![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Star Trek Review (mild spoilers)
May. 21st, 2009 05:25 pmMeh.
No really, meh. What was there about this movie that was interesting or exciting? It felt almost exactly like that vapid Lost in Space remake they did with William Hurt and Gary Oldman - all flash and no substance. It was just "techno Trek" to me. The computer displays just looked unreadable and full of horrible graphic design elements, the story was dull and uninventive (time travel AGAIN??), the acting was awfully one dimensional, and it was more about homage and nods to the previous movies than it was about telling a good story.
Interestingly enough, I noticed something that doesn't usually grab me... the music was BAD. I mean, boringly, glaringly, bad. It was all orchestra and trumpets, like it was trying to be all John Williams or something, but it was lifeless stuff. And why did everything have to have the same goofy ass sound effects from the 60s?
Suck Trek!!
No really, meh. What was there about this movie that was interesting or exciting? It felt almost exactly like that vapid Lost in Space remake they did with William Hurt and Gary Oldman - all flash and no substance. It was just "techno Trek" to me. The computer displays just looked unreadable and full of horrible graphic design elements, the story was dull and uninventive (time travel AGAIN??), the acting was awfully one dimensional, and it was more about homage and nods to the previous movies than it was about telling a good story.
Interestingly enough, I noticed something that doesn't usually grab me... the music was BAD. I mean, boringly, glaringly, bad. It was all orchestra and trumpets, like it was trying to be all John Williams or something, but it was lifeless stuff. And why did everything have to have the same goofy ass sound effects from the 60s?
Suck Trek!!