User Review

As of the 8th Star Trek feature film, the even-odd rule still holds. That is: the even numbered treks are awesome while the odds suck. I'll be the first to say it's very subjective (I still think Trek 5 aka "Kirk vs God" was awesome, but I wouldn't recommend it to the average movie goer). Casual fans and hardcore geeks alike gotta agree that the most crowd-pleasing treks are #2 ("the wrath of khaaaaan"), #4 ("Spock hugs a whale"), #6 ("Kirk vs Shakespeare") and now I would add #8 ("Picard loses his sh**"). Why are these the best? I think it's because they had the most exciting plots combined with some great character development. "First Contact" may not have the most original plot (Enterprise goes back in time to try to save humanity from a future threat), but the interesting character development is definitely there. I think this is because this film returns to a wonderful Trek tradition where one of the cast members directs the film (here it's Jonathan Frakes "Riker" calling the shots). Whereas the prior film "Generations" seemed to play it too superficially, not really exploring the personalities of the crew, here in "First Contact", we delve deeper into the mind and personality of Picard, giving the story more depth than your standard linear plot. Picard is shown to be a conflicted individual with his motivations bordering on Ahab-like obsession, even down to the obligatory quote from Moby Dick. OK I know what you're thinking. We already covered the Moby Dick theme in Star Trek 2 The Wrath of Khan, and yes we did (imo more dramatically thanks to Ricardo Montalban's chilling, psychotic portrayal of the vengeance obsessed madman). But golly, its such a good theme that we'll let it slide, and to be fair, this is different because it's the good guy who is now vengeance obsessed. Even supporting characters are given their chance to prove themselves as more than background scenery. There is a subplot involving the android Data who is taken prisoner and tempted by the borg with the promise of sensual pleasure. Giordi, Deanna and Riker (who, in "Generations", seemed as wooden as the townsfolk at the end of Blazing Saddles) had a fun little subplot opposite James Cromwell who played Zephram Cochrane, a cynical, alcoholic, rock-n-roll-blasting antihero who is supposed to lead the human race to hippy flowerpower peace. That was a cool spin. The bottom line is that this even-numbered installment had all the elements that have appealed to Trek fans since the 60s. Tense stories overtop some great character moments. The only downside, as my title implies, is that I'm still not quite sold on the Enterprise's new crew. I'm getting there, but I still gotta say I prefer the originals, and I say this only to remind my fellow Trekkies that sooner or later we gotta give in.. So if you're an old school trekkie like me, I don't think this flick will convert you instantly. But it was much better than "Generations" which, in my opinion, did a lousy job of bridging the generations. I mean, when did Capt Kirk trade places with Walter Matthau from "Grumpy Old Men"? This Trek flick puts us on much firmer footing.