Star Trek: Beyond (2016) ... and beyond ST Beyond

There's not much to be said about "Star Trek: Beyond" ... not much of good. Even the poster is bad. There's been quite some time since I've been so disappointed by a Star Trek. Question: What do you do if you need to write a story for a Star Trek and you don't have an idea? Answer: Recycling. What's making this worse than normal is doing it so poorly right after the previous movie where we've seen an original and stylish re-inventing of a classic villain (Khan). What we have in "Beyond" is more or less the original background of Khan (well .. somehow they managed not using it in the previous movie), attached to a different villain in what turns in the end to be a simple shallow revenge story ...

In the intro we have Enterprise crashing in pieces on a far away planet as result of an attack from an apparently unknown race, lead by a guy with typical "evil alien" looks who wants a weapon incidentally present on board of the ship. The context: long ago another Federation ship got wrecked on the same lost planet, that remained lost for a while, sufficiently enough that the captain to develop a mutation extending his life as well as his revenge wish for being forgotten. Spoiler: who's the "evil alien"? ... if it's not obvious, you'll probably get it early when you see the old shipwreck for the first time in the movie. However, there's a bunch of other stuff hard to get. Not because they're not so obvious, but because they don't make any sense ... Starting with why the guy didn't leave the planet, considering he's in command of an entire army capable at least to reach the nearest inhabited outpost (his target in the movie actually) ... And that's only one. Honestly, I'm to lazy to start enumerating others ...

Well .. but in a movie - especially a SciFi - you can overlook some things that you can't explain. The problem is when pretty much everything else sucks. The direction is like a "Fast & Furious ... in space" (no joke, there is the same director as latest F&F actually). The editing and the camera work is horrible, as pretty much everything on the technical part for a ST in the year 2016. Tricky question: what's worse than a poorly used kinetic camera ... Answer: a poorly used kinetic camera in 3D.

Without other comments ...
Rating: 2 out of 5 (objectively ... subjectively: 1.5)

Now, beyond ST Beyond ... If you really like "Star Trek" my recommendation is to stay far from this one. Skip it. Go see Tarzan instead. Or something else. I don't know ...
If you've never watched a "Star Trek" until now, don't ruin your impression with Beyond. Incidentally, in a different context, I've recently written a summary of what's worth seeing out of the "cinema episodes". Any of the following is way beyond Beyond (in the positive direction)...

The old generation - Kirk & co.

• ST II: The Wrath of Khan (1982) - I think this is old, but probably has the largest hardcore fan base. That's why it happens often to have any sort of references more or less obvious to this movie and key scenes in it. 
• ST IV: The Voyage Home (1986) - Again, it's old, but it probably has the most funny subject: time travel to take a whale into the future when the species got extinct (no other spoilers); 
• ST VI: The Undiscovered Country (1991) - I've watched this very long ago and I don't remember much besides I liked it the most from what's in the "old generation" series + it's the one which "aged" the best being the most recent. 

The next generation - Picard & co.

• ST VII: Generations (1994) - Nice for nostalgic people. Makes the transition between the old generations with a meeting between Picard and the old Kirk. Lots of people say this "episode" is not so good, but I think it's acceptable. The villain has a solid build, the movie has a bit of life philosophy, indeed it has some lengths, so not the best but overall works. 
• ST VIII: First Contact (1996) - Must see. My #1. Borg + time travel + first alien contact for humanity = probably the best story of all.
• ST X: Nemesis (2002) - Must see. I think it's the most underrated Star Trek. The critics unfairly bashed it. It has one of the best villains, the story's sufficiently original (including a side story) and is also probably the most alert in this series (= doesn't bore).

The new generation - Kirk & co.

• ST XI: Star Trek (2009) - Must see. A return to the original crew with a very nice time travel story. Maybe a bit cheesy, but within decent limits. My #3.;
• ST XII: Into Darkness (2013) - Must see. Probably the most "romantic" ST (referring to the current, not about romances) = strong revenge story, a different Khan is back = lots of references to ST II very cleverly inserted and probably the best soundtrack. My #2.

"Redshirts"

I've chosen for the final entry of this year to do something that I don't remember doing before = instead of a movie to pick a book as subject for an entry: "Redshirts" by John Scalzi. Don't worry :) considering how much I'm able to read outside work related stuff, it definitely won't become something regular.

Looking at what I just wrote is somehow irrelevant to say that "Redshirts" is one of the best books I've read in the last five years ( with an average of something like one book/year :) ). Maybe it's more relevant to say that's the book that got the Hugo in 2013 ( + the Locus award ). If that doesn't say much either, maybe you're not a SciFi reader and normally I would recommend picking another book. But maybe you enjoyed "Star Trek" :) or maybe you're attracted by time travel ( oh yes, I'm back to that ;) ).

What's the link with "Star Trek" ? "Redshirts" starts as a sort of satire taking place on the Earth's flagship, and you cannot miss an obvious similarity with: "Enterprise" and the missions "where no man has gone before". With something particular though: we see the action developing through the eyes of some crew members who don't have a high rank on the ship, and who are asking themselves why only a small group of officers are surviving each away mission. And more precisely, why each time somebody of a lower rank must die in the most crazy and tormenting ways that nobody would predict. That's actually where the title comes from .. in "Star Trek", the original series, the red uniform bearers where apparently cursed to a similar fate.

What's the link with time travel ? Well, without spoiling much, solving the above issue seems to rely on time traveling :) And again, we have a quite nice approach of the topic, even though this time it's pure fantasy (no life loops theory analysis, just a light version of alternate universe strings).

Leaving the subject aside, I have to point out the literary style. It's the only book by John Scalzi I've read, and if the early beginning didn't seem to show much more than a cheap novel, what followed changed dramatically this impression :). The satire in the first part of the book is excellent, and the comic punchlines in some dialogs take you by surprise. I don't remember laughing loud while reading another book. The second part switches towards drama, and the final is again surprising (positively) in the way it's approached. Normally you would expect a novel ending in a final chapter .. or well, with an epilogue. Here, we have three codas. Narrated in the first, second and third person. And if you are still thinking that what you've read is some light satire, this part will probably change your perspective. Besides boosting the drama effect (although keeping the comic side), the ending manages somehow to integrate also some romance in this story even if (light spoiler) up to the last page it won't be obvious how solid (and surprisingly non-cheesy) is this nuance.

To conclude, despite being an often acid satire, after you turn the last page you realize that "Redshirts" it's an incredible warm book. And short, to "burn" fast :) So I recommend it warmly. That's all for now ... and of course Happy Holidays ! ;)

Star Trek Into Darkness (2013)

How should I write this entry without spoiler ? I'd better not write anything :) Ok, let's try something brief. Because what's essential for "Star Trek Into Darkness" is that somehow it managed up to the release date to keep the subject pretty hidden. It's essential because it turned to be a pretty pleasant surprise not knowing much in advance. Even the negative character, although listed in the IMDb published cast since a while ago still had a question mark upon him. It even got to fake "leaked screenings" of the final credits that gave identity (either fake or real) to ...

Khan. Khan Noonien Singh. That's as much as I'll leave as "spoiler" - nothing more. Sorry, but to "enjoy the movie" is better like this, with the risk of an entry that's too short. I still can make some recommendation though. To get a complete enough view of what the last Star Trek offers, it would be good to see the previous one that starts an alternative temporal line for Kirk & Co. Alternative to the generation and the facts from the first series (the old old one, before Picard), having the connection point in "the old Spock" (Leonard Nimoy). Even more recommended before watching the last installment is to see "The Wrath of Khan" aka Star Trek II = the 2nd big screen movie from 1982. In case it wasn't obvious already, Khan is not a new character. More important is that the script of the new movie "recycles" in very nice manner what it gets from there. I'll refrain from saying more but it deserves attention. If you've already seen the movie from 30 years ago, the current one will certainly bring up memories. I hope in a positive way :) although there are opinions saying that J.J. Abrams has lost the Star Trek spirit and that the commercial aspect (= action, explosions, violence) dominates instead a sufficiently complex and intelligent subject that would me more in line with the series. Partially I agree, partially though the subject is not (yet) so superficial to throw the movie in .. how to say it nicely .. well .. "Transformers league".

Besides that, as in the previous big screen "episode", the cast is really up to the level of the original one (I'll keep my opinion that at least the doctor: "Bones" McCoy played by DeForest Kelley before '90 is perfectly reprised by Karl Urban now). To avoid any spoilers, I'll keep the discretion on the negative character ( but this is also with a plus :) ). On the positive side I would also add the sound + the score by Michael Giacchino for who I don't have much respect, but I have to admit that he catched "the feeling". On the minus side, besides the ultra commercial factor + the typical U.S. "flavor" (even if it would stand written on the credits that the production is 100% European you'd still be convinced that it comes from Hollywood), something else, well ... the 3D. I've never been too attracted to 3D, but there are movies (e.g., "Life of Pi") on which I had to admit that it works, and that it makes a difference. Not in this case. For me it could have been 2D without doubt, especially given some action scenes in which the frame is not fixed for at least a second. In any case, the general conclusion is positive. So, enjoy the movie, and .. live long and prosper ;)

Rating: 4 out of 5