Star Trek (2009) ****1/2

We live in an era where what was old is new again. Batman came back from bad pun hell and pulled off two great films. James Bond flourished in his "re-boot", then fell in his second outing. Horror icons are getting new lives, for better or worse. Of course we can't forget about what happened to Star Wars. Hell, there's rumors of Daredevil and Superman underway and they've had films as recently as three years ago. CPR on dead franchise is in. Star Trek is another of one of these "re-boots". Or is it?

The film is basically the first mission of the U.S.S. Enterprise and its original crew. The cadets mission is to assist in apparent attack on Vulcan by a Romulan war ship. It's a basic plot that becomes more interesting because it shows a young, inexperienced crew that is eventually led by James T. Kirk (Chris Pine) and Mr. Spock (Zachary Quinto).

The first thing that really interested me was the acting. Filling William Shatner's shoes as James T. Kirk is probably the most daunting task in cinema since George Lazenby replaced Sean Connery as James Bond. You would have to choices: try to emulate Shatner or try to make the role your own. Chris Pine chooses the make the role his own and accomplishes the impossible- he scores with it. You still get the smug, risk taking Kirk, but it's different and that difference does not affect the film. Zoe Saldana also reshapes the role of Uhura and succeeds almost more than Pine giving the character more depth than previous incarnations. The remainder of the cast basically mimic their original counterparts, though Quinto does tend to break away from Leonard Nimoy's original portrayal from time to time, a daunting task considering that Nimoy is also in the film. Also Karl Urban is an excellent Dr. McCoy.

J.J. Abrams breathes new life in this dead franchise by going back to basic and re-tooling the original product, fitting in the old school stuff while giving it the edge of the new millennium. The last few Star Trek films were stale incarnations that Abrams rises above and gives us a great space adventure that isn't hokey and delivers an entertaining two hours.

Now I'm not the worlds biggest Star Trek fan. I know most of the basic stuff from the films and am not too attached to the original material. Will there be cries of Trekkie childhoods ruined by this film? Probably, but you have to admit that this film is superior to the Star Trek films from the last fifteen years. Labeling this film as a "re-boot" isn't really fair to the film and what it's all about. This film is more like a bridge between the old series and the new (as much money as this is making there will be a sequel). Instead of starting over and pissing on the original institutions the writers took the liberty to not erase what happened in the first forty years of Trek lore, but still give a fresh spin on an American institution.

Star Trek was a pleasant surprise for me. I expected normal remake/re-boot schlock that fails at all levels except for screaming "LOOK! WE'RE A NEW FRANCHISE REBORN!". It was an entertaining film that had a 2 hour plus running time that didn't feel that long. I actually wished there had been some more to it. Of course, that's what sequels are for.