Enlighten Up!

Finally, I was able to catch an elusive screening of Enlighen Up! at the Cabot Theater in Beverly. Mid-week matinees are fantastic if you hate crowds. In any case I was drawn to this doc even before it hit the festival circuit, mainly because it stems from a Boston/Somerville production company. I am interested in the local talent and wholly support independent film. More on this later…

Enlighten Up! is about one of the producers, Kate Churchill and her quest to prove that yoga can transform anyone, even a skeptic like Nick Rosen, her “guinea pig.” Nick is a journalist from NYC who comes from an interesting family background and makes himself open to all different kinds of yoga practices, all different kinds of theories about yoga and ultimately spirituality. It is organized chronologically by Nick’s journal entries. I sort of wished we could see more of what he wrote especially when tension rises between him and Kate.

They travel around the world in search of true yoga practice and interview dozens of instructors and yogis. It was really impressive that the managed to do all of this and actually get interesting bits and pieces. Their trip to India was especially fascinating for nothing if not just the cultural shift. The photography was beautiful, but maintained the shaky documentary feel. The documentary itself fell a tiny bit flat in the middle. I, like Kate, wanted to see more of a character arc. The only other thing I felt was missing was a little more detail about yoga. I don’t practice it, but the film seemed to be speaking to people who already knew the language. If it were directed to a broader audience and maybe charted different kinds of yoga practices so the layperson may be able to understand better what some of the terms mean. Part of the confusion perhaps is that there ARE so many different intentions/reason/kinds of yoga ranging from purely physical to reaching nirvana. But I still wished they explained it better for those of us who don’t know what yoga is.

In any event, it was extremely interesting to watch. Do I think that the film succeeded in transforming a person? Somewhat, but not enough that it is going to make any great impact on the yoga community. Or the community at large for that matter. Nick reaped the physical benefits of practicing yoga, but of his mind, I couldn’t tell.

As mentioned earlier, this particular film was of interest early on, mostly because it was produced by a Boston-based company. It gives me hope that I will be able to work near my home without having to move my life to L.A. or some other city in order to work in film. It is also great because I start grad school this week at Emerson College. Watch out, Boston! It will be wonderful to start his new endeavor, a little scary, but I have confidence that it is where I am meant to be.

Readers, beware that I may be posting my papers to the blog and less movie reviews. This is possibly more for my sanity than for your benefit, but maybe you can glean more out of academic adventures.

Bigger, Faster, Stronger… and smarter?

Today I viewed Bigger, Faster, Stronger, a 2008 documentary about whether or not steroids are ethical to take, in sports, in competitions, in medicine, in life. The director and host Chris Bell struggles to grasp some answers as he interviews athletic superstars, olympians, and people who’s lives have been touched by anabolic steroids. Here’s the actual synopsis from IMDB:

The documentary examines the steroid use of the director Christopher Bell and his two brothers who all grew up idolizing Arnold Schwarzenegger, Hulk Hogan, and Sylvester Stallone, and also features professional athletes, medical experts, fitness center members, and US Congressman talking about the issue of anabolic steroids.

Steroid usage has become a serious issue which our government has strived to figure out how to regulate. Medically, some kinds of steroids are used to keep people alive, including some HIV survivors, so making them illegal all together wouldn’t be acceptable. Anabolic steroids are the kind that athletes take to beef up. I’m sure you can think of more names than I can of celebrities who have admitted to taking some form of stimulant. And it’s not difficult to pick out those who were/are on the ‘roids.

The story was most interesting to me when Chris Bell let us into his world. He discussed growing up idolizing Hulk Hogan, Schwarzenegger, and Sly Stallone. When he discovered that both of his brothers were on steroids, (one for olympic lifting, the other for aspirations of WWE stardom,) Chris had a moral and ethical dilemma. He was taught not to cheat and body enhancements were cheating, right?

This doc is not one to be watched lightly. There’s some serious stuff in there but it’s left open-ended for the viewer to make their own decision. I wish there was a definite answer from Chris about which side he ended up on, as he was a user for a short time also. The footage was great, it was expertly edited and the characters we meet along the way are memorable. I strongly recommend this film to anyone remotely interested in fitness and health or documentaries in general. Someone at my gym recommended it to me and I wished I watched it earlier. I feel more educated on the subject and understand a little bit more of why our country, why our athletes and our celebrities feel the need to use steroids. But they don’t stop there…

Is Tiger Woods’ corrective eye surgery cheating since he now has better than 20/20 vision? Do musicians and performers who take drugs in order to reduce anxiety cheating? (Maybe if it’s an audition…?) American air force pilots frequently take adderol type substances to keep them awake, alert and focused. (The American air force are the only air force in the world that are allowed or even encouraged to take drugs. Elsewhere, everywhere, they are not permitted.) Students take the same kind of caffeine pills to stay awake, study more and cram for the next exam.

On the one hand, I feel that, yes, it is cheating. Definitely. The argument made in the movie is mostly, “well, everyone is doing it so it’s a level playing field anyway.” And “You need this to reach your FULL POTENTIAL.” If that’s really the case, and there are no super humans who can run the 100 yard dash in under 9 seconds, then what do we do? On the other hand, there has to be some talent for athletes/musicians/students, etc. to perform. For Arnold to come to America and become an actor, maybe not so much. But everyone starts somewhere. He just happened to start as a bodybuilder.

This doesn’t change my mind about steroids. I hope Chris Bell feels the same way, despite his close connections to the issue. Feel free to comment about it if you have any stories. Watch the movie and tell me what  you think.

Listings lists

I have always been a fan of making lists. For everything: groceries, to do, places I want to visit, things I want to do. The hardest list to make always are movie lists. In a recent Facebook note in which I was tagged, you list movies that “will stick with you.” This can be interpreted in many ways of course. I took it to mean films that I have thought of months or even years after seeing them. Some of these were just plain haunting and would not even make my top 100  favorite list. Others remind me of different times, whether it be childhood or college classes where I learned more about film theory and ideas behind the motion picture.

The most difficult thing about listing movies is that it is almost constantly changing. Every week I’ll watch a movie that may stick with me for the next week. The next month. Currently at this very moment, I’m watching Apocalypse Now Redux for the first time. Marlon Brando is quite frightening. In any case, my point is that I will never get to see it all and therefore never have a perfect quantifiable list.

The American Film Institute (AFI) Top 100 Movies has changed and probably will change every 10 years or so. It amazes me when you look at the original list from 1998 and the current list from 2007… Check it out here. It amazes me what makes the list and also what is removed all together. Take a peek if you have the time.

What better way to end this post with a small series of lists, (that are more specific than the aforementioned Facebook note.) Enjoy. Make fun. And comment with your lists!

Movies that will always stick with me (because they made me cry every time):

1. Free Willy
2. P.S. I Love You
3. My Girl
4. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
5. Meet Joe Black

Movies that will always stick with me (because the scared the crap out of me):

1. Jurassic Park (Seeing this as and adult is a totally different experience than as a 9 year old.)
2. Freddy Kruger
3. Fear (aptly named)
4. The Shining
5. The Halloween Movies

Movies that will always stick with me (because they are my childhood.)

1. The Wizard of Oz
2. Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (with Gene Wilder)
3. Anastasia
4. Beauty and the Beast
5. Sleeping Beauty

Movies that will stick with me (because I couldn’t get them out of my head a week after I saw them. This could be a really long list but I’ll keep it to 5.)

1. Reservation Road
2. V for Vendetta
3. Matrix
4. Mr. Death
5. Dig!

HP & the Half-Blood Prince

One of the most wonderful movie-viewing experiences is ye olde drive-in. I recently had my first drive-in experience at Mendon Twin. At $20/carload and a double-feature to boot, you can’t lose. It was a wonderful time and something I quite wish I’d done as a kid. In any case we saw Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince and Terminator.

Recently, I finished reading J.K. Rowling’s 6th book of the HP series for the purpose of comparison. Everytime a book is adapted  to a film, there are nuances that are lost because the medium is different. If a filmmaker was to adapt a book, word for word, it might be unbearable to watch for the length, if not for all the unnecessary shots to call attention to each character’s emotional state, which is easier to communicate with words than a look (sometimes). It’s no surprise that books are and always will be better for this reason alone. The reader will see things happen in their own mind’s eye, whereas the filmmaker will make the audience see it through his/her lens.

Dir. David Yates has taken creative liberties with Rowling’s story. I almost feel as though it was a little too much. Not only were there complete scenes taken out, (which is to be expected,) but even many parts that are essential to the plot were altered to such a degree that it changes the meaning and the characters. For example, the climax of both the book and the film occurs when Dumbledore and Harry return to Hogwarts to find Draco and the Death Eaters waiting for them at the castle tower. In the book, Dumbledore stuns Harry while he is underneath the invisibility cloak enabling him to see/hear everything that ensues but not allowing him to do anything about it. In the film, Dumbledore just tells him to help the others/hide, which makes the plotline weaker to me because he could’ve done something to help Dumbledore. I suppose one could make the argument that changing the meaning and the characters should be expected also, but Rowling created this world, these characters, this story. I’ve wondered what it looks like in her mind.

Other than the adaptation losses, I enjoyed the movie quite a lot. Many characters were allowed to step out of their previously two-dimensional selves, which only helped the believeablity. The hormone-raging teens only heighten the comedy, which I have to say was more than a relief from digging into Voldemort’s dark past, horcruxes and all. Jim Broadbent as Slughorn was perfect casting.

The next and final installment of the series will be split into two movies for two reasons: 1. It’s a long story and I hope that they want to do it justice and 2. more movies make more $$. In any case, if you are one of those who just watch the movies, I highly recommend reading the books. It’s easy reading and they’re probably at your local library. You might just have to wrestle it away from a kid, though. Totally worth it.

Public Enemies, not #1

A few months ago, I had put together a list of movies that I was excited to see. Public Enemies was pretty high on that list. To many people’s dismay, the film fell flat. It’s not the fault of Depp, although his character and star of the film, John Dillinger felt extremely muted, nor is it the fault of Christian Bale who gained 60 ish pounds to play the role of bureau agent, Melvin Purvis. I wholly blame Michael Mann for turning what could’ve been an amazing 1930’s cat-and-mouse gangster-thriller into a long, boring movie.

Two main issues bothered me about this film. The camera work and the audio. These are two pretty important elements when making a movie. First let’s talk about the camera work. The handheld, motion blur movements did not work. These kinds of shots did not fit the clean-cut time period, or Dillinger’s personality. In truth it made me slightly dizzy and I could not figure out why Mann continued to use these kinds of shots. In addition to the motion blur, he tried using strange angles that also didn’t seem to fit. Mann also seemed obsessed with the 1930’s cars and put far too many beauty shots in. We shouldn’t be focused on the cars. We should be focused on Dillinger and trying to figure out how his mind was working. Frustrating.

It seemed as though Mann thought he was making a different film. In the case where you’re making a biopic, I am of the opinion that one should let the story tell itself and not try to make it something it’s not. In this case, John Dillinger, Public Enemy #1, could have been a great story. This may have been why I was so disappointed. All the characters could’ve been fuller. You couldn’t tell one gangster from another and I didn’t care when they died. Half the battle of making a good movie is making the audience connect with and care for the characters you create.

Complaint #2: the audio. First, let me just say that the music was great. Otis Taylor has 2 songs on the soundtrack and both are fantastic. Also Diana Krall makes an appearance singing “Bye Bye Blackbird.” No, what I am referring to about the audio, is the actual dB levels of many of the sound effects, (guns shooting, tires squealing) and also the dialog levels. It varied so much from shot to shot, that it was distracting. At one point, Marion Cotillard gets slapped, my ears were actually ringing. Did they do ANY audio sweetening? Or at least do a pre-screening to get audience feedback? Unprofessional.

There were some things I liked about it. The music. The fact that they used Dillinger’s actual hole-up for the final shoot out scene. The original bullet holes were still there when the crew got to the set. Creepy. I liked knowing that the FBI hadn’t been officially assembled yet and how J. Edgar Hoover was handling the crimewave. I liked that it was historical, similar to Jesse James, and yet it didn’t have any real feeling. Just as the color palette they used, everything was muted… except the audio.

Overnight sans Success

Success can be measured many ways: by the amount of money made, how much was achieved, or simply that something was finished. The latter is the case for the Overnight success of what is revered now as a cult classic: The Boondock Saints. This documentary about the making of a film that was such a big deal when I was in college was enough to interest me enough to watch it. But soon enough I learned that this was no ordinary behind-the-scenes escapades. The documentary itself seems amaturely made, but the story it tells is worth seeing, especially for the independent filmmaker.

It centers around Bostonian Troy Duffy and the script that got him famous for about 10 minutes. The script, itself was good and that surprised most people because Duffy was a self-proclaimed screwup. So when he got the attention of major Hollywood studio producers, including the Weinstien’s at Miramax, he did a little dance in his overalls. Not only that, but he finally got the recognition he thought he deserved. Some say it even went to his head. At this point, there were no contracts, just buzz about his “hot script.”

Expectations were running high when Troy and his band, The Brood, all moved out to L.A. They moved to involve the band in the soundtrack of the film, play some shows, and get signed. Troy seemed to be less than enthused when the band actually did signed by Maverick Records, only because he claimed to be the reason they were all there in the first place… well because of the script that is. As the cherry on top, Troy and his brother Taylor had serious differences which matter only because Taylor was in the band, and was more musically talented than him.

As for the script, Harvey Weinstien bought it for $300,000 and gave Troy a budget of $15 mil. to produce it. A first time writer/director’s dream come true. So what the heck happened?? Mr. Duffy became a raging egomaniac who thought the world revolved around him. He is the most unpleasant person and it was all caught on tape by his friends Tony Montana and Mark Brian Smith, his personal camera crew to record his elevation to fame. 

Harvey decided not to make the film, recinded his offer and put it up for grabs to other studios. One lesson to learn: if Harvey Weinstien doesn’t want it, no one else will take it, either. Troy didn’t just fall from grace, he took a nosedive.  He decided to make the movie anyway, independently with less than half of the budget and therefore needed people to work almost for free. It amazes me that this film was even made at all.

Kurt Loder from MTV wrote this article following the DVD release of The Boondock Saints. If you don’t have time to watch Overnight, which I highly recommend to any and all filmmakers to keep us humble, at least read his scathing review. Regardless of your feelings about The Boondock Saints, it is worth watching Overnight, for nothing if not to see karmic justice.

The Coward and the Outlaw

A recent viewing of The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford opened my eyes to new cinematography techiniques and ways to tell a historical story.

The cinematography is amazing not just because of the on-location shots in Canada, but because it’s hard to imagine that America was so untouched. The shots were consistant throughout as each transitional shot was recognizable with certain lighting and fuzziness around the edges that gave it this uneasy feeling. Ultimately, you know that Jesse James will be assassinated, but it’s nothing like what I thought it would be. It was almost as if he knew it was coming; a preemptive strike to avoid the unpredictable nature of Jesse’s trigger finger . I was unfamiliar with the story and it made me want to know more about the James Gang and why Jesse was so missed, even though he committed countless thefts, murders and plunders across America.

There was something charismatic about Jesse that Brad Pitt was able to deliver. He was mysterious and although he had a family, he also preserved this secret life that was dark and adventurous. Something certainly that would create admiration and obsession with young Bob Ford. Casey Affleck was perfect. His crackly voice gave the effect of pre-pubescence. His movements were unsure and awkward. Just as one might imagine.

The film ran quite long, but I didn’t mind as much because it took time to tell the story. They might have been able to cut it down to 120 minutes, but I think viewers might have missed out on something. I appreciated the slow pace and the cinematography sort of made up for the length. It was not what you might expect to see considering it was about a time in history when train robberies and stickups were common occurance.

It would be interesting to study Jesse James as one of the first celebrities. I’m glad that the film didn’t end right after his death. The public went nuts. They sold photographs of his dead body for crying out loud! Do I want to see photos of Michael Jackson’s dead body? Heck no.

But, what followed his death made me dislike Robert Ford, which up until that point I was entertained by his childlike fascination with Jesse. He really was a coward and that’s how he will be remembered. And Jesse… he will be remembered as one of the most infamous outlaws that ever lived.

New (old) Movies

Over the past 2 weeks, I’ve been extending my film education by watching a ton of different films that I’ve never seen. Mostly found by browsing the “watch instantly” lists on Netflix, and decided by whatever looked interesting at the time.  Since it would take seemingly forever to write on each of these individually as I usually  do, and since some of them weren’t worth writing that much about, I thought this list and brief thought about them would be better. If any of these spark your interest and you want to hear more on a certain title, leave me a comment and I’d be obliged to write another post.

Becoming Jane

A drama about the life of  young Jane Austen (Anne Hathaway) and her romance with Irishman, Tom Lefoy (James McAvoy).  Hathaway shines in this role and McAvoy is the perfect accompanyment. The biographical story was endearing and heartbreaking. A definite insight into how Jane Austen became the Jane Austen that inspires so many. ♥♥♥♥ out of 5 because I don’t have stars.

Step Up 2 the Streets

Just another dance movie? Yeah, pretty much. But these kids have moves! The acting was not the best, but they weren’t hired to be good actors, they were hired to be good dancers. Does anyone know if there really is a “Streets” competition? Entertaining. ♥♥ out of 5.

I Capture the Castle

Set in 1930’s England, Cassandra Mortmain (Romola Garai) is stuck in a decaying castle with her eccentric family. It keeps extremely close to the book, (which is one of my old favorites.) The acting is great, but the story is  better. Rose Byrne as the sister and Bill Nighy as the father, who at one time was a great author. It’s a fantastic coming-of-age story. ♥♥♥♥ out of 5

Vanity Fair

Never having read the book, this looked as though it might be in the same vein as Jane Austen. It was not so. It was very dark and almost conniving how Becky Sharp ascended the social ladder. It felt like a long movie when I was watching it, not Reese’s best work. ♥♥♥ out of 5

Man on Wire

A documentary about a tightrope walker, Phillipe Petit and his famous, illegal, tightrope routine between NYC’s twin towers in 1974. Although the documentary was of very high artistic quality, I was more curious about the man who felt this was his life’s calling. ♥♥♥ out of 5

Postcards from the Edge

I’ve wanted to see this since we analyzed the opening credits in a college class. Meryl Streep and Shirley MacLaine are wonderfully desperate in this film as daughter and mother, respectively. Streep is the young Hollywood star being thrust into the spotlight by her mother while trying to cope with her drug problem. ♥♥♥ out of 5

Monsoon Wedding

An arranged marriage in India with customs that I’ve never seen and have little knowledge of are just the beginning of what this film is about. There is a lot of commotion between the bride and her secret affair with another man, the groom’s eccentric family, and a lovestruck event planner. I wish I knew more about the customs that I saw in the film, but the overall story was rich and also neatly packaged together in the end. ♥♥♥♥ out of 5

Dial M for Murder

First, I love Hitchcock. Like many of his films, there is a plan to murder a spouse by a stranger, who this time is blackmailed into it. But the evening doesn’t go according to plan, (when does it ever?) Unraveling the mystery is the greatest part.  There was nothing I didn’t like about this one! ♥♥♥♥♥ out of 5

Persuasion

Another Jane Austen novel turned movie. Just so you know, I’ve never actually finished an Austen novel, but the stories that are presented in the films make me wonder if I could get through the flowery language. The drama is, well… classic. Persuasion was no different. Great characters that have absolutely no idea what they want. ♥♥♥♥ out of 5

From Here to Eternity

A classic from the AFI top 100. (yay! another one I can cross off that list.) Burt Lancaster and Montgomery Clift, Frank Sinatra and Deborah Kerr, pretty amazing lineup. The film had a great balance of drama, comedy and tradedy. Not a chick flick, as I expected it to be, a pleasant surprise. ♥♥♥♥♥ out of 5

Penelope

A fairy tale about a cursed family and a pig-faced girl played by Christina Ricci. Really charming and very enjoyable. I think the morals that it expounded were great for children and adults alike. James McAvoy again as the love interest. He is good at brooding. And a total surprise performance by Reese Witherspoon who produced the film. ♥♥♥♥ out of 5

Eagle vs. Shark

Story of two socially awkward New Zealanders as the figure out love, revenge and video games. It was painful to watch. Funny moments, but then you just had no idea where it was going. It’s like what would happen to Napoleon Dynamite if he grew up in New Zealand. It caught my attention because Jemaine Clement from Flight of the Concords stars. ♥ out of 5

Jane Austen Book Club

So I watched this only because I’d been seeing a lot of Jane Austen movies. Certainly better if you’ve read the books for this modern day story entwining of Austen’s plotlines. It really only mimics the relationships, but that’s mostly what Austen writes about anyway. It did make me want to start a Jane Austen Book Club so I can actually read these books. ♥♥ out of 5

Best in Show

One of my friends in college had all of the Christopher Guest movies and I never really understood why he loved them so much. This film was one of the best mockumentaries I’ve ever seen. Christopher Guest is certainly talented at picking up the idiosynchricies of people that are a part of dog shows and then amplifying them. ♥♥♥ out of 5

Changeling

I had some idea of what this movie was about, but not the details. Nor did I know that it was based on a true story of a mother who’s child was lost and the LAPD brought back the wrong boy. Scary how the legal system used to be and how easy it was to put someone in an asylum. It was also nice to see Jolie in a different role, although the line, “This isn’t my son” got old real fast. ♥♥♥ out of 5

Feel free to comment if you want to hear more on any of these. Look for the next post on The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford.

The (hilarious) Hangover

Hangovers aren’t usually ever funny.  Definitely not the case here.

Admittedly, when I saw the preview for The Hangover, I didn’t think much of it. Just another raunchy comedy. But what I saw was really really funny. Raunchy, yes, but it held my interest for the entire length of the movie. Here’s the plotline from IMDB:

A Las Vegas-set comedy centered around three groomsmen who lose their about-to-be-wed buddy during their drunken misadventures, then must retrace their steps in order to find him.

What I liked best was that this was not a Dude, Where’s My Car? reinvention. The characters alone are priceless and kudos to the casting team for this entire film. How the heck they got Mike Tyson… and his tiger, I’ll never know. Justin Bartha and Bradley Cooper were in the 2006 rom-com Failure to Launch together. In The Hangover, they play the groom, Doug and best man, Phil, respectively. Although Doug is absent for a majority of the film, the laughs keep on coming with Ed Helms from The Office, and Zach Galifianakis, recognizable from 2001’s Out Cold, among many other films.

Put these naturally funny guys all together, mix in the eccentricties of the characters that they put on, and the winding story of a groom gone missing in Las Vegas = effing funny. I don’t want to say too much because you should really just see it.

However, I will say that I was relieved that it wasn’t neatly packed together in the end. Not everything is fully explained, which I think is true to the nature of drunken nights. It starts out with this ridiculous tradition of the typical Las Vegas bachelor party. Which isn’t really a party, but a weekend for the purpose of last ‘freedoms’ before entering into the ball and chain of marriage. Then when morning comes, we find ourselves working our way backwards with the characters to figure out what happened and where Doug is before the wedding.

It wasn’t my intention to go off on a tangent on marital traditions, but I will to expound on the above sarcasm. My personal opinion on bachlor/bachlorette parties in a nutshell: harmless fun, drinks, dancing is wonderful. I have nothing against celebrating the last night as an unmarried person. But going out for the express purpose of sexual pleasure before you make a life-long commitment is not only disrespectful to your spouse-to-be, but downright foolish. Forgive the passion that I have for this, but as a bridesmaid in many weddings (not quite 27…), and I have not and would never like to participate in that sort of thing. Of course, bachlorette parties were merely invented to be the equal to bachlor parties and in most cases involves a spa weekend and not a chipendale’s experience.

Regardless, The Hangover was a hilariously exaggerated comedy which I loved, despite the fact that it glorifies a ridiculous tradition. Feel free to weigh in on the film or wedding traditions.

Star Trek, shiny and new

Better late than never. I viewed Star Trek a while ago, but I think it’s still a worthwhile post. Reader, beware that I am not a trekkie. Repeat, I am not a trekkie. In fact, I don’t think I’ve ever sat through an entire Star Trek episode or film. Of course, the familiarity of the characters is unmistakable, which for us non-trekkies is a big plus.

Other than the fact that this looked like a sweet action movie, I wanted to see it because J.J. Abrams directed. I’ve always been a fan of his direction all the way back to Alias. And the first 20 mintues of Star Trek did not disappoint. Emotionally wrenching and action packed. That’s how Abrams likes it. And I do too. A friend of mine who saw it said she cried in that first twenty mintues.  It’s meant to get some kind of emotional response.  The rest of the film is entertaining to say the least. Plot line from IMDB:

A chronicle of the early days of James T. Kirk and his fellow USS Enterprise crew members.

Casting is excellent and even trekkies couldn’t ask for a better comparison between this new, young, hip actors to the elder generation.

It doesn’t hurt that even the marketing is sexy. It takes a lot to make me think that Sylar from Heroes is not a bad guy. (Obviously I know he’s not a bad guy in real life…) But they accomplished this flawlessly before the movie even came out! Not only for Spock, but for almost the entire cast. Abrams succeeded in making a notoriously geeky (and I say that in the most loving way,) film franchise into something that high school girls want to see. Kudos, to Abrams, the producers, and the marketing team. I already want to see the next installment, assuming there is one.

Ok so back to the film itself… the characters were the best part. The story was secondary, which may be standard for Trek movies, I’m not sure. It only bothered me a little. As a filmmaker, story comes first for me. You can have the best cast, the best director of photography and the movie will still be less than stellar if the story is fluff. I don’t think the Star Trek story is fluff. I suspect that there was probably much more shot and edited, but maybe had to be cut out for time’s sake. For example, how does this mysterious chemistry appear between Spock and Uhura. Perhaps, I should’ve done some research before viewing the film to get insight on things that may have been glossed over. I would’ve loved to know more about the characters and their relationships with each other.

Bottom line: Awesome movie. I’m glad they’ve left it open for a sequel and hope that they keep Abrams at the helm. The Star Trek saga will always be a mystery to me and I’ll never be a trekkie, but I can surely appreciate the details and fictional history that went into this film. It’s surely a fun ride!