Home Movies

Moviefone has a small slideshow theorizing why we aren't going to the movies as much, these days. I agree with a lot of what they said. The quality of home viewing has improved. The availability of streaming video is convenient. The economy is poor. The quality of many movies has declined.

Almost two years ago, I did the math, and it still holds true. Now that the initial outlay for a Blu-Ray player and HDTV has been made, we can buy a movie on Blu-Ray not even four months after its theater opening, and have all the popcorn, soda, and snacks we want for far less than it costs to go to the movies--even a matinee--without snacks! Even our once-frequent trips to the Tri-Way Drive-In have all but vanished. The gas used to get there and back costs over $10.00 now!

Sure, watching at home isn't the same experience as going to the movies, but I can't say the last several trips have been all that pleasant. I send text messages as much as anyone, but during a movie, I put my phone away. At the last one we saw in the theater, someone in our row had their phone out during the entire movie. Nothing like a bright light in your peripheral vision to help you lose yourself in the story being presented on the screen!

I've never gotten used to people talking through movies, either. I can understand little kids asking questions, but full-grown adults and teenagers? It's grown so widespread that when I show a rare video in my classroom, kids talk aloud more than when there's no video showing. What is it with people? When did it become all right to carry on a conversation in the middle of a movie? And I don't think this is just me being curmudgeonly. It can't be enjoyable for anyone else, either. The theaters even put up funny public service announcements before each movie, telling people not to do it. I used to say something to people who were rude, but then one day, I suddenly realized that I'm not bulletproof. I'm not even bullet-resistant. Theaters now hire more ushers to keep things under control, but you know what? They're not bulletproof, either. I don't blame them for not risking their lives to tell someone to quiet down.

I don't know what the solution is, but I know that our collection of Blu-Ray movies is going to keep growing, and far faster than the amount of half-filled popcorn bags that go into the trash at the movie theaters at the end of a poorly-attended showing of a new film.

Batman: Under the Red Hood (NO SPOILERS)

"Batman: Under the Red Hood" is the latest of DC Comics' direct-to-video animated features and I think it's one of the better ones to date. Note that it is not appropriate for children at all. The level of violence and bloodshed is once again high.

I didn't read most of the source material, so I can't claim to be an expert on the character or the comics, but for all of the faults of the retroactive continuity that leads to the appearance of the Red Hood, the writer of this movie, Judd Winick, avoids all of it and makes it work well.

The first thing I noticed about the movie is the different styles used to animate Batman and Nightwing. There is a scene where the former Dynamic Duo are pursuing the Red Hood on foot in a style reminiscent of Casino Royale's opening parkour chase. Where Batman tends to take direct routes, Nightwing often takes the lead, bouncing acrobatically from structure to structure. This is a nice attention to detail, since Nightwing is a former circus acrobat. Then, when the Red Hood actually makes his escape, Batman uses his memory of the chase and research to uncover the Hood's identity. That's right, Batman does detective work!! That alone is something to be happy about, but the fun doesn't stop there.

Through a series of flashbacks we learn the history of the Red Hood and his true identity and how it relates to Batman. Without giving it away, it is touching, well done, and emotional. Emotion in a Batman movie is generally limited to rage, so this is a refreshing touch that humanizes a character who for about the last 20 years has desperately lacked humanity.

There are some slick moments and some nice fight scenes, which I have come to expect from the DC direct-to-video movies, but this one had actual story beats that went beyond the typical large-scale earth-shattering superhero events. The interconnectivity of the characters and the concept of family play large roles and that, to me, makes this movie a winner.

Bruce Greenwood does the voice for Batman in this movie, and he's pretty good, though no Kevin Conroy. To be fair, though, I can't imagine why anyone would ever hire anyone but Kevin Conroy to provide the voice of Batman. John DiMaggio does a pretty good Joker, part Mark Hamill and part Heath Ledger (if you can imagine that) but the guy who stole the show for me was Neil Patrick Harris as Nightwing. He simply nails the part as the not-so-dark knight.

The special features on this disc include two documentaries, which are so-so, and an animated short featuring Jonah Hex. I'd be willing to bet that this Jonah Hex was 10 times better than the live-action movie. It left out the horse-mounted Gatling guns and the occult and told a straight Western tale that I really enjoyed.

Also included were four episodes of Batman the Animated Series, but they were in standard definition and the picture quality was actually worse that that on the DVDs that I already own.

I recommend this disc!

Astro City--A Movie!

W00t! My favorite comic book of all time is going to be made into a movie!

Delusions of Grandeur...Not so Much.

C-3PO, in Empire: "Artoo, you don't know how to fix a hyperdrive."

Uh, Threepio? Do you know what R2-D2's primary function is? You know, besides delivering secret plans? He's an astrodroid. He fixes spaceships.

Seriously, did George Lucas even look at the scripts he commissioned?

"Lost"

No spoilers! Feel free to read if you've never seen "Lost."

I wasn’t watching “Lost” when it started in 2004. It was still baseball season. And while the Tigers weren’t in the race, I was just getting back into baseball after a long absence and I couldn’t get enough. My wife kept telling me about this great new show, and while it sounded interesting, I couldn’t tear myself away from the Tigers. So, I missed the first few episodes and figured that I’d just have to watch it later. When they started rerunning the show on Saturdays, I was still watching baseball but it started to occur to me that the show must be pretty good. Then, in December, when baseball was long over they started showing the first season over again on Wednesday nights. I was hooked.

I’m not going to try to convert anyone into becoming a fan of this show. Like my reaction to “Watchmen” last year, I loved it and I don’t really care who else does or doesn’t. I don’t care what the ratings were, how many people watched the finale Sunday night, or what anyone else thinks about it. For me, “Lost” was the ultimate TV experience. Like “Twin Peaks” before it, “Lost” kept you guessing. It was non-formulaic. The one thing I hate about TV series is how they repeat the same formula, over and over again. I don’t understand how anyone likes “Law & Order,” “NCIS,” all of the “CSI” shows, or even “House,” although the latter has been surprising lately. I like shows such as “Hill Street Blues” and “The Wire,” which were episodic, yet told a very long story with ongoing subplots, like televised novels.

“Lost” was the ultimate water cooler show. Scenes and events were open to interpretation. Where the show looked initially to be just another version of “Cast Away,” (the producers did use the Tom Hanks movie as inspiration), that notion was quickly dispelled in the first two hours when Sawyer killed a polar bear. But when the pilot of the crashed plane was yanked bodily from the cockpit (which was suspended high in a tree) by some unseen monster and slaughtered, it was abundantly clear that the survivors of Oceanic flight 815 were not on a typical tropical island.

People who weren’t familiar with the show have asked me over the years, “Isn’t that the show about the plane crash?” I always responded sarcastically and said something like, “Yeah, and the Star Wars trilogy is about two robots that crash in the desert.” It’s hard to describe the show, though, to someone who hasn’t experienced it. The first season was primarily about survival on the island, but it’s so much more I don’t know where to begin. The show is about survival, yes. But it’s more about faith. It’s about destiny. It’s about redemption. It’s about purpose, greed, leadership, guilt, love, hate, fear, revenge, compassion, perseverance, jealousy, protection. It’s about people.

“Lost” was a great show partially because of storytelling techniques. When we first meet the survivors of Oceanic flight 815 they have already crashed. We see how they act under the worst conditions imaginable. Through flashbacks, though, each character in turn is fleshed out, their motivations examined, their previous interactions with the world and even the other characters revealed. Through the looking glass into the past, the viewer finds that each character has his or her own flaws, and more than a few secrets.

Over time, “Lost” became a show that Magi and I watched together. We found ourselves having conversation after conversation after each show about the mythology surrounding the island and the interactions of the characters. Then, when that wasn’t enough, we started watching it together. We’d have conversations during the commercials. Sometimes the commercials came so abruptly that we were upset by the interruption, but other times we appreciated the chance to reflect together on what had just occurred. I don’t know how many times we both said, when an episode ended, that it was the best show ever. It was dozens of times, at least. We often found performances that we thought should earn Emmy awards. Josh Holloway, who played Sawyer, had a number of scenes last season that should have made him a shoo-in. Sadly, when any kind of science fiction or fantasy element is added to a show, your Emmy chances drop like a hot potato, and “Lost” has its share of those. Actors of the highest quality are often relegated to other science fiction shows of decidedly lesser quality when their shows go off the air. I hope that doesn’t happen with these people. They deserve better.

I would be remiss if I didn’t mention the music, here. It’s so important to the pure emotion of the story. Michael Giacchino, whom I’ve mentioned before, is one of the real stars of the show. His Academy Award-winning score for “Up” is really a spinoff of his work on “Lost.” The montage that introduced us to Carl Fredrickson is indicative of his previous work on this show. Often, the directors would just shoot a montage of the interactions of the cast of characters with Giacchino’s score over it to close an episode. There was no need for dialogue. And in the series finale Sunday night, his Oscar win was shown to be entirely justified.

If the music wasn’t beautiful enough, the setting of “Lost” certainly was. Filmed almost entirely in Hawaii, we were treated week after week to lush, gorgeous scenery that I had not fully appreciated until I saw it in high definition. I typically watched the first several seasons in standard definition, often on my 20” television in my basement office. With Netflix streaming the show in HD to our newer television, we are gaining a new appreciation for the way this show was meant to be seen. We always noticed that the credits were half on the screen and half off, when we watched those first seasons. “Lost” was working ahead of its time, with the full intention of being seen on higher-quality screens, much like “Firefly” was, three years previously. Sometimes we need to be dragged kicking and screaming into a new, more enjoyable experience. I can hardly wait until the series is released on Blu-Ray in August. I have never purchased “Lost” on DVD, so I won’t feel cheated for having waited.

Another amazing quality of the show was the fan following. Like Star Trek before it, “Lost” has a cult following. Scads of websites exist in support of the show, cross-referencing character appearances, settings, objects, and events. There are blogs aplenty about it. People comment on Doc Jensen’s blog by the thousands. I have to wonder now what Star Trek would have been like in the 60s if the Internet had existed! I bet it would have looked a lot like this.

I do marvel, though, at the way some of the reviews of the finale have been written. I don’t know how many times I have read something to the effect of, “I haven’t watched ‘Lost’ since the first season but the finale stunk.” People who have hated the show since the beginning have decided to pop by different websites to express their sympathy or disgust for those of us who have watched it for six years. I’m not sure of their motivation for doing so, and I never quite understand the loathing that geeks like us seem to attract, but there’s one thing of which I am sure. These snobs could really learn some lessons in humanity from actually watching the show. The messages sent and the lessons taught therein could benefit them far more than they have benefitted those of us who have seen it through. They shouldn’t feel sorry for us. It is we who should feel sorry for them. On those people, the irony is lost.

The 2010 Academy Awards

Michael Giacchino won for Best Music (original score). That's all I cared about. This guy's music is simply the best. The first ten minutes of "Up" was one of the most beautiful sequences I've ever seen put on film. It made me cry and Giacchino's score was a big part of the emotional impact.

His original score was the best thing about the new Star Trek movie. And his music from "Lost" plays a huge role in conveying the drama in my favorite television show. His soundtrack from "The Incredibles" was the one of the first CD's I put on my iPod. It's evocative of John Barry's James Bond music with some 60s Batman thrown in.

Congratulations, Michael!

Fly, Fatass, Fly!--Updated

Go, Kevin!

Kevin Smith is one of my favorite filmmakers, so I am clearly biased. If you haven't heard about his situation this weekend, he was asked to leave a Southwest Airlines flight because of his size. He claims that he fit between the armrests and was buckled in without a seat belt extender. Southwest claims that he has purchased two seats in the past, but on this standby flight, with only one seat available, he was a safety risk. He took the next flight and flew in one seat, even though he had purchased two.

I know how I think the situation probably worked, but I wasn't there. I can't honestly say that I know for certain who's right. But the comments section of every single website I have seen covering this story has innumerable comments insulting fat people, saying things like they all smell because they can't wipe themselves, they're rude and inconsiderate, and that they should just eat less and exercise.

Well, I'm here to tell you that's a load of nonsense. After I lost a lot of weight last year, I hit a dead end. In the past year, I have worked out hard at least 300 out of 365 days, and have been very careful about what I eat and haven't lost any weight since May. I simply don't have the time to do more than my 30-minute workout each day, because then it's followed by a15-minute cooldown and a five minute shower. After getting dressed again, the better part of an hour is gone. I simply don't have more time than an hour in a single weekday.

There are also people who have medical conditions that prevent them from losing weight. But it doesn't matter to some of these people making comments. We're all just fatties. One of the reasons I stopped watching "Real Time with Bill Maher" last year was because of his constant ranting about overweight people. He's a pot smoking womanizer, but that's apparently okay with him. The real offenders are people who are overweight. I'd like to meet him so I could challenge him to a 10-mile bike race. I guarantee I would literally beat him by a mile.

The simple fact of the matter is that some of us are going to be built like this no matter what we do. Being overweight, I seem to belong to the last class against whom it is acceptable to discriminate. It'll be interesting to see how this whole thing plays out.

Avatar

I usually don’t like to write reviews of a movie until after a second viewing, but in the case of Avatar, I think I should have written one immediately afterward. I don’t have any unique insights to add about the plot of the film or the perceived weakness of the storyline. Yes, it’s the story of Pocahontas or Dances with Wolves. There really aren’t that many new plot ideas under the sun. But what I do want to talk about is something that I have never seen done so well before and was the highlight of the film for me. Never before have I been so thoroughly convinced that I was seeing an alien world.

The weakness of creating good science fiction has always been that budgets and technology limit how alien a setting can be. The original Star Wars trilogy featured desert-like Tattooine, shot on location in Tunisia; Hoth, an ice planet that could have been at our own poles; Dagobah, a swamp; the cloud city of Bespin; and the forest moon of Endor, which has the same redwoods I’ve seen near San Francisco. Even the new trilogy gave us but glances at truly alien landscapes, and most of them had entirely earthlike appearances. A few of them, only seen in glimpses, looked truly alien, and they looked like the setting in Willy Wonka. But in Avatar, we see a truly alien environment and it’s entirely believable.

Upon arrival on Pandora our anchor, Jake Sully, sees a vast jungle that looks entirely earthly. But when his avatar starts exploring the place, we are introduced quickly to the unique plant life, as well as a few of the predators that roam freely. The dangers of the planet become all too clear. Everything is different. The trees have a bioelectrical network that rivals the human brain. The tendrils that come out of the Na’vi’s hair interact with the tendrils of the animals they use for travel and hunting. They live with a spiritual connection to their environment that is (I loved this line) “measurable.”

I think that no matter the weakness in the story, the setting gives us a sense of immersion that gives the story more credibility. The viewer more easily identifies with the Na’vi because the nine-foot tall blue people seem to really belong to the world that they defend. It’s not just another Earthlike environment that harkens back to Civil War-era America with Native American allegories. There’s only so much suspension of disbelief I can muster when I see a famous actor like Kevin Costner running around with Graham Greene. I know their faces too well and know that they don’t belong in the 19th century old west. But in Avatar, Pandora really feels like it belongs to the Na’vi. And so it does.

Curmudgeon?

As I grow older, I fear becoming the curmudgeon my dad was later in life. Heck, what am I saying? All the time I knew him he was a curmudgeon. When we went to see what I still consider the finest superhero movie of all time, Superman the Movie, he left the theater grumbling, "Well I still don't believe a man can fly." This, from a guy who thought that George Reeves hanging on wires was perfectly fine in the 1950s!

At this stage in my life, I begin to question whether my age is beginning to make me equally grumpy. There are many comic books I've given up on, including my favorite character, Batman. I was watching a History Channel show on comic book superheroes today, and when Frank Miller was describing how former Batman writers claimed that for them, he had ruined their character with his popular work, The Dark Knight, I literally shouted at the screen, "They were right, Frank!" Maybe it's that Batman has evolved past the point where I really liked the character or maybe I consider my childhood memories of the character sacred. But whatever Batman is now, he ain't my Batman. People who know that I love the Batman character can't help but ask me about what I think about Batman movies when they come out. I always have to say that I don't care for them. When they make the mistake of asking why, I trot out a laundry list. I don't think that makes me a curmudgeon, but someone who has a strong idea of what a hero is, and knows that the character as portrayed in the movies is not that guy.

This hits me especially hard at the comic book store, too. I see my childhood heroes acting completely out of character from how I know them. I understand that the target audience is much older than it was when I really enjoyed comics, but I would argue that sophisticated stories don't necessarily have to include rape, on-panel eviscerations, and psychotic, amoral behavior. I can accept those things more easily from creator-owned characters, but not from characters whose moral standards I looked up to as a kid.

Besides the Batman movies, I have lately had difficulty accepting some other film adapations. The Spirit was absolutely offensive to me. Director Frank Miller put some elements from Will Eisner's seminal work in his film, but trampled over the entire story with what we could call Millerisms. There was Nazi fetishism that he previously used in the Dark Knight, and he even stole one of his own lines from Daredevil. The style of cinematography was straight off the pages of Sin City, which he created. The Millerisms overpowered the classic and original storytelling techniques that made Will Eisner a true master of the visual form.

Last year's Star Trek movie had lots of stuff I liked and even some stuff I loved (Michael Giacchino's score, for example) but I still have a lot of problems with it. Does that make me a curmudgeon or just someone who loves the original Star Trek series so much that nothing would have been good enough?

When I start to think that I just hate everything, I have to remind myself that I absolutely adored the Watchmen movie. I didn't expect to, but I thought the makers of that film not only did the graphic novel justice, but improved the ending considerably by not teleporting a giant, telepathic squid into New York City.

So what is it that is making me fear being a curmudgeon? I sure don't want to be. I really wanted to love the Dark Knight, especially when I saw the reviews, but I thought it was horrible. I even bought it on Blu-Ray (on sale) and gave it another chance today. I got to the first scene where Batman drives the tank--sorry, Batmobile through the parking garage barrier, then explodes the corner stairwell, which one would assume is next to the elevator, and causes more property damage than he needs to, and I just have to think that if this is our hero, we deserve better.

I guess what I'm going to have to do is start writing something of my own, and see if I can do better. I'll have to see if I can make a story with internal consistency. I want a story that would appeal to my students and give those who are like I was at that age something to look up to, and ideals that they can respect. If I can do something like that, then I will feel justified in being a little cranky when I see Superman leaving thugs to die in Superman Returns.

We can only hope.

I See You

My 20-year old niece, Theresa, is an amazing artist. She is living a life I can only enjoy vicariously, but it sure is fun watching her work and grow. We saw "Avatar" a few weeks ago, and I think it had an impact on her. The picture to the left is done from a photograph of her, modified with Photoshop. Just to show you what she worked with, I am including the side-by-side picture from her deviantart site.

All I can say is, wow. And go to her site to see more!

Logan's Run

Great article about one of my favorite novels, Logan's Run, over here. Lots of information about the movie, TV show and comic book, too.

No Wonder...

It's no wonder we didn't get a really good view of the new Enterprise in the Abrams movie. It's ugly.

Are We in the 1980s??

If the double feature I wrote about last year was the coolest thing for a Marvel Comics fan last year, this one is the coolest thing ever for an 80s cartoon kind of person! Our drive-in really knows how to match them up.

Cheers!

From the Much Ado About Nothing Department comes an article from the New York Times's health section, railing against the alcohol consumption in the new Harry Potter movie. It raises the question of whether or not butterbeer is alcholic, and I have to laugh. The kids in these movies (and books) consume potions that alter the structure of their very bodies when they drink Polyjuice Potion! Felix Felicis is the ultimate doping solution, and in the same movie they are expected to produce a Draught of Living Death!

Harry, Ron, and Hermione face the dangers of torture murder in their lives DAILY and have wielded deadly weapons as a matter of course since they were 11 years old. And the NY Times is worried that they're setting a bad example for children by drinking butterbeer?

Riddikulus!

The Watchmen Dilemma

What to do, what to do? I want to have Watchmen available to see in my home immediately, but I don't want to shell out the money multiple times when each new, exclusive version of the movie is released on DVD, Blu-Ray, et. al. and be left with a disc that I no longer want. The "ultimate" edition of the film is supposed to be released around the holidays, intercut with the "Tales of the Black Freighter" animated video, and clocking in at around 3.5 hours, with documentaries and motion comics and presumably everything else involved with the movie. For the "director's cut" being released today, which is still longer than the theatrical release, I understand that the Blu-Ray has a special commentary feature with picture-in-picture commentary, which sounds really cool. The only problem is that I don't have a Blu-Ray player, nor do I plan on buying one before Christmas, when we are thinking of getting a Playstation 3. So, when I received the email from Fandango suggesting that I download the movie on iTunes, the solution presented itself. In the short term, I can download the movie to my video iPod and plug it into my TV to view. Magi hasn't even seen it yet, so it will be immediately viewable. Then I simply have to wait until we have the correct player for the "ultimate" Watchmen home-viewing experience, and hopefully have the equipment to support that experience. And the best part is that I won't have an annoying, inferior disc taking up space in my video cabinet.

Anyone want a previously viewed copy of the first version of "Serenity," by chance?

Update--I just read that this version of the director's cut comes with a $10 coupon for the ultimate edition to be released later, so if you're considering doing what I'm doing, I just wanted to make you aware that the inferior version won't be worthless.

Hot Serial

In the late 70s, I used to watch a show on WGTU channel 29 called "Hot Serial." Shown at 11:00 each night, "Hot Serial" featured a nightly chapter in an old movie serial, like Flash Gordon Conquers the Universe, or Radar Men from the Moon, featuring Commando Cody. It was a great show to watch when you only had a 9" black and white television, since the serials were filmed in black and white anyway! The titles for the syndicated program always started with a bowl of steaming cereal suspended by wires, flying around the screen.

I received a set of Flash Gordon serials that I had purchased for my dad, and I'm watching them now, thinking back to when we lived in my grandparents' basement. Good times, hot serial.

Separated at Birth?

On the left, Draco Malfoy. On the right, Adrian Veidt, aka Ozymandias.

"I'm not a comic book villain, Potter. Do you seriously think I would explain my master stroke to you if there were even the slightest possibility you could affect the outcome? I triggered it 35 minutes ago."

The Soft Bigotry of No Expectations

We saw Terminator: Salvation on Sunday, and I liked it. That isn't to say it was a great movie, but neither did I expect it to be. Unlike Star Trek, I had no idea what it was about, save that Christian "Psycho" Bale was playing John Connor.

I think this is a pattern for me. I loved Iron Man last year, but hated the Dark Knight. I am by no means an Iron Man expert, and was willing to forgive minor alterations to the Iron Man mythos. But you put Batman, the Spirit, or Star Trek into a new form, and I get relentless in my attention to every last detail. On the other hand, I loved Watchmen and I have a really strong familiarity with the material. I guess it's just hit or miss, but it sure is easier to like something when you go in not caring whether or not it's any good.

Where Star Trek Fell Apart For Me (Spoilers)

I've been giving this a lot of thought. Star Trek got a 95% positive rating on the tomatometer, and I just wonder if I'm too close to the subject to see it objectively, like when I didn't like the Dark Knight when nearly everyone else did. After two days, I've found the point where it falls apart for me. It's not about the time travel or the new continuity or the design of the ship or the plot structure. As it should be, Star Trek is about characterization.

Where the movie goes flying off the track is the point when Spock kicks Kirk off the ship. It was the "Wait...what?" moment of the whole film. I can see punishing the insubordinate cadet who messed up your Kobayashi Maru test. There's this thing called a brig on most ships. It's a place where people can be safely contained until such point they can be dealt with with due process. But essentially throwing him overboard in a life raft was, well, extreme to say the least, and a very un-Spocklike thing to do. Where is the logic in sending the guy that the captain made your first officer to a hostile, alien predator-filled environment, landing him 14 kilometers from the nearest Federation outpost, which is manned by two engineers? In my wildest imagination, I can't see any incarnation of Spock doing that. It just seemed to serve the plot points of picking up Scotty and meeting old Spock, and no other reason.

Speaking of old Spock, why in the hell did Nero drop him off on a little planet to watch Vulcan be destroyed, and then allow him to go free? I felt like it was a Dr. Evil moment where Scott Evil suggests shooting Austin Powers in the head, rather than Dr. Evil's idea: I’m going to put him in an easily-escapable situation involving an overly-elaborate and exotic death."

I'm pretty sure that's where the wheels came off for me. I really wanted to like this movie, and to a certain extent I did. But when characters go that far away from who I think I know them to be, it takes me right out of the drama and makes me start thinking critically, and that's never a good thing for me when watching a movie, particularly when it's a subject about which I care deeply, like Star Trek or Batman.

By the end I was thinking, let me get this straight: Kirk went from a third-year cadet on academic suspension to captain of the Federation flagship in (more or less) one day? Riiiiight.

Star Trek

Spoilers follow.

Gene Roddenberry's original pilot for Star Trek was deemed "too cerebral" by the network, and they ordered a second pilot made. There was never any danger of that criticism for this movie.

This was a nice summer popcorn movie during which I felt perfectly safe not thinking too much. If I had, I might have wondered where the mile-deep chasm in Iowa was located. I might have wondered why the starship Enterprise was being built on the ground in Iowa, and how it was supposed to get into space from there. I might have wondered how JJ Abrams felt that he had captured Gene Roddenberry's optimistic future by portraying Starfleet officers as drunken bullies who beat up townies in Iowa's bars. It's a good thing I didn't think about that in the first 15 minutes. I might not have enjoyed the other 112.

This was a fast-paced action/adventure movie with enjoyable stunts, gunfights, explosions, and lots of laughs. It didn't say anything about the human condition. There was no allegory for present-day culture, morals, or beliefs. There was no lesson to be learned. In other words, it wasn't Star Trek.

I'm sure this will be a hit with the masses. It will serve to spark new interest in what was an ailing franchise and effectively reboot it. I'll enjoy the new films, as I did this one. I just hope that now that they've hit the reset button that next time they'll actually have something to say.