Star Trek: Beyond

Star Trek: 167km via A5


Mild ambitions rendered, uh, shaky.
-spacer-
Reported on 10th of September, 2016

I didn’t hate Star Trek: It’s probably fine. It was fine. Probably. It was absolutely 14,731 times the film than the other two. Don’t get me wrong, the other two Star Trek films prove definitively that JJ Abrams’ success is deserved. After the fact surprises and tenuously post-it’d trailer moments: if you fake it, they will feel.

Star Trek: Beyond

20 August 2016 @ The Liberté Multiplexe


$4.50 or, if one must be quotidian, and one must... 
★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆

menu

In the case of Star Trek: Beyond, however, we have a surprisingly crackerjack plot. Straightforward and clean, Enterprise crashes into planet, separating out the crew into various teams who must struggle and reunite. The sequences had some thought put into them, with goals and ways to get them.

However, I did discover the really excellent C. Chocolat. The couverture was a bit chalky, but the filling was outstanding. The raspberry was especially memorable, with a bit of vinegar I think. Sadly, the macaron Breizh (famous here: caramel macaron enrobé'd in chocolate) was fairly standard. Still, the experience was worth the two hour drive, which I did to avoid 3D

However, I did discover the really excellent C. Chocolat. The couverture was a bit chalky, but the filling was outstanding. The raspberry was especially memorable, with a bit of vinegar I think. Sadly, the macaron Breizh (famous here: caramel macaron enrobé’d in chocolate) was fairly standard. Still, the experience was worth the two hour drive, which I did to avoid 3D

Such mild ambitions by the usually detestable Mr. Simon Pegg are sadly rendered moot by the shakycam direction. Mr. Justin Lin is, like Mr. JJ Abrams, deservedly successful. If you shake it, they will feel.

Re: such sequences, and having recently learned of the ‘curtain line’ (very important concept), I present you with the curtain gag. What one should shoot for in a film is the narrative action sequence. Bits in Gravity, Terminator 2, Die Hard, Monsters, Inc. even I, Robot have a lot of moving parts, where one thing leads to the next, action, thought, reaction, etc.

The curtain gag, on the other hand, has just one moment that all the action leads to. If the saucer of the Enterprise is going to be turned upside down, it will fall on you like a escape pod, and there’s going to be some dust. That’s pretty much it.

liberte_multiplexe

Sadly, the ticket for the Multiplexe Liberté is identical to those of the Gaumont Rennes. Nevertheless, they have this cool and misleading feature. Two minutes my ass! I had to see thirty seconds of Blood Father, which almost gave away that it was bland! 

Another director would have come up with every possible permutation of what one can do in an upside down world. The curtain gag means we write to the end: the saucer falls down – the motorcycle flies through the air and teleports and so on. It’s not unlike the three act structure. You come up with an bit, then write to it. The alternative – imagining the opportunities that situation creates – is as daunting as writing characters who can anticipate consequences and make decisions.

Shame really, as the conception of the multi-gravitational star base, complete with MC Escher pedestrian walkways, may be one of the few filmic imaginations of a hard science-fiction novel universe. As we watch the Enterprise dock in an environment where people standing in a variety of planar directions, one imagines all kinds of cool stuff they could do if they set Die Hard there. When instead it’s revealed that there was a reveal (the surprise is that there was a surprise! – fine, the guy who couldn’t possibly be human is human to teach us that humans can also be human about their oh the humanity), you’re just bummed that they decided to set Super 8 there.

Forgot that one, didnja. That’s the point.

The Take

menu
Profits!
Maybe it was the fantasy of the film it could have been, maybe the gratitude for the film it wasn’t, but nice story structure.
$4.50
Sorry, Ted, I loved the utterly and inconceivably anachronistic use of the song Sabotage to destroy the various robo-swarm-baddies….
$2.00
Total Profits
$6.50
Losses!
…but, re: enjoyably stupid action film tropes, what the hell happened to the sub-badguy? Hero kills bad-guy, sure, but side-kick must kill first henchman and female lead must kill female baddie. Instead, first henchman disappears completely, and female baddie is killed offscreen…only NOT to reappear. Very unsatisfying. Be what you are.
$1.00
It’s a weapon…wait for it…that KILLS people. Huh? Huh?
$1.00
Total Losses
$2.00

Thoughts on Star Trek: Beyond

menu
  1. Mary says:

    OK, the plot was stupid, i.e. a series of annoying, quick fix solutions for every constant problem, thankfully derived from politically correct “team work.” Can I just say Shatner does it better? Re: “Sabotage” to yes, destroy the Matrix-esque swarming killer robot things (successfully). This song sucked in 1994, and it still sucks now: there is no way it could save the world. What lonely 35 year old video gamer was allowed to write this script, clearly ripping off The Matrix and Avatar, just for starters, and then throwing in 90s scream rock as if it were actually Led Zeppelin? Please. For me, the best part of this movie was watching Karl Urban, commendable for trying to make something of the lame plot and his character vis a vis Spock, as if as though “acting” was really a career. It doesn’t work, but he’s still cute.

Annoyed? Prove it!

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.