Zoe Saldana and the UK Premiere of “Star Trek”, London

Posted by fjgirls in April 21st, 2009

A long time coming this film and for Star Trek fans it must seem an eternity but “Star Trek” is finally here and it premiered last night in London’s Empire Cinema, Leicester Square and there was a bit of a turnout for this one. This film began its early stages of development in 2005 and shooting took place between November 2007 and April 2008 andÂ involved aÂ lengthy post production phase due to the heavy CGI involved and its integration into the original shoot.

Zoe Saldana (pictured above) who plays Lt Uhura was at the premiere last night and for us stole the show, in this case it wasn’t the dress althought it was good, it was the girl, Â she shone more than most, a hard thing to describe in words, but you know it when you see it something they call “star quality”. Â Â This film also features Winona Ryder who plays Spocks Mother, but unfortunately she was unable to attend the event.

ITN Star Trek Premiere Video Coverage

Other cast star members that attended are as follows:

Chris Pine as Captain James T Kirk,Â Â Eric Bana as Nero,Â John Cho as Hikara Sulu, Karl Urban as Dr Leonard “Bones” McKoy,Â Â Â Simon Pegg as Montgomery “Scotty” , Zachary Quinto as Spock

Guest at the event included Tamara Ecclestone, Jeremy Clarkson, Lorraine Kelly, JJ Abrams, Ozwald Boateng, Nick Knowles,Â Richard Hammond and Edith Bowman plus quite a few more.

Â Film Plot:

Film Trailer of Star Trek

Star Trek is a 2009 science fiction film directed by J. J. Abrams, written by Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman, and produced by Damon Lindelof and Bryan Burk. It is the eleventh film based on the Star Trek franchise and features the main characters of the original Star Trek series, who are portrayed by a new cast. It explores the backstories of James T. Kirk (Chris Pine) and Spock (Zachary Quinto), before they unite aboard the USS Enterprise to combat Nero (Eric Bana), a Romulan from the future who threatens the United Federation of Planets.

Check the Wikipedia link below as it has extensive and we mean extensive information about this film including cast, production, direction and heaps more.Â

Information courtesy Wikipedia

The Verdict:

A lot of effort has gone into this film, its taken in film terms a monster length of time to make, with 12 months being the norm for conventional films.Â Â Its a hard work, blood and tears production but none of these things are our concern here, what is our concern is the end result………………………is it any good and more to the point is it worth going to see!

This is a totally revamped Star Trek, we are not Trekkies here but are aware of the original TV series version with William Shatner, the series of films that came out with the new Captain who we thought was good, and this film is now No11 in the series with a complete change of cast with some role reprisals but the emphasis is on the fact that the characters and character names have not changed. Its very fresh looking and the opening sequence looks very similar to the Terminator Salvation scene, minus the hi tech chase.

Fresh is the word we would use here, revitalised is the other, as it was in need of a makeover, a similar situation to the Bond films with Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace making things a bit grittier and just that bit more real and bringing things bang up to date.

The film has story, pace and drama, some character development, earth and space shots/setsÂ and does have special effects as in CGI, but the film does not rely on these to make the film, they merely enhance the experience.

All shaping up to be a decent rated film but there are negatives here. First with a wild actor change, those who are used to the original cast as in actors, may have some trouble adjustingÂ from the very distinct original actors, in our opinion there is only one Spock, and only one Scotty with his famous scenes in the “engine room” trying to “get more power”. Dr “Bones” and his famous temperÂ again another very strong character, very hard to replace and the chemistry these characters had together after working together for so long, that is something that is very very hard to replace.

Trekkie purists may have trouble adjusting to all these changes, but we think it had to be done, whether it works is debateableÂ Another negative and its a criticism raised by a few critics, this film is not as “cerebral” as the previous Star Trek outings in other words the grey matter will not be stretched nearly as much with the quantum physics and molecular analysis that was going on in previous offerings. Thirdly the baddies in this film just didn’t cut it with us, just looked a bit laughingly retro in an otherwise fresh and modern film.

Our final verdict is we are neutral on this film, there’s enough technical backbone to keep this film out of our gutter ratings, for sure. As for the critics, they Â are never keen on sci fi films, so don’t expect any significant star ratings, 1 or 2’s with a possible 3 here or there, will be the order of the day but we could be wrong on that one.Â Movie mags on the posters always give 4 and 5 stars, always, butÂ its the comments you have to read closely. As with all ratings they have to be taken with a pinch of salt.

Â This film will pull in the Trekkie fans, Sci Fans and also fans of some of the actors and actresses that appear in this film and action film fans will probably also be keen to view this offering. This all adds up to at least a reasonable box office success, add the Star Trek strong branding, and this could, repeat could be a flier, Â but we think Hannah Montana: The Movie just around the corner , will cause this film some serious problems in the ratings war and fly at a much higher level. Â Our Rating 3 stars out 5 and worth a look!

Get further information at StarTrekMovie

The Star Trek Red Carpet:

Who shone on the night ( in our opinion)

Zoe Saldana