patronus to protect you during the scary parts.
  • Call Snape "Hans".
  • Throw golden balls at other people in the theater and yell "Catch my Golden Snitches, bitches!"
  • Pull out your penis (or, if you're a woman, the penis of the man next to you), stroke it, and purr "Good job, Crookshanks".
  • Scream in terror every time you see a decrepit old man who looks like a Dementor.
  • Ask the screen if the carpet matches the drapes when Ginny Weasley is on screen.
  • Put a black sheet on your head, call it the cloak of Invisibility, and then walk into the other sex's bathroom.
  • Refuse to let someone sit next to you because you're "saving your seat for Buckbeaks the hippogriff".
  • Pour a soda on my head and blame it on Peeves.
  • Call your breasts or your balls Fred and George and then make people laugh at them because they're such lovable pranksters.

Follow these few simple rules and enjoy your magical Harry Potter movie experience!

My review of Bruno (spoiler-free)

Tuesday, July 14th, 2009

bruno-movie-poster

Do you think people suck? Do you already have a pessimistic outlook on how low humanity has sunk? Do you know that there are people in the world who have no morals and should probably just be buried in a ditch?

If your answer is yes to any or all of these questions, Bruno is the movie for you. It puts multiple faces on the ugliness of humanity, exposed by Sacha Baron Cohen's flamboyantly stereotyped Bruno, and it's hilarious.

If, however, you still have hope in your heart that people are inherently good, this movie may make you question your outlook on life. It may make you sad and cry. It will also make you laugh, but there will be moments where you will literally recoil in horror at the things that real people do and say.

Bruno was hysterically funny for me and improved upon the concept of the quite-funny Borat. It's irreverent, it's shocking, it's gross, and it's very very real. With no filter on what humanity can be like when exposed to the light of day, Bruno moves from uncomfortable laughter at prejudice, child endangerment, and hate to side-splitting laughter at pushing the envelope, shock humor, and penises. I will definitely be buying it on Blu Ray to see what bits, interviews, and horrors were left on the cutting room floor.

My review of Terminator: Salvation (Spoiler Free)

Saturday, May 23rd, 2009

terminator_salvation_robot

If only previews were representative of the actual movie for which it's advertising, I would be one ecstatic movie watcher. So many movies would be hilariously funny with awesome action scenes, great emotional gravitas, and amazing soundtracks. Alas, this is not the case. In most situations, the previews are created as part of a slick marketing machine, designed to pull together the elements of a film that has been determined to be the most attractive, slap on some appropriate music that won't appear anywhere during the two-hour air time, and spread that preview all over TV and the Internet. The movie itself may be excellent or may be dreadful with one or two shining moments, already exhibited ad nauseam in the previews. Terminator: Salvation is somewhere in between those two extremes.

Unlike Wolverine, which was a shitfest of mediocrity, T:S has glimpses of brilliance showing through the plotholes, ham-fisted dialogue, and random screaming. These few shining moments are a direct result of the cast, despite the director and screenwriters. Christian Bale does his best to inject John Connor with emotional weight even as he is handed overwrought line after line. Sam Worthington has some of the best scenes in T:S, punctuated by some of the cheesiest scenes. I can almost imagine fuckin' McG telling him, "Sammy (because you know a douche like McG would call him Sammy), I want you to throw your arms out to the world and scream. Yeah, I know you've already done that fourteen times already, but trust me, it'll be rad! Oh, and we'll take that scream in post production and make it sound so generic that it could be used for any number of situations." Common does a decent job as John Connor's #2, ranking somewhere between Dwight Yoakam and Ice Cube on the scale of "Musicians who become actors". And Anton Yelchin (did you know that he's actually from the former USSR?) once again demonstrates why he should be in more movies by stealing the show as a young Kyle Reese. Bryce Dallas Howard and Helena Bonham Carter are both particularly useless in T:S, especially since they are written as one-dimensional stereotypes.

What should have been an outstanding movie about the war against the machines and the rise of John Connor as the leader of the Resistance was instead a mediocre effort that contained all of the trite elements that must be listed in the movie-making checklist that McG and his ilk use:

  • Cute kid who has some disability but still manages to come through in the end and be resourceful even though everyone knows that kid would have died instantly? Check.
  • Completely unnecessary scene where a woman almost gets raped just so you can see a male character save her? Check.
  • Repetitive slap-you-in-the-face dialogue and plot points to ensure that the absolute stupidest person in the room gets it, with no sense of subtlety? Check.
  • Complete and utter disregard of the danger of ever-present, never-sleeping killer machines when it suits the situation? Check.
  • A world where everyone is perpetually dirty and unwashed, yet they all have white shiny perfect teeth? Check.
  • Building crescendo of music to indicate a dramatic moment because the dialogue is not sufficient? Check.

The dialogue is so clunky that it's like it was written by a 15-year old who saw the first two Terminators, drank four Red Bulls, and then watched Top Gun. Here is my version of some of John Connor's dialogue in this movie:

"This is John Connor. We are at war. War is bad and dark. But we must remain human. Or else we are no better than the machines. This is John Connor."

"My name is John Connor. You are The Resistance. Here are some weaknesses for the machines that will seem like foreshadowing but won't really matter in any way. Each of you listening to me – you are The Resistance. I am John Connor."

"This is John Connor. Please pass the potatoes. You are The Resistance. I am John "Mashed Potatoes" Connor."

This is not a movie that will get better with time. This is not a movie that built on the backs of the superior films that preceded it (even Terminator 3). This is brainless, irrational, shiny junk that could have been so much more. It's obvious that McG, the douchiest douched that ever douche, had aspirations of greatness, and it's equally apparent that his aspirations fell far short. Maybe you should have aimed a bit lower. Learned how to make movies instead of music videos. Given the reins to someone who could have done the film some justice, instead of squandering it all for this forgettable brain fart of a movie.

I give it a C-.

My review of Star Trek

Friday, April 24th, 2009

startrek

Before I start my review, let me offer congratulations to Sarcastica, who just gave birth to a baby boy named Nolan last night. Even though you didn't name him Adam, which is an awesome name, or Avitable, which is an even awesomer name, I wish you the best of luck with your new family!

Now, let's talk about Star Trek. It doesn't enter theaters until May 8th, two weeks from today, but I was able to snag a ticket to a sneak preview screening of it (thanks Jess!). I got to the theater about an hour and a half before showtime and waited at the front of a line full of some of the geekiest geeks that ever geeked. I mean, talk about stereotypical. The people behind me were actually telling Klingon jokes, I shit you fucking not. And before you talk about the pot calling the kettle black, I fully accept that I'm a geek. I am not, however, a fan of Star Trek. I've never seen a full episode of any of the four thousand series that existed. I've never seen Star Trek I or II or III. I saw the one where they go back in time to save the blue whale from extinction. It was funny. And I think I've seen a few of the movies that didn't include the original cast, but they were completely forgettable. The amount of knowledge I have about the world of Star Trek is extremely limited.

As a result, I walked into this movie without the baggage that most of the Trekkies attending had. I like JJ Abrams, I enjoy intelligent action films, and I'm a fan of some scifi. Even if this didn't have the "Star Trek" name, I would have probably gone to see it. Unless it was called "Radioactive Hamsters" or something.

For those of you who want to see this movie, I will keep the review completely spoiler-free. Rather than discuss the details of the plot, I thought I'd focus on the good elements and bad elements of the film.

THE GOOD

The Action: This movie did not slow down for me at all. I never felt compelled to look at the time or even look away from the screen. The story is very tight, and things move at an excellent pace.

The Dialogue: Everything felt genuine. It wasn't a bunch of hokey futuristic talk that just sounds goofy. It felt grounded and even felt like it could be our future.

The Actors: Replacing the dynamic personality of William Shatner with someone else could have been catastrophic. It wasn't. Chris Pine did an outstanding job of making the character of James T. Kirk his very own, without in any way mimicking the affectations known as Shatner's acting style. Zachary Quinto was seamless in his role as Spock, and Simon Pegg made a great Scotty. The two big surprises for me were Zoe Saldana, who played Uhura, and Karl Urban, who played Bones McCoy. Saldana was compelling and one of my favorite characters from the movie. Urban somehow became a young DeForest Kelley. and with the exception of a few forced lines that took me out of the movie, was quite a chameleon. Eric Bana's villain, Nero, had gravitas and felt like he had justice on his side. The best villains are the ones who believe they're noble, and this was no exception.

The Plot: It was simple, straightforward, and managed to simultaneously tell a fresh story while eliminating any complaints from Trekkies about continuity. That's right – they managed to tell a great origin story without in any way compromising the integrity of the decades of continuity and canon. And they set the stage for more stories that will have the freedom to explore any avenue they desire.

The Visuals: In one word: outstanding. Everything worked, everything felt real, and I didn't see anything that jumped out to me as being obvious CG.

THE BAD

The Action: During a few of the fight scenes, they opted for a technique similar to a cross between the Bourne movies and Batman Begins. Namely, very close in, action moving too fast to track, and occasionally confusing shots where you couldn't discern who was doing what. They also pulled out for some scenes, which I felt worked better. I prefer Zack Snyder's technique of slowing down action scenes to show the choreography to the naked eye, but that's just me.

The Dialogue: Some of the lines were very forced and were obviously stuck in there to pander to fans. Of special note would be McCoy's trademark "Dammit, I'm a doctor not a physicist/circus monkey/garbage man/etc./etc/." and Chekov's inability to say the letter "V". These lines were minimal, though, and didn't really interfere with my ability to enjoy the movie as a whole.

The Actors: I like Anton Yelchin, but his Chekov was grating. Using a foreign accent as comic relief seemed to be the weakest part of the one Star Trek movie I've seen (nuclear wessel), and it weakened the movie here, too. I would have much preferred his character to have a slight accent, if any. For me, though, and I'm prepared to be crucified for this, the worst actor by far was Leonard Nimoy. It felt like his every line was him winking at the audience, breaking the fourth wall, especially the voiceover towards the end. I understand why they brought in a legacy character, but it was just indulgent, unnecessary, and annoying.

The Plot: The only complaint that I have about the plot is that it felt a bit anti-climactic. Without spoiling anything, I can only say that I was surprised that the end of the conflict was the end and there wasn't anything additional about to happen.

The Visuals: Other than the too-close, blurry action scenes, I have no complaints about the visuals.

THE UGLY

Winona Ryder's old age makeup. She was excellent in the role, and it was nice to see her acting again, because she's one of my favorite actresses, but her old age makeup was just as bad as it was in Edward Scissorhands, which was almost 20 years ago. Why they couldn't take some of those excellent visual effects and just apply them to her face ala Cate Blanchett in Benjamin Button, I don't know.

CONCLUSION

It's a very strong reboot to a faltering franchise. Star Trek is fun, exciting, and accessible to diehard Trekkies, casual fans, and newbies. It's not going to win any Academy Awards (well, maybe for technical shit), and it has a few missteps, but overall it was a very good film.

I give it a B+.