Review of Star Trek Beyond (2016) by Axet — 23 Jul 2016

Whether you are a longtime fan who has seen it all before or a newcomer to the Star Trek series, how you could not be bored out of your mind sitting through this is unfathomable. On the one hand it's recycled rehash with no spark of originality much less intelligence. On the other, if you haven't seen it all before you would be baffled by this insider reboot-sequel. Either way, it's very thin. The only thing it's beyond is boring!

Put it this way, I might even take the very first Star Trek movie from 1979 over this, because as dreadfully boring as that non-eventful debut was, it at least had a true sci-fi gothic space opera realism to it. This thing is wall to walk cartoon action, and as I've warned so many times - non-stop over-the-top action is every bit as boring as no action!

The visual effects are the best part, but at this stage in cinematic history great VFX is a given. That said, there are some clunky shots in this!

The director is a mechanic for hire veteran of the laughably awful, silly "Fast and Furious" series. Obviously he can manage a set and technically understands "moviemaking", however he is not a gifted storyteller nor what a real director is, or at least used to be since the studio monkeys hire a lot of these types to helm their tent poles and otherwise now. We don't need more dime a dozen technicians Hollywood, we need those better at story craft!

The previous two JJ Abrams directed entries were good (both 8 ratings here), with the first being a true origin story prequel, and the second being a sequel/remake with twist which turned off most and infuriated some old fans. For some reason I went with it. Without really giving anything away, we can expect whales in the next entry because it's clear they are remaking the original movie series film by film while spinning it to something they are selling as new. Yeah, right. Well the house of mirrors aspect isn't the problem, it's the lack of involving story here that is. JJ the executive producer now gets sloppy with the property. Besides the weak story he stupidly goes without the anamorphic flare aesthetic established in the previous two. Why? Your wife told you to lose them? Put on a pair of pants pc leftist p---y! Criticisms in general of the flares being overdone? So maybe scale it back a bit, but don't lose that aesthetic altogether! Now this one doesn't match! Besides, the flares were fine and a great new visual motif that fit this futuristic content perfectly. If he had done it for "Star Wars" too, that would have been a terrible mistake of course. Here it's fine. Stand your ground wimpy nerd!

Lastly, a word on the cast. All three principles are doing impersonations. That's not good acting! Imagine if Daniel Craig or his predecessors did impressions of Sean Connery? Chris Pine is a solid actor with a look for sure, but he is no Bill Shatner and he never will be. Not even close, because one thing true stars have is personality. Say what you will about Shatner, but he became a big star because he's a true original and has personality galore. He also has proven to be a very fine actor many times out, granted not always. What sets Pine apart from dozens of good looking capable young Hollywood actors who could just as easily slip into this role? Not much.