‘Trek’ accessible by non-Trekkies (3/5)

Star Trek

Starring: Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Eric Bana.
Directed by: J.J. Abrams.
Rating: PG-13 for sci-fi action and violence, and brief sexual content.
Running time: 2 hours, 7 minutes.

At the risk of annoying half the readers out there, I’ll make the disclaimer now: I’ve never really watched “Star Trek.” All I knew about the show was Patrick Stewart, Spock, the Enterprise, something about Klingons and the old standbys: “Beam me up, Scotty,” and, of course, “Live long and prosper.”

What’s great about the latest “Star Trek” movie is that it didn’t seem to matter how little I know of the Trek universe. But, even if it did, I would have watched it anyway — after all, J.J. Abrams was at the helm. And, actually, being unfamiliar with the overarching story seemed almost an advantage in this case. I wasn’t attached enough to be annoyed with any of the changes made.

As fellow “Lost” aficionados will already be familiar with, Abrams and Trek co-producer Damon Lindelof (also co-creator of “Lost”) are big fans of time travel. So bringing that love to “Star Trek” was probably not much of a step for them. From my understanding, this film is a kind of “rebirth” for many Trek characters. It’s apparently a separate timeline from what the Trek show (and subsequent movies) are in, though with the same people — think “Back to the Future II.” It’s a great plot device for the writers and producers as it essentially allows them to reset to the beginning and truly make “Star Trek” their own vision with already-beloved characters.

“Star Trek” shows an alternate timeline for characters such as Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Scotty, Sulu and Uhura as they attempt to bring the genocidal Nero to justice. Too, the film thrives on the character development and friendship of Kirk and Spock, profoundly different but both outcasts in their own ways.

The cast list for this movie is surprisingly star-studded (Eric Bana, Karl Urban, John Cho, Jennifer Morrison and, most surprising to me, a brief role by Winona Ryder). But perhaps it shouldn’t be unexpected. Abrams is usually heavy on character development, so it makes sense to eye accomplished actors for many of these nuanced roles.

One of the most exciting cast members, though, was Leonard Nimoy as an older Spock. And rather than just use a Nimoy cameo as a nod to Trekkies, Abrams takes full advantage of his access to the former longtime Vulcan and uses the role to bridge the connection between the original “Treks” and the new movie.

In the behind-the-scenes special features, co-writer Alex Kurtzman notes that, while the “Star Wars” films are the equivalent of rock ’n’ roll, “Star Trek” is more comparable to classical music. In the drafting of this script, Kurtzman made an attempt to bring more of the rocker style that would attract modern viewers who are used to faster-paced films.

But, despite its perks, the film rides along a slightly above-average line. Many sci-fi movies fall into the good-versus-evil standby, and while “Star Trek” struggles against this stereotype, it never quite makes it out. The attempt to “humanize” Nero falls short and it’s difficult to view him as anything but demonic. The end result leaves “Star Trek” as an entertaining, but not exceptional, foray into the space where no one has gone before.

I hope that everyone has a wonderful Thanksgiving. And if you see a good movie or two (or even a bad one), feel free to send me word of it to rcrofut@fltimes.com.

3 of 5 stars