Review this movie
May 24, 2013This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This was the best Star Wars movie I've ever seen!
As a movie person, as a Star Trek fan, this movie was incoherent, flashy trash. As people better than I (that is, the boys at Red Letter Media) put it, it was as if the writers of the movie made a list of things they wanted to reference in the movie (Tribbles, Klingons, etc.) and played screenwriting connect the dots. It was just a series of Star Trek references, one after another and called a movie, and there's very little that's original about it. All in all it was just something to make the fans go "OH LOOK SHE SAID SOMETHING IN KLINGON!" and something for non-Star Trek fans to drool at explosions over.
As a movie, it wasn't that interesting. There was no plot. Think about it. What was the plot of this movie? In the beginning, Kirk violates the Prime Directive, so they bring him back to Earth, where lot's of shooting happens, which leads to Klingons, which leads to more shooting, etc. etc. etc. The characters aren't very deep: Kirk is a reckless youth, and all his actions reflect that. Spock is an unemotional rock except when he isn't. Scotty is whacky, Uhura is concerned, and Bones is there. We're given no reason to care about any of these people, and this whole thing about Spock learning to deal with his emotional side and Kirk learning how to be a leader happened already in the last movie.
As a Star Trek movie it was awful. Khan is white, Leonard Nimoy was in it for seemingly no reason, Khan is white, there's an android in it who isn't Data, there's only one warp speed now, Khan is white, they ripped off the Wrath of Khan's most important scene, overall it cheapens all the original characters, and Khan is white! At best, it felt like poorly-written Star Trek fanfiction.
I could go on but I think you get the gist. It get's a 2 because it had nice special effects.… Expand
May 24, 2013With Star Trek: Into Darkness, J.J. Abrams manages to re-imagine and re-invigorate an entire cast of characters while upgrading an epic story with spectacular effects and compelling modern-day allegories. He carefully adapts the narrative to the uncertain moral tenor of our times (fighting terrorism vs protecting human rights), while paying deference to the villains from the 1960s Cold War era that birthed the whole enterprise (grin).
Unfortunately, what’s been lost in translation has been the rich character struggles of yesterday whether the original Spock’s long journey from self-sacrifice, rebirth, and evolution into wise statesman (and dear friend) or Data’s many years of transcending his robotic limitations to discover, explore, shun, and ultimately embrace emotion (albeit with a microchip regulator). There are memorable moments of character development in the Star Trek reboot, but they’re mostly bite-sized nuggets made for 10 second TV spots, tightly squeezed between high-octane special effects sequences.
All of this is to be expected. Big budget action flicks are as competitive as ever, and so, the pleasant niceties of complex, empathetic characters are often first to be sacrificed. It’s just very hard for me to feel the same passion or gravitas as when Spock said to James T. Kirk: “Jim, I have always been, and always will be your friend,” or even when Data reacts joyfully to hearing from his creator that he is “Not less perfect than Lore!”
Still, my central beef with this film is far deeper, and admittedly, totally unfair to the franchise. For the Star Trek narrative or rather, its “neo-religion” of progressive technological progress is shared almost universally by sci-fi authors, movie producers, and storytellers the world over. At its core, it’s a vision of increasing energy use, increasing human ease, and increasing mobility not just around our beautiful blue orb, but across our solar system, galaxy, and beyond.
Accustomed as we humans (or at least we industrial humans) have become to cheap and abundant energy and the ceaseless introduction of new consumer goods and whiz-bang techno-gadgets it seems only natural that the destiny of humankind is to one day transcend this earthly realm, and spread the gospel of material progress to the stars, does it not?
It does not.
Lurking behind the cover story of terrorism and modern unease is an even more troubling development: the endgame of fossil-fueled civilization, and hence, the end of space travel.
Sound absurd? Not really.
Let’s take a moment to piece together the evidence: the desperate rush of invasions by powerful nations into the last remaining oil- and gas-rich territories (Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria, to name only a few); mounting unrest and revolutions in those same regions as energy and food costs rise; the mad scramble by energy corporations into remote regions (deepwater drilling in the Gulf of Mexico and the Arctic and highly polluting extraction from Canada’s “tar sands”); “like there’s no tomorrow” wealth grabs and tax cuts by the elite as joblessness, poverty, and inequality grows; and the increasing ferocity of global warming super-charged tornadoes, hurricanes, tsunamis, and typhoons not to mention the attendant global risks to food security, water availability, and seaside populations that climate change represents.
The scaffolding of industrial civilization is starting to show some serious fractures, and no replacement energy sources or technological miracles are ready-and-waiting to save it. If the good folks at the Association for the Study of Peak Oil are even close to being right in their prediction that we’ll soon have to live with less and less overall energy to conduct the activities of modern life, then we’d better stop dreaming of star treks and start coming back to Earth.
That one-time energy bank beneath the earth’s surface that fossilized millions of years ago isn’t coming back. We’ve used most of it already, to power our vehicles, light up our cities, and yes, take us beyond the confines of our planet. But now, faced with the coming end of that generous endowment, we must finally make peace with our own homeworld and one another.
In some ways, the realization that our species will not travel the stars is very sad. We humans are brilliant, creative, and capable of profound love. We’ll simply have to wait for other species with greater resources to find us, and hope that they too, had conceived of some “prime directive” which forbids them from interfering in other worlds at least not until we’re ready.
In other ways, the fact that we’re finally bumping up against ecological and energy limits is of great relief. Perhaps the worst-case scenarios of climate chaos may simply not be possible. At long last, we shall have to reconnect with our own planet.
Perhaps Abrams could call the movie Earth Trek: The Journey Home.… Expand
May 24, 2013Great Villain, but I could of used a little bit more humor then the non stop gloom. The non stop action is great, but this movie seems like its trying very hard to be just like the dark knight. The villain and action are enough to warrant a ticket purchase. The 3-D was good, but not as good as iron mans. Overall can't really complain about much besides the fact it isn't as good as the original.
May 24, 2013JJ Abrams has no idea how to stage an effective action sequence, which renders this action-packed film rather redundant. Its fair enough that they decided to focus less on ideas and more on spectacle, but there was no flair in the conception or execution of any set-pieces in fact there were no real set pieces, just a relentless barrage of changing locations and flying CGI objects, all filmed with an artlessly roving shaky camera. A good action sequence is predicated on suspense, environment, and clear objectives, and it does matter whether the viewer can clearly discern what exactly is going on in any frame.
The positive reception towards this kind of film makes me worry that modern audiences are forming a kind of pavlovian response to fast cuts and loud bangs. Thankfully directors like Alfonso Cuaron still know how to construct a decent action sequence so I guess there's still hope after all.… Expand
May 23, 2013'STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS' is an absolutely brilliant space-adventure movie. Just as good, if not, better than the first.
Surprisingly for a summer blockbuster, the plot holds up very well to scrutiny, containing little to no plot holes (unlike the 2009 film). The script contains some very strong, resonant themes like friendship, family and loss, which are amazingly brought forth through great writing, directing and acting.
The acting by all the cast is excellent, especially by the villain played by Benedict Cumberbatch. The main crew from the first film are all quite excellent especially Chris Pine as Captain Kirk. Also, newcomer Alice Eve is surprisingly good playing a new crew member.
The action is perfectly paced and contains some of the most thrilling sequences I've seen for a long time in a sci-fi movie.
The sound effects are top notch and the music score is awe inspiring.
Overall, STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS is a great sci-fi roller-coaster ride of imagination, immersion, darkness, thrill and adventure. A must see.
May 23, 2013This movie is brilliant. I don't know what else to say. Just go see it, trust me, you'll love it. Funny, smart and holy crap the villain is played by a brilliant actor you might recognize if you watch big shot British TV. Definitely got my bang for the buck.
May 23, 2013Okay, as an action movie it's really great, characters are perfectly acted, plot has it's twists, and the ending is satisfying! But my expectations were higher, Star Trek is Science Fiction, not a fantasy. And 3d is pointless here(except for prologue). So it's a great action movie, but could've been better!
May 23, 2013J.J. Abrams' returns for his latest sequel of Star Trek into Darkness. The first reboot was very good, but the second one is even more better. Captain James T. Kirk (Chris Pine) and his entire crew members from Enterprise return for the latest mission to capture Khan Noonien Singh (Benedict Cumberbatch) for blowing up the section in London and his plan to steal photon torpedoes from their spaceship. Kirk and Spock (Zachary Quinto) both return for their latest roles and they did great as the leaders. Newcomer star, Benedict Cumberbatch plays the new villain, Khan and he did very good job for playing a genetic superhuman bad guy much like Ricardo Montalban. The whole crew members did very well such as Uhura (Zoe Saldana), Dr. McCoy (Karl Urban), Scotty (Simon Pegg), and Dr. Marcus (Alice Eve). The action scenes are well paste and it's fun to watch with 3D that the entire spaceship drops down to the planet Earth, the crew members blast their lasers in epic battle of Kronos, and Abrams added some lenses shot in every scenes like the original film. The special effects are done well and the dialogue makes so good that acting makes it seriously. Star Trek into Darkness makes another classic Star Trek film and Abrams' did a great job for making this reboot sequel. I really enjoy this movie and I'll bet that Abrams is going to make his latest sequel of Star Wars, Episode VII, but we can't explain for his new project and maybe he'll do good much like Star Trek. Thumbs Up.… Expand
May 23, 2013Star Trek Into Darkness is a fast paced movie that will likely leave some Trek fans with mixed feelings, but people who like action movies, you should enjoy this one.
For the Tek fans, you might get offended by some of the scenes that are slight twists on the past movie. I knew some of the plot twists and surprises before they happened, but I think most people will be caught off guard.
My biggest issues with the movie involve some physics issues where in one part of the movie punches and kicks had lots of power and later they did not. There is a scene where a large burst of power shoots out that should of killed or vaporized anyone next to it, but does not.
Beyond the physics issues, I found a few classic dialogue moments, some very good acting moments, and naturally the CG work is great. The pacing could wear some people out. It is not wall-to-wall action, but it is not to far off from it. Basically the opposite of the original Star Trek movie. When I say original, I mean the first movie with the TV series cast.
If you are die hard Trek fan and did not really like the first of the JJ Abrams Star Trek movies, then avoid this movie. For sci-fi fans or Trek fans with a more open mind, this should be a good movie for you to watch.… Expand
May 23, 2013JJ Abrams is back and so is his lens flare. While less noticeable in this sequel, it is still there and still unappreciated. Cinematography aside, the story leaves a lot to be desired as well. The first movie in 2009 was essentially a reboot of the franchise, the time travelling Spock gave a plausible sense of an "alternate history" Star Trek Universe where the "old crew" could explore a "new future". However this sequel then proceeds to rip off its plot at key moments from the original Star Trek Wrath of Khan. While not a shot for shot remake of the story the parallels are obvious to any Star Trek fan. There are numerous moments in the movie when aspects from the original are blatantly copied. This is not what I want to see in a reboot franchise that explicitly altered the universe for the sake of continuity. The 2009 movie was designed to open a new future for the crew to follow, yet they seem to plod along and follow the original movie scripts in this sequel. It is just lazy writing and poor direction. An original story would have been far better. They had so much they could draw from and they chose instead to copy Wrath of Khan.
I would have scored the movie much lower, but Wrath of Khan is a great movie and even this rip off has its merits. Its lack of originality and lack of character development for everyone except Spock hamper it slightly. The effects of course are top notch, as expected in a sci-fi blockbuster of this caliber. The musical score could use help as it essentially runs the same score as the first movie. There is a distinctive lack in familiar alien races as well, I understand this is a reboot and that the timeline is before much of the exploration has been completed, but there are literally dozens of unfamiliar alien races serving on the Enterprise and living on Earth, I could forgive one or two unfamiliar races but at this point they are just littering the screen with costumes and makeup for the sake of it.
I can only hope that a third movie will learn from the mistakes of the original movie series and will also take into account that this is in fact a reboot and does in fact need some original writing to take advantage of that fact.… Expand
May 23, 2013This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I saw it today, and at the risk of my soul, and Trekie status, I have to say...I liked it. One big reason is because I was very wrong about something major. I will spill it, below, because it made a huge difference to me, but it is a spoiler too. You are warned!
I was horrified when I heard the villian was Khan. ST2 is the best movie in the series and I was horrified at the thought of trying to re-do it. Well, this is NOT a remake of ST2, its a remake of the original Space Seed! It keeps intact the conflict between Khan and Kirk who, for a bit different reasons, and has preserved the Khan/Kirk re-match in ST2.
Some people think all the "in-jokes" as silly, but I thought they were a tilt of the head from JJ to the Trekies. They didn't have to be in there, after all.… Expand
May 23, 2013This film lacked originality and I fear for the future of the series. If it took four years to come up with a plot that was basically borrowed from a previous film. how unoriginal will the third film be? Frankly, I am already bored with the Spock /Kirk battle and hope that they get on to the mission of the Enterprise. Eliminate the battles scenes or at least minimize them and have a smart plot with some other worlds and some real science fiction.… Expand
May 23, 2013This is not the Star Trek at all I grew up with that put forward thought-provoking themes, a strong moral base, and social commentary. The license has been turned into an appeal-to-the-lowest-common-denominator exercise of ADHD pacing and moar splosions! Further, you can pick out the bits where the producers forced clin d'oeuils to the original-cast movie (and if you're familiar with the original movie on which this is pseudo base you'll cringe at each clumsily-inserted line). If they would have just stuck with a non-contrived plot where the movie seemed to be going for the first 2/3 it would have been much better.
That said, the screenplay is well done (up to the last 20 min) and it's sure fun to watch. I'd recommend it over Iron Man 3, but don't expect anything more than a hammy action-fest.… Expand
May 23, 2013Satisfaction. That was what swirled around me when the movie ended. Even after the lights flickered on and the credits began flashing on the screen, I barely noticed them. Satisfaction purged out of me in warp speed, and scenes in the movie danced in my mind. Finally, I realised why my friend had been raving about the movie, because I myself had a big mouthful of that sheer goodness.
I walked out of the theater with my mind reeling back to earlier scenes. I thought of the concrete character development, which enabled me to fully relate to the characters. It felt as if I had known them long ago. People might deem the relationship between Jim and Spock cheesy, but I say that's the type of relationship we humans are lacking in real life, where facades thrive.
On the way back home, I once again walked down the memories of the build up of the movie. A solid plot, a dashing, evil villain made sure the adrenaline stayed pumping through my veins. The twists and turns in the plot had stolen my breath in the movie, and now it was stealing my ability to concentrate in walking home.
During the movie, I found myself absorbed in the story throughout. One cunning villain was enough to send Starfleet into turmoil. Then came Admiral Marcus, who added to the confusion of who was really the villain. In the end, it came as a surprise that both of them were evil.
I reached home, tired yet happy. As i lay on my bed, a fleeting sense of fuzziness came over me. Thanks J.J.Abram, I thought. Thanks for letting me know some awesome and wonderful people. I closed my eyes-I would need to sleep early. Tomorrow, I would have to go back to join Captain Kirk and Spock in another adventure. I would return to the theater and Star Trek Into Darkness-to boldly go where no man has gone before.… Expand
May 23, 2013Ugh. Nice special effects, pretty decent score, pretty actors. Oh, and, as usual, the Cumberbatch was excellent. But... a terrible plot full of holes and inconsistencies, no character development whatsoever, a semi-fascist Star Fleet, repeatedly demonstrated lack of understanding of physics ("science" fiction it ain't) and the constant forced laugh-lines and chase-scenes make this an unmitigated disaster. Also, what is it with spaceships falling out of orbit and people jumping out of their broken windows post-crash lately?! This movie might have been not too shabby if they had picked the first big sub-plot, stuck to that for say a double feature and then moved on to some of the more traditional Trek material. Instead, shot their wad on this turd. So sad.… Expand
May 22, 2013Historia paralela a la original. De forma original, buena fotografia, escenarios, aunque no se le dio importancia a los personajes secundarios.
Parallel to the original story. But original, good photography, excellent scenarios, although not given the real importance to the secondary characters.
May 22, 2013This movies LOOKS GREAT. The special effects are some of the best I've seen in awhile. It looks like space, it feels like space. Costumes and sets are used in the tradition of the original Star Wars movies, and any CGI is not distracting, if noticeable at all. On a visual level JJ nailed it. I just wish I gave a about anything that happened to the characters etc. My friend and I looked over at each other after about an hour and a half of constant action and said, "I'm not invested in this at all." A bummer, cause the first movie was pretty fun. Suspense seems to be missing from recent blockbusters. Especially since anything that makes enough money overseas or here, gets a sequel so we know we don't have to worry about any of the character's fates. They're all gonna live and be back in 2 or 3 years to do this again, worse.… Expand
May 22, 2013This is just marginally better than the first one. It seems they can't come up with an exciting, NEW or original script for this series. Instead, they rely on time travel(once again) and introducing villains from the old series. I guess we'll keep seeing Leonard Nemoy in each one of these films as well until he dies. This is truly a shame as I would have thought they would have gotten all this extraneous bull over with in the first film.
It's definitely time to get out there and explore bold NEW worlds and situations.… Expand
May 22, 2013Well can what can I say but damn good fun this movie was really good not a star trek fan but I enjoyed this and the first one JJ Abrams does a good job of giving these movie a polish over the originals and can I say Benedict Cumberbatch was amazing i would give the a 10 out of 10 very enjoyable but I would say not for everyone
May 22, 2013This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Absolutely insulting in every possible way, even if you approach watching it with clean slates. Full of plot holes, ridiculous action scenes and useless characters. The first movie was actually likable even though it had its fair share of problems but this one... Oh my...
In all honesty the movie deserves a 3/10 but I gave it a 1/10 simply because of the degree of incompetence demonstrated at the end. I mean you create a whole new timeline just to be able to answer every cannon related question with "its a whole new timeline and anything can happen" but then all you can come up in your rebooted version is recycling content from the original movies?
It hurts even more if you are a Trekkie. If you expect a movie to deliver anything that Star Trek stood for (moral and philosophical themes wrapped within an immersive and interesting story) then stay away from this one because the only thing it will deliver is a two hour kindergarten fun. You wan't to enjoy Star Trek Into Darkness? Then simply rent "Star Trek: Wrath of Khan" instead.
Live long and prosper but don't expect to see another good Star Trek movie in the near future (at least until Abrahms is shaping them).… Expand
May 22, 2013Into Darkness did not disappoint. It's so far my favorite movie of 2013. As with Star Trek 2009, JJ Abrams did an amazing job directing this film. Acting, dialogue, and special effects were top notch and came together to create a very memorable movie. I'll be sure to see this movie in the theaters once more.
May 22, 2013Thoroughly entertaining, but too easily predicted, ST:ID lacked the wow factor of the first Abrams attempt. The actors embody the characters fully now, with special props for John Cho who does a lot with very little, and Karl Urban who makes Bones the most interesting character in the series at this point. But the problem is that Kirk and Spock should be the most interesting people on screen. They have a couple of really nice moments, but sadly, not the big beats of the movie. I'm nitpicking and I'll admit it (notice my score) but I want more from the two of them than we are getting at this point. The movie rests on Benedict Cumberbatch's performance, and in that choice JJ and crew protected themselves from disaster; he's superb. I'm excited about the next one and hope that they choose to take the real risk in coming up with a story that doesn't necessarily rest with one big bad.… Expand
May 22, 2013This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. After his ambitious and highly creative 2009 reboot, J.J. Abrams returns to the Star Trek universe with "Into Darkness" a sequel that ups the game in every conceivable way. The action and special effects are simply breathtaking, and the actors have come to inhabit their individual roles like a glove. Pine and Quinto in particular bring a new level of authenticity and humanity to their respective Kirk and Spock, and Benedict Cumberbatch is ruthlessly imposing as Khan. Even the plotwriting is tighter and more brilliant than before, especially in the third act where Abrams pulls a bold but genius salute to "Star Trek II" with a role reversal of Spock and Kirk in the iconic "death" scene and even a gleefully entertaining "KHAN!" from Spock himself, and the starship crash scene in London is a moment of pure cinematic greatness. Fans of the series and of the original Khan will surely be divided by the filmmakers' move here, but for me, I thought it was a truly stellar piece of writing and an honorable nod to the original canon. This new Trek universe is just so damn entertaining, and with Abrams at the head, the third one will surely be primed to blow us all away. Simple, straight-up awesome at warp-speed engage!… Expand
May 21, 2013This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Orci, Kurtzman and LIndelhof need to go back to the drawing board. Given a freeslate to work with and they come up with a product that is horribly maligned. Add to that the fact that Abrams tries to pull a Bay with his direction and style and you have a recipe for a disaster, thats before mentioning that the lens flare shenanigans have only gotten worse. The dialogue in particular is horribly dull and cliched with their delivery off base most of the time. The melodrama between spock and uhura is so poorly done that it reeks throughout the movie long after the scene has passed. The actors do their best, Pine, Quinto Cumberbatch and Urban (Urbans Bones is by far the best part of the film, the only part to stay consistently good the whole time) but the scripts dialogue is just so bad. Cumberbatch's character suffers the most out of the four, with not only having to deal with terrible lines but also uneven direction. This is before we even get to the plot of the film which is so incredibly uneven and unappreciative of its clean slate in the star trek universe. It boils down to the fact that its treated more like a transformers esque action film than the adventure of star trek and lets be clear, Abrams can't direct action, he does adventure. Its painfully evident as the action scenes themselves are quite nice, but due to the weak script they have no weight, no consequence making it all seem so MEH! Paramount needs to let go of the writing team in favour of people who are willing to bring life to the franchise (keep Abrams, its not his fault the script was shoddy). And also Spock crying "KHAAAAAAAN!" is so out of place that its a parody of itself, not Wrath of Khan mind you but of Into Darkness. If you really want to watch this train wreck, dont waste your money on this cash grab, stream it or torrent it.… Expand
May 21, 2013In to darkness is n awesome movie going experience. The movie is full of twists and turns involving many of the characters including Kirk, Spock McCoy and others. The visual effects are no just there for people t gawk t, rather, they are part of the plot. I loved that ever actor was give his or her big moment on screen. I also loved that the actors get these iconic roles they are play, and that is no easy task, But, Chris Pine and company are up to the task and deliver big time. This is the first great blockbuster of the year. I will measure everything else against it… Expand
May 20, 2013It's like a bunch of dumb drunk guys sat around watching the original Star Trek and got a wild hair to recreate the show using the old action figures as puppets. The characters are only similar to the originals in slight cartoonish ways. I know, I know, alternate universe--which here is just an excuse to pull any cheap thrills they wanted and have an excuse for it. Tradition aside, the script of this movie was so ponderous, half the dialogue was used to inflict plot points on us. The jokes don't work because the movie is in a contrived tizzy state almost the whole time, and there's almost no relief from it. And the jokes are not funny anyway, they're played out. Also, where's the science? The ship's broken at one point and no one knows why and we never find out. The explorative and intelligent part of Star Trek is gone in this movie, replaced with frantic and inane running around. In general, the characters were whiny and spineless and hard to pull for--like they dropped out of any stock poorly-written TV show. The whole experience was so fake--I'm bummed. I gave this a 1(instead of 0) because the scenes with Jim and Christopher Pike were good.… Expand
May 20, 2013This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Just... not good. ABRAMS!!! The guy is a hack in creative terms but pretty talented regarding his production company. He should stick to what he knows and especially keep his hands out of space. the best thing he ever did as a sole creative endevour was writing Armageddon.
This IS a bad remake of Star Trek 2. Star Trek 2 is Star Trek 2. There is little positive to say about it. It's a functional summer action movie. The new Superman is more important than this, and that's just because of the people involved alone.
Paramount should trilogy this out for good and then do a TNG reboot! haha. Trek is dead, long live the Trek.… Expand
May 20, 2013This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. ***SPOILERS***
I like the first (2009) movie, however I completely dislike this recent attempt. One, Cumberbatch as Khan simply does not work. They went through great lengths to find plausible actors for the main crew, why not the same treatment for Khan? He looks, sound, and acts nothing like the original. I could call the Excelsior the Enterprise, it doesn't make it true. I will say that Cumberbatch makes a good antagonist, but a crappy Khan. Other than that, the plot holes and head-scratching moments are far too abundant. For instance, what was the point in the scene with Marcus and Kirk when she was indisposed? I found the movie to be a good action film, but a poor Star Trek film. It lacks the sophistication and intellect I expect. After all, Star Trek is a sci-fi "DRAMA", it relies on better writing, casting and acting than this movie received.… Expand
May 20, 2013Please JJ, if you can't keep your crayon within the borders, don't consider the resulting scribble to be "art". I don't buy your "alternate timeline" bs. You have managed to make a cheap, throwaway version (or two) of "Star Trek", and you are ruining its heritage in the process. Roddenberry must be aghast! Please, JJ, leave Star Trek to people who actually care. What a shame!
May 20, 2013I dont quite understand why this movie isnt making that much money. It was actually one of the best action movies i had seen in a while. Story, graphics, acting...everything was very well done. I hope they keep the franchise going cause i cant wait to see another one.
May 20, 2013This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Superlatives simply won't do justice to this film. Loved the first in the reboot series and this carries on the same quality. Felt that linking back to future Spock was a bit unnecessary but that aside the film was excellent.… Expand
May 20, 2013This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This second installment of Star Trek just doesn't flow as smoothly as the first one. Good action and visual effects like one would expect from JJ Abrams but in my opinion, this movie was not as engaging as the first one. The story and sequence of events just was not as exciting as the first one. It is still a good movie to watch for sci-fi fans as well as the Star Trekkie. A couple of flaws in the story but maybe I just didn't quite fully understand the history of the Star Trek universe. For example, why need to draw blood from Kahn when you have 72 frozen bodies to draw blood from on the starship, all of whom are genetically engineered superhumans?… Expand
May 20, 2013SPOILERS, SCROLL FOR MORE Prose and Khans. So did this iteration of Khan work and should JJ Abrams and crew be demonized or demigods? For me, the new Khan was a lot of fun. I hated the guy, liked the guy, hated the guy and confused when he was boxed up again in ice and not executed. But the fact that I felt anything about the character means that J.J. did good by me, and I consider myself a Trekkie.
So why the anger or confusion?
I read one blog that contemplated all of this, but they missed a key point which I think explains why one audience loved the wow factor and another did not: real jaw-dropping shock value. If we had known all along that Khan was the baddie we probably would have been more interested in the movie. Why? Because the jaw drop would have been bigger when he assisted Kirk and crew at Kronos. He would have been seen as a tragic figure which would have been a real surprise instead of a plot twist. I think the surprise that it was Khan is no surprise because almost everyone who was a Trekkie already knew he was (or hoped he was). And in this case was not jaw dropping...Unlike...
Iron Man 3. So I nearly crapped myself when the twist came. I REALLY wanted to see the Mandarin killed, hell I wanted to kill the guy! He triggered a real emotional response and I was angry about this A-Hole. So when Tony Stark finally finds him I was blown away. Holy was pretty much what I said in the theater. This twist was not known in advance, it was not even obvious because in Iron Man I we saw something similar between Tony's right hand man and the Jihadist. I assumed this would be a similar move: co-partners in evil with the Mandarin being the ring leader and Killian the stooge. What a damn surprise, what a joy to see a genuine plot twist! Which brings me back to....
KHAN! So whereas IM3 dropped me with their twist, I really just expected it in Star Trek Into Darkness. I still think he was an excellent baddie and I was happy to see Buckaroo Banzai/Robocop star Peter Weller back in the movies. But jaw dropping this was not. Instead it was more like a smug smile.… Expand
May 20, 2013These days a movie has to have more than the usual CGI mechanics. It has to have a story. This one was weak and barely good enough for a TV episode. Cumberbatch is great, but none of the other characters caught fire. Pine does a good young Kirk-he's more likeable-and Quinto does Spock well, but doing Spock well is like falling off a truck. Just look thoughtful and don't use your facial muscles. Uhuru shagging Spock? C'mon girl, you need passion!… Expand
May 20, 2013Bombastic, thrilling and mindblowing action blockbuster (especially in IMAX 3D) with a clever and multifarious plot, enganging acting performances and, of course, amazing visual effects. But not just that, it all fits in with the Given Circumstances of the Star Trek franchise and the series, which doesn't just make it an unforgettable cinematic experience, but also a satisfying alternate continuation of the Star Trek timeline. A Must-See for Trekkie fans!!!… Expand
May 20, 2013Into Darkness is a more coherent and compelling adventure than its predecessor. It's hard to do a story that could be stretched out over 7-13 hours justice in about 2, but the film-makers did a good job of creating a tight runaway train of popcorn flick fun. The dialogue was super snappy and the cinematography was quite good. Since I am not enamored of the Star Trek franchise to begin with, I can approach this movie from a more neutral stand-point and just compare it to other comic/sci-fi outings from the last few years and I have to say Into Darkness is one of the better genre films of the last few years.… Expand
May 20, 2013By being the second Star Trek film released this time round the will always be a comparison to Wrath of Khan, but how well does this film do? The story in this film is quite good following the crew of the Enterprise as they go on a revenge mission against Jon Harrison, played excellently by Benedict Cumberbatch. There are twists and turns here and there but most can be seen from along way away. The growth of the supporting casts characters is welcomed and I felt the main cast were now more than 1 dimensional characters unlike the last film. The Kirk and Spock relationship also improves this time. It is also once again Bones gets the best lines of the film. The action sequences are cool but I was irked by the fact that sequences felt like the last film and the fact everyone was always running at the slightest hint of urgency. The lens flare is back yet J.J Abrams has toned it down a bit this time. It also became irritating at times when people just couldn't be transported for one reason or another as away to set up another action scene. Finally aside from about 10 seconds of goofy 3D where things fly at he screen the 3D effects are almost none existent. Compared to the first Star Trek this film is better in pretty much every way from the action, to the story and to the villain. However since it slaps you in the face with Wrath of Khan references it shows it is nowhere near as good a film.
Rating 7 out of 10
A very good effort marred by comparisons and callbacks to the other Star Trek 2… Expand
May 20, 2013I did not like the last installment of Star Trek and I found this one to be an improvement. The plot, unfortunately, gives you that "Deja Vu" feeling that you've seen it before, but it is so action packed I was never bored. Some of the dialogue is corny, and some of the homages to the original TV series (such as the Doctor experimenting on the Tribble) seemed so forced, but the cast is energetic and the pace frenetic. I avoid seeing movies in 3-D that tack the 3-D on after the film is shot so I cannot comment on that, but the special effects otherwise were excellent. Probably the best part of the film for me was Benedict Cumberbatch as Khan. The biggest negative of the film for me was the young Spock being able to communicate with himself in the future. It took a lot of the suspense out of the movie. We knew Spock would not be killed EVER in the movie because he is still alive in the future. Not a great film but certainly entertaining.… Expand
May 20, 2013I'm new to the star trek series so I can not compare this to previous films but, I can say this was a good introduction. The story is very good and the characters are very memorable, as they were before, and just when you think the movies over it's not, and then it does it again.
May 20, 2013Not so much a reworking as a re-invention of the franchise. With the last film and now this thoroughly enjoyable installment, J J Abrams is certainly in the game to win converts and in this regard I am cretainly to be counted. I wasn't a follower of the cheap and cheesy TV series and in the main I didn't like the films of the 80's and 90's. Into the Darkness, with a bigger budget and excellent characterisations by Chrs Pine and Zachary Quinto as Kirk and Spock respectively, just soars. The payoff is that your brain moves faster than the unfolding events in excited anticipation of what's to come. The film moves at a cracking pace (at times things get a tad too hectic) and the production design and special effects are amazing, as is the sound. Benedict Cumberbatch's unusual looks helps create a surprisingly multi dimensional villain and Abrams directs with incredible dexterity. There is also a surprisingly moving scene between Kirk and Spock which is totally unexpected in a film of this kind, but is also significant as a key to the film's success. It's not just another mindless blockbuster! All that remains to be said is that the opening sequence involving the rescue of Spock from an active volcano is brilliant as are the closing fight scenes aboard a transporter. Beam me up.… Expand
May 20, 2013A Classic Villain! That's what Benedict Cumberbatch plays, and his performance is iconic. As usual, the performances here are all top-notch. There is some rather clever twists that will either enrage Trek fans or unite them. I'm in the latter group, feeling that everything really worked for me. The film is a little one-paced with frantic energy, but it never looses it's focus and the result is ultimately superb. The best film of 2013 so far.… Expand
May 20, 2013Bad trek, bad science fiction, bad direction, good action.
Adjust your expectations this is a action film that plays lip service to trek by lifting entire scenes and elements from wrath of khan jumbles them up and sprinkles underwear,running around and action on top without understanding or even caring about its source material, plot consistency, physics or even potentially its own future as a film series.
Leaving out the obvious about how the film is made to make a good trailer for a film not a good film, its total rehash of ST2 and going straight in on the lack of consistent use of plot, the film attempts to broaden the scope of the action introducing a room full of captains whose ships are available and are never used even when the finale is unfolding within spitting distance, takes iconic trek tech and continues to bastardise it, like beaming direct from Earth to Qo'nos effectively means that tech will need suppressing for future movies or you won't even require a star fleet if you can beam bombs across the galaxy.
Warp drive continues its unabated exponential speed increases, Janeway would give her left leg to get a hold of it and would have been home in days.
The ship itself continues to get dumber, in addition to engineering in the first film being a death trap in case of emergency decompression now the saucer section is too with internal open spaces riddling the ship existing only to add tension to later scenes, the only logical reaction would be to don your space suit and wear it constantly for fear of sudden death.
Moving away from the fantasy physics of Star Trek to just fantasy physics of film, everything is spread up 1000x for effect and plot tension an object falls unpowered from the moon to earth in minuets anti gravity going offline causes ceilings to become floors while in free fall, even accounting for rotation that's dumb.
That said I am giving it a 6, perfectly watchable dumb action film Scotty is solid, Pike is perfect, sulu gets the biggest character progression of anyone, everyone else retraces their arcs from the first film.
Oh wait a minuet, the plot hook is magic blood, that loses a mark your getting 5 into darkness.… Expand
May 20, 2013Watching this movie felt like déjà vu. The plot (an evil power bent on destroying the Star Fleet) is certainly nothing new. The dialogue seemed cobbled together from every cliché in the series: annihilation is imminent with every decision, each crew member must take a stand (using the inevitable cliché) and Kirk/Spock spar/smooch. The futuristic Earth has cool architecture and the big crash is spectacular, but most of the combat is all noise and flash without much cool action. Fans will dig the endless drama, but I'd rather see "Iron Man 3" again.… Expand
May 20, 2013Lens flares aside this is Star Trek. This movie had everything they could think of trek wise squeezed rinto 2.2 hours. Does every spice on the shelf thrown into the pot make for a good soup. Well I think it does. Ok, enough with the metaphors. I really liked seeing Peter Weller in a real movie with some decent screen time for us Robocop fans. This movie makes great use of 3D and IMAX or XD. I would suggest seeing in 3D if possible and of course buying the bluray when it is available later this year over DVD otherwise those lens flares might blind you.… Expand
May 19, 2013The best movie JJ Abrams hasn't made is probably how he pulls it off to manage Star Trek, Star Wars and make homages to 80s Spielberg all at the same time. This new one has some good ideas after a clunky first act, with a very good actor in Benedict Cumberpatch and a dramatic revival from Peter Weller. The Kirk and Spock chemistry is super lacking, even though the dramatic choices and homage-laden finale lays entirely upon emotional investment that there is a deep connection between the two. Both Zachary Quinto and Chris Pine are blocks of wood, so it really hurts the overall impact of the movie. Though I didn't like this movie very much, it's better than the 2009 version. The movie has improved SFX, and some cool stuff in terms of scope, but it's not really clever in terms of tactical space battles and the lack of emotional investment hurts the overall impact. And the movie is overly fast-paced, with too many abrupt all-of-a-sudden moments.… Expand
May 19, 2013Star Trek Into Darkness reminds us this that Abrams and company have no allegiance to the stories and characters of old, that this is not your father's Star Trek. Into Darkness shows that the crew tasked with writing and producing these films are honing their craft and making arguments as to why Sci-Fi may be the greatest genre in entertainment right now. Abrams' signature is lightly written over the production work without pushing the lens flare effects he's known for. At times, the filmography resembled that of Joss Whedon's "Firefly" TV series, something that translates well into Star Trek. The cast again turn in fantastic acting performances, diving deeper into their own characters' strengths and vulnerabilities while staying true to the characteristics of each character. It's very fun and rewarding to see Into Darkness' plot unfold, and the surprise villain will certainly tickle the Trek fans. I definitely recommend this, especially if you liked the previous film.… Expand
May 19, 2013It's all over the place, and more often than not a bit of a confusing frenzy Many aspects don't pertain to the storyline, which should have been left on the cutting-room floor. It does have it's moments, granted, but as a whole, this second film's a mess.
May 19, 2013Chris Pine is again excellent as James Kirk, as are the exceptional cast in the new series. I was pleasantly surprised because so often when a new series comes on so incredibly strong, the sequel often disappoints. Having said that the reason for my less than stellar scores simply the casting selection of the villain. Yes we understand the timeline is now shifted but the villain from whence he is derived absolutely drives the need for a Latino actor. For example Javier Bardem would have been an excellent choice.… Expand
May 19, 2013If you're just going to see Star Trek with no prior Star Trek background, you will still enjoy this as a summer blockbuster. It has action, comedy in the correct places, and is epic. If you're a Trek fan, you'll also enjoy this movie continuing a tradition of using Star Trek to question societal issues (hint without spoilers: terrorism and targeted assassinations). Kirk and Spock play quite well off of each other, and Benedict Cumberbatch was a perfect fit for the villain. It isn't perfect, but you can't really expect it to be. It's a great film nonetheless, and the series will hopefully be continued in this new timeline.… Expand
May 19, 2013Perfect Gratification!
Star Trek Into Darkness is perfection in CGI, science, space travel, military content, current events, and damned near everything else you can think of. The references to the original series, changed by the alternate reality, were creative and fluid. This film is IT. That's all I can say. On a separate note: I respect and was deeply touched by the note in the credits to the 9/11 victims and heroes. With our current sociopolitical climate, this is not popular. It took a lot of courage and touched me deeply. Thank you for creating a film with finesse and extraordinary creativity and forethought. This film has set a new standard. Outstanding!… Expand
May 19, 2013JJ Abrams continues to be the quintessential factory-farm movie guy. He doesn't want to create his own voice, so much as he wants to show you how remarkably well he can mimicking Spielberg at his mid-80's peak.
It's a different era, though, and the attention spans aren't what they were, so no plot point is considered too significant to interrupt the action for more than one or two minutes.
Basically, this is a fun movie that has nothing to do with what Star Trek was. It's a mindless summer thrill ride in every sense of the word but one...the actors are seriously in it to win it this time around (and good for them...they shine). There's nothing wrong with being a mindless thrill ride, of course. My only real complaint is that I miss, beyond any hope of communication, the days before CGI.
This isn't because I think effects looked better, back then, but because creating special effects within the primary filming process required directors to think about something other than "How cool can you make it look, my software junky slave labor crew?" These days, the characters can destroy an entire city center, wiping out innumerable lives, and then sprint barely half a city block over to continue the fight in a place where the populace is still casually strolling to work and where the glass isn't even cracked. It separates you from the film.
And why do lazy mistakes like this happen? Because the director thinks you're an idiot? No....because the special effects are a far greater and more invasive component to the film than they ever could have been twenty-five years ago, but they are often no more a part of the discussion when plotting out the story than they were at that time.
The other thing that struck me is that Abrams tried to engage Star Trek in this movie simply by using sense memory (visuals and audio reminiscent of the past) and by copy-pasting text from older movies. That's fine, when you're making a reboot movie that can easily be deleted from the "fan canon" later on and carries no franchisal threat....but I sure hope he doesn't take the same approach when he makes Star Wars. That brand may be at the point where anything is up, but if Abrams brings it up from prequel level to "Into Darkness" level, then he's missed a real opportunity.… Expand
May 19, 2013This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The downfall from moral tale about a uptopian future continues in this installment. There is not much of Roddenberry's creation left amongst the summer movie popcorn movie making here. The dialogue is never allowed to sink in, Kirk is never in control of anything and continues to be buffeted about by every other character, and the action sequences are all given the same level of intensity and editing. A gentle touch on the shoulder is treated the same as a spaceship spinning out of control. There was no love in this movie. The writers and producers appear either to actively disrespect Star Trek, or they do not care and see this as less of an artistic outing as it is a cash grab. This is a decent summer action movie and nothing more. As far as a Star Trek film, it is a failure.… Expand
May 19, 2013This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. There is a serious continuity error, concerning the fate of Captain Pike. In this movie he dies, while in the original TV series it is clear that he lived and was paralyzed.
One thing that was highly awaited: after almost 50 year there is FINALLY a failure of the artificial gravity.… Expand
May 19, 2013Inundated with aesthetically breath-taking visuals, bolstered with a clever narrative though bordering on the convoluted, ameliorated by an inspired take on an iconic Starfleet adversary, and seasoned with a measure of treachery, deceit and duplicity, Star Trek Into Darkness is blockbuster entertainment on the grandest scale. Undaunted by the runaway success of its predecessor, it boldly sores into the stratosphere as a revitalized intergalactic colossus transcending the modern day science fiction genre. On its Vulcan side, Star Trek Into Darkness is an intelligently scripted, sophisticated and shrewd specimen. On its human side it is frequently tempestuous, regularly humorous and every so often affectionate, it spectacles the conflict of human emotions in the most turbulent of times. Furthermore, beset with nostalgia soaked token nods and references to Star Trek’s of old, teeming with witty dialogue, and awash with exhilarating action, J.J. Abrams’ second enterprising effort in the celebrated series has plenty to satisfy obstinate Trekkies and casual moviegoers alike.
Star Trek Into Darkness is a science fiction action-adventure movie co-produced and directed by J.J. Abrams. It is the twelfth feature-length film entry in the Star Trek franchise and the sequel to Abrams’ 2009 Star Trek reboot, based on the Star Trek science fiction entertainment franchise created and established by Gene Roddenberry in the mid-1960s. It commences with the U.S.S. Enterprise and its plucky crew whose exploratory voyage has steered them in the direction of a primitive civilization on the fictional-Class M planet Nibiru. When Starfleet’s General Order number 1, the Prime Directive is infringed the impetuous yet cunning Captain James T. Kirk is summoned back to Earth where he is reduced in rank from captain to first officer under Admiral Christopher Pike’s command who reoccupies control of the Enterprise. Simultaneously, an unrelenting and inexorable former Starfleet Commander, Jon Harrison has instigated and launched an attack on a top-secret Starfleet installation on Earth. When Starfleet’s high-ranking officers’ lives are put in jeopardy at the hands of Harrison, Kirk with personal retribution on his agenda re-assumes captaincy of the Enterprise, and he and his crew embark on a mission of vengeance behind enemy lines to seize a supposed former comrade who’s appetite for devastation knows no bounds. As the Enterprise and its crew are catapulted into darkness at warp speed, it soon becomes apparent that everything is not as it seems; a far-reaching web of deceit and duplicity is untangled leading to an epic showdown where allegiances will be brought into question and sacrifices will have to be made.
Reprising his role from Abrams’ 2009 Star Trek is Chris Pine, who uniform to his previous outing provides a stellar performance as James T. Kirk, the courageous, self-assured captain of the U.S.S. Enterprise renowned for his many female exploits and his end justifies the means view on Starfleet orders. His portrayal of the fabled Captain Kirk is akin to that of William Shatner in his finest hour. Also reprising his role from Star Trek Into Darkness’ predecessor is Zachary Quinto as Kirk’s notorious cohort aboard the Enterprise, the unyielding, super-intelligent half-Vulcan half-human Spock. Quintos’ portrayal of Spock is exemplary, markedly and strikingly similar to that of Leonard Nimoy, the original Mister Spock otherwise known as Spock Prime. His “unintentionally” condescending normative judgement afforded for any of Kirk’s dubious commands and his golden lecture like recitals of Starfleet directive are first-class. In consort with his razor-sharp retorts packed full of wit and his exemplification of emotional discovery, Quinto provides the movies stand-out performance amongst other remarkable character interpretations including that provided by Benedict Cumberbatch who plays the films main antagonist, the malevolent and genetically advanced former Starfleet Commander Jon Harrison. Cumberbatch is suitably menacing and articulates Harrison’s dialogue in an especially chilling manner. In addition to this, his animated facial expressions and piercing stares mould an ominous character that translates on-screen to a believable and genuine threat to Starfleet and to the Enterprise. Karl Urban returning as Leonard “Bones” McCoy with his cranky nostalgic wisecracks and gags is great, and Zoe Saldana reprising her character of Uhura is particularly good in her intimate scenes with Quinto/Spock, which divulge the plights in their strained relationship.
Full review available at: http://thetoddsmoviereviewblog.blogspot.co.uk… Expand
May 19, 2013J.J. Abrams has achieved his goal of making Star Trek for people who weren't smart enough for the original series there is no science in this fiction and don't think too much about anything anyone says or you will start to ask questions around which the poorly pillaged plot will quickly unravel.
The effects are pretty, no denying it's a great looking film.
I only wish this quality cast had quality scripts to run with, they make a valiant attempt at saving the film from itself, but in the end you have a poorly scripted car chase movie in space.… Expand
May 19, 2013Excellent movie. Much like the first Star Trek from 2009, the action grabs you from the beginning and does not allow you to sit back and relax until the credits roll. Spock is incredible! He shows you how much of a badass he can be when provoked. Kirk is the films driving force, however, providing the audience with the most memorable action sequences, as well as its most effective comic relief. Highly recommended!… Expand
May 19, 2013Perfect summer movie and as good or even better than JJ's first foray into the rebooted Trek Universe. Cleverly rebuilding off the original series/movies. Great performances, scenery, action, plot, you name it. Good use of all available characters. Brought my 8 and 10 year old boys with me, and they insisted I add this review because they enjoyed it so much.
When is the third coming? And now I'm getting my hopes up for Star Wars 7-9.… Expand
May 19, 2013Overall this a good film and likely worth seeing at a theatre. However I must say that it lacks in story and character development, and doesn't really give the actors a chance to act.
The movie starts off great! It shows this cool alien race on an M class planet and it really feels like Star Trek, however after that we go into a more casino royale style Kirk with big explosions etc (yawn). I think what made the first one so good was that it was about the life of Kirk and Star trek history, while this one was more or less just an action movie.
The editor included of a lot really cool and epic shots of spaceships and of Earth, however if that time was spent on explaining character motivations, it would have created a more coherent picture of the story than a CGI animation is capable of. I don't want to give spoilers away so I won't say more than that.… Expand
May 19, 2013Absolutely the first movie everyone must see this summer. Benedict Cumberbatch rides high along with the films visually breathtaking digital setpieces. An undertone of every characters impending death is present throughout the entire film, which may be the films greatest strength in the short run and greatest weakness in the long run.
May 19, 2013Star Trek Into Darkness was obviously not going to be anything compared to the first reamke of the Star Trek franchise, but because of its spectacular visuals and thrilling action sequences with a little flavor or Benedict Cumberbatch and J.J. Abrams awesomeness, Star Trek Into Darkness just feels like any other powerful sci-fi thriller.
May 19, 2013This movie was awesome! I have no clue why anyone would go below and 8 and thats for trekies standards. The movie was non stop compelling and didn't make you feel like your waiting for the boring scene to be over. The graphics were top notch and the bad guy can kick some a$$.. like you should just lay down and cry if this dude was coming after you. I love the whole "who is leading who" concept. Only thing I can say that was missing was more of a back story on the villian to make us really like or hate him. Other than that.. you need to take your family to go see this or you're not an Merican! pew pew… Expand
May 19, 2013This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. JJ Abrams sticks close to the franchise in this movie, his first Star Trek movie was a good way to reboot the show with an alternate reality, but it had some flaws, like a weak villain..
Now with this long awaited sequel (at least for my part) he succeeds at mostly everything in this movie. It is such an homage to one of the best Star Trek films, Wrath of Khan, and to me it even surpass it. The cast has great chemistry and truly works as the crew of The Enterprise.
The villain in this movie is also one of the better villains in a long time, Benedict Cumberbatch does a truly amazing job as the villain in this movie. The true stars is still Kirk and Spock, but they do give more screen time for the other characters, which is a great thing.
There are some truly clever references in this movie, and a very well done twist of sorts. And they have true klingons in this movie to that truly are ruthless and brutal.
This is to me the best movie since The Hobbit, and the ending of this movie gave me goosbumbs, one of the best Star Trek movies ever, and actually my second favorite movie after First Contact, and it sits side by side with Wrath of Khan.… Expand
May 19, 2013This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. As a die hard Star Trek fan and borderline enthusiast I was delight at the approach and energy JJ put into this film. The spin on the story was priceless and simply put JJ did it right, he bought his point of view to the story and I can wait to see what he brings to Star Wars VII. If you are on the fence about seeing the film I encourage you to climb down and go see it. JJ brings the right amount of emotion, passion and action without going overboard and being campy. The way he did just worked everything that makes the movie fits here. Hats off to JJ for having the courage to "Boldly Go Where No One Else Wanted to Go".… Expand
May 19, 2013Absolutely loved this movie. I was happily surprised when it still had the great humor from the original, something I thought the movie would lose based on its competition. However, aside from the humor, the story was much more dramatic than the original and somehow they managed to make the action even better.
May 19, 2013I'm a big Star Trek fan and to see this movie made me feel like I was in another world. The movie was great visually. The story line was interesting and left you on the edge of your seat. I personally was hoping for more in this movie especially with a longer appearance of the true Spock. After finishing the movie I was left with a "is that it" feeling. Personally I enjoyed this movie and wold recommend it to fan out there!… Expand
May 18, 2013This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Let us first imagine that we are truly going where no one has gone before. That being the case, this movie took us to new places while still giving us something old to hang on to. That being said, there were some issues.
Spoilers start here:
Ok, the great mystery villain is Khan. Great anti-Kirk villain. However, those that remember the original series also know that Khan was found in deep space while on the 5 year mission aboard the Botany Bay. However you introduce him, Khan is Khan. Badass and take no prisoners.
Kirk on the other hand is all over the place. emo, angry and valiant in the end. The should-he-be-captain argument was well played in the first movie but lacked a bit of the same punch in this one.
Action was spot on fun. I decided to avoid the 3D as I am not a fan but I can imagine that this movie in 3D would sparkle. The story was a bit....incoherent at times such as the death of Kirk. Yes I said the death of Kirk. Which looking at the film might have truly been my biggest problem. Look, I have grown up around Star Trek and all the movies. Star Trek II TWoK is not to be blasphemed in the eyes of most true Trekkies. So what did JJ do? He turned around the entire scene and we replayed the final moments of that original and turned it around where Kirk dies instead of Spock. Spock screaming the infamous Shatner "Khaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan" somewhat missed the mark for me and the radiation damage done to Kirk's skin was not there compared to the makeup done for Spock. Speaking of Spock, the enjoyment of the original series was that Kirk was clever enough with the help of his crew to outwit any adversary. I did not care for Spock calling on his older self to seek answers on how to win. Seemed anti-climatic.
This movie was a coming of age movie for Kirk the character and starts the new 5 year mission. I am unsure on how JJ could top himself on a 3rd movie as ST2 was more than adequately robbed of material. But, there are good Trek stories still yet to be told.
I struggle with assigning a numeric rating to this movie because it really was a good movie minus the death of Kirk and the unoriginality of that entire scene. Even with that being said, I still very much liked the movie and I can understand the alternate timeline issues that make this series fresh.… Expand
May 18, 2013Very entertaining movie, but what annoyed me were the liberties taken with the original Khan episode and then the Wrath of Khan movie, as well as stuff taken from other S.T. movies. It was as if the writers assumed Trekkies who watched the original series would be too senile by now to remember how the story lines went, which was insulting. I have no problem bringing the past into new movies, but you can't just rewrite the history that everyone knows and loves unless you explain why! (Can't there be new stories that happened "in between" the episodes we all watched over and over again? Come up with an original story for the next movie, please!)… Expand
May 18, 2013As a big Trek fan, I truly enjoyed this alternate timeline's second installment. There was never a slow moment. I was certainly surprised by several developments but ultimately a very satisfying experience. I look forward to more adventures with this crew.
May 18, 2013The reviews seem to reflect either a "love it" or "hate it" rating for this movie. Personally, I loved it and felt was even better than the first of these new installments, or "reboot". Great script and even greater acting. I must be getting soft--I never thought I get misty-eyed watching Star Trek, but I did watching a couple 'dramatic' scenes in this movie (e.g., the Pike-Kirk exchange in the bar and the Kirk-Spock exchange right before Kirk (Not gonna spoil it for you.)
Yet the question should be asked: Why such an extreme polarity in the reviews in terms of people either loving it or hating it? For all Star Trek fans like myself, it depends on how you interpret "reboot".
If you look at reboot as a replication of the same thing, i.e., of complete adherence to the original tv series in terms of plot line and character portrayal, then there will be plenty you could find to criticize. For example, you might hate the "new" Spock who exhibits much more 'humanity' and/or much more tension between his vulcan and human sides than Nimoy's original Spock ever did (or his Spock Prime for that matter).
However, if you look at "reboot" like a new 'retrograde' car (e.g., Mustang, Challenger, Camaro, etc.) which has fundamental styling elements easily identifiable/reminiscent of the original muscle car of the 60's while yet adding "new and improved" modernized touches which accentuate the look even more, then you like me will love the "new" Star Trek. You might even love the 'new' Spock, and may think the deeper, more complex portrayal of the character is even better than Nimoy's original (Yes, that is "heresy" to some for me to say, but so be it.) I'm not knocking the original Star Trek in any way. But this is arguably an improvement, not just technologically in terms of the cinematography (which no one can argue), but in terms of the acting as well, provided you get over any expectations of complete adherence to the original Star Trek, which is impossible to pull off just given the new actors trying to play old roles.… Expand
May 18, 2013An action filled movie that answers a lot of fan complaints about the first film. It addresses Kirk's unworthiness at being given the keys to a brand new star ship without ever earning it. Not much of a spoiler, but he gets demoted for doing something stupid, and by the end of the movie, it really feels like he's paid for and respects the chair.
It continues the comic book series technique of borrowing elements from the TV series and movies to give you a remix that feels familiar without being predictable. Some of the winks to the first 3 Trek movies do seem a bit forced though, to the point where I almost expected to see a tank in engineering with a whale working a console.
Well worth the $20 admission.
Somebody put the lens flare generator out of its misery. Please.
Since the reboot happened AFTER Enterprise, shouldn't the Klingons be bumpless? Are they wearing toupee's? Not a spoiler because they were in one of the trailers and only barely figure into it.… Expand
May 18, 2013This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This movie getting 5.0 or less ratings is simply either the rantings of people who have no clue what good science fiction is or trekkies who were going to vote that way no matter what if this movie dared to re-imagine the greatest villain in Star Trek history. To the rest of America I would say that this movie represents the pinnacle of science fiction movies from plot to suspense to action to emotion. How many other science fiction movies will have viewers literally weeping in their seats. Fantastic special effects combined with great sound make this movie even more enjoyable in IMAX 3D. This movie is sure to only add to the legacy of J. J. Abrams and the Star Trek franchise and sets the bar almost insurmountably high for future sci-fi movies. Quite frankly, if Abrams can do this for Star Trek, it is almost unimaginable what he will accomplish with the Star Wars franchise. I think we can finally rest safely knowing that Ewoks and Jar Jar Binks are a thing of the past though we will certainly have more lens flare in our upcoming Star Wars VII.
Star Trek: Into Darkness is a thrilling spectacle that will keep you on the edge of your seats and appeal to viewers of all ages, genders and species!… Expand
May 18, 2013The nerd's nirvana of science fiction series, probably more so than Star Wars, the Star Trek story grows as it actually regresses in its story to the beginning of its five year exploratory mission, as is explained famously in the intro of the two TV series. The first may have taken some getting used to, seeing new actors play much younger versions of the original series, but "Into Darkness" firmly places Chris Pine particularly as James Kirk in the coveted position of a legendary character.
Still rebellious and impulsive, without giving the plot away, we find the Enterprise crew fighting most of the film close to home and in London against a very fresh Khan, or as fresh as you can be for being 300 years old.
I'm not a big trekkie, but my wife adores the series. I was pleasantly surprised by good acting and some very cool special effects, my favorite the planets one space station orbits, much like Jupiter and alien landscapes. This is where visual imagination has no limits and it's done brilliantly, although I do wonder if all planets are so oxygen rich one can just walk off the plank without worrying about the atmosphere or lack of one.
But we assume all that stuff was taken care of and don't sweat the details. Pine is a first rate actor, as are all the cast, and for a summer movie with lots of action, boom booms and a very cool futuristic London, it's a fine choice. Abrams has done a very good job with this movie, and probably will be up for some special effects Oscars at years' end. One thing I must ask: in a world over two hundred years in the future, will they really have old vinyl records and turntables? Not to mention the same kind of music we listen to now.… Expand
May 18, 2013This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Teenage action nonsense, mindless action blockbuster. The movie applauds military might above all else.
Pure anti Star Trek. The most elegant and smart sci fi tv show deserves more than a Transformerslike film. No ethics, no morals, Stafleeters are violents and imperialistist guys.… Expand
May 18, 2013I am not a trek guy! So for those of u that did not grow up in a star trek world it is a great movie to go see. I also liked the last one they made. I have read a ton of bad reviews from star trek fans. If you forget about the past which is what they tried to do in the first film. Then it is a great movie.
I cant wait for the next one!
May 18, 2013Star Trek Into Darkness is a big, loud, summer tent pole of a movie, and it succeeds in being a really fun thrill ride. All of the characters from the first movie return in this sequel to the 2009 film, Star Trek, which features all of the characters of the original 1960’s television series of the same name. If you are a fan of any of the things that I just mentioned, then you should definitely see Star Trek Into Darkness. Now, I do have some critiques of the film. While the first movie in this series was intent to be an amazing spectacle, making occasional nods to the original series, this sequel seems to be more interested in paying fan service to folks who grew up with the original television series over creating a truly unique experience. There were whole sections of the movie where it seemed as though the filmmakers were ham fisting in scene after scene to pay homage to events that have played out on screen before. There seemed to be a really big missed opportunity to take characters that we thought we knew, and twist them into something unexpectedly fresh. I would have been much happier if they had simply tried to craft an original tale. As a longtime fan of the original television series, I genuinely appreciate the performances given by this new generation of actors in roles that were firmly established well before they were even born. I would love to see them continue on in their voyage for many more episodes, but I want to see them do something new. I do not need any more re-treads of old stories.
Star Trek Into Darkness B… Expand
May 18, 2013Not only a great Star Trek movie, but also a great movie overall!
To begin, I should admit that I have been a Star Trek fan for a long time now. I also have a film degree and have studied and made films for many years. I saw Star Trek Into Darkness last night, and it made me laugh, cry, and shout for joy! Yes, the action scenes are exciting, but what really makes this film great is the emotional depth of the characters and their interactions. For those of you who are wary of seeing this film because it may not be exactly like previous episodes or films, I argue that you give it a chance. Yes, the stories are different, but our protagonists are the characters that we have come to know and love over the years. If you go to this film, and support the Trek series, we can be sure that we will have the opportunity to join these beloved characters as they travel where no one has gone before for many more years to come.… Expand
May 18, 2013I’m probably the wrong person to write this review. I’m sure, out there, exists a long-time devoted Trekkie who went to see Star Trek: Into Darkness and found it perfectly in tone with the rest of their beloved franchise. I have never seen an episode of Star Trek; I’m not sure what Deep Space Nine is or why the Klingon language sounds similar to a toad deepthroating a foghorn. My knowledge of its universe is limited to the first Abrams film released in 2009, a 10 minute segment from the original series with some sort of connection to the Epic of Gilgamesh my history teacher bestowed upon my class during my freshman year of high school, general pop culture, and now, the new JJ Abrams film, Into Darkness. Upfront: I am writing this review completely ignorant of 99% of Star Trek mythology up until this point. Truthfully, I think this blindness grants me an advantage to be able to judge the film objectively and without the taint of hundreds of television episodes, numerous motion pictures, and an endless surplus of fan mania. My non-bias conclusion: Into Darkness has a lot of problems.
Read More http://www.recomedia.net/filmtv/star-trek-into-darkness-review-when-good-enough-isnt-good-enough/… Expand
May 18, 2013I rolled my eyes at the plotline and yawned, and there-in counted the number 232 each. After watching the failure of the Revolution Tv show and the indescribable mess that was the TV show LOST; I went into the movie theater with low expectations, and boy I was not disappointed.
My expectations were as listed 10 highest 1 lowest
CGI overkill 10
Unfortunate Cliché'= 10
Maximum Warp Cheese 10
Generic Love Plotlines 10
Money Back Guarantee 1
Future Typecasting for Actors 10… Expand
May 18, 2013This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Good points:
Effects are superb, Pine is excellent as Kirk, CGI is also excellent.
Khan should be ruthless, virtually unbeatable he isn't.
Scotty is a major annoyance esp that accent!
Spock FFS can't believe they actually have him crying that's a major cringe point, this alone managed to detract from what was an entertaining movie.
It's a real pity as I thought this was going to be a hit.… Expand
May 17, 2013Unmotivated characters, in-cohesive plot, and archaic execution.
JJ Abrams: Okay. The first Star Trek was good. Let's make the second one better!
Studio: Meh. People will still watch anything with your name and the brand of Star Trek attached to it. Just make the film as fast you can so that we can make money.
May 17, 2013If you enjoyed Star Trek (2009), you'll enjoy this film. If you watched and enjoyed the original Star Trek II *and* enjoyed Star Trek (2009), you'll really enjoy this film. If you didn't like Star Trek (2009), don't bother going.
Visuals: 10; Music: 9.5; Character Development: 9; Story: 7, Fun Factor: 8; Total (after weights): 8.3 Will have to round down to 8.
Star Trek Into Darkness has positive themes such as enduring friendship, father/son relationships, and coping with loss.
The character arcs for Kirk and Spock (as well as side characters like Scotty and Sulu) are very good for the movie and the series.
The visuals and music were both top-notch.
There are a couple potential plot holes which I won't get into here, but otherwise, I thought the story was entertaining.
Lastly, for fans of Star Trek II, there is some fan love at places which was a lot of fun.… Expand
May 17, 2013I've been a Trek fan for at least 30 years. This film is easily the best Trek and the best movie I've seen in years.
Abrams brings a great respect for the source material and combines it with the perfect vehicle for continuing voyages. I'll admit: I wasn't completely sold on the alternative time line thing at first. Now, I think it was a brilliant move.
I haven't enjoyed a movie this much since I was a child.
And to all the "die hards" with the "0" ratings: all I have to say to you is "Cat's Paw", "Turnabout Intruder" and any other pure dreck from TOS. The new series capture all of the spirit that Roddenberry created and reframed it beautifully. The characters are alive and like the best of old Trek, the new films are about their relationships.… Expand
May 17, 2013It's an obvious aspect of the film-making industry that many sequels just don't match up to the originals. J.J. Abrams and the cast of Star Trek: Into Darkness were able to avoid a slump in their sophomore follow-up, and that is impressive in its own right. However, the acting shines through, with truly emotional scenes between intense action sequences, and the film flows extremely well throughout.
J.J. Abrams choices of scenes and environments has always been a strong suit of his, one which he used to full effect in the first Star Trek in 2009. In "Into Darkness", the environments are used to great effect, from the opening scenes to the final shots in the credits.
The soundtrack is wonderful, making the viewer feel the emotions of the scenes. Of course, the theme is the highlight of them all.
The acting is wonderful. Without knowing that Benedict Cumberbatch was going to be in it, nor with the knowledge of the character he portrayed, I was impacted by his performance. Midway through the film his portrayal made me second guess myself every couple of minutes. The relationship between Spock (Zachary Quinto) and Kirk (Chris Pine) was masterfully done in both dialogue and the performance of said dialogue. Pine and Quinto's on-screen relationship is a wonder to see, creating layers and depth to Spock and Kirk's relationship. In addition, the rest of the cast is well acted again, a testament to how well each actor and actress fits into their role.
It was a great follow-up to the first Star Trek reboot, definitely worthy of continuing the series.… Expand
May 17, 2013When I saw the reviews that were coming in for Star Trek Into Darkness, I rolled my eyes. The first one got good reviews and in my opinion, that movie was a mess. So my expectations were low going into this film; "just another stupid popcorn movie that will sully the name of Star Trek". I was even ready to go get a refund and go watch Iron Man 3 if need be. Boy was I wrong. This outing was thoroughly entertaining, flowed logically (a huge issue with the last film), and even had some good character moments. People also acted like people in this film, and Kirk was less of an idiot this time around and actually grew as a character. Story was pretty solid; some of technical details were off but I can't complain. Reveals were well paced and the action was handled well. There was one moment near the end that had me rolling my eyes and wondering what the hell the writers were thinking (hint: it isn't very original). However, upon reflection it made sense, and the reactions of the characters was believable. Though, one will have to accept that time has passed between this movie and the last, so the non-nonsensical character dynamics in the last film have evolved and been fine tuned into something sane and rational. Also, the main villain has been given a lot more menace and demonstrates why he's a major threat (you'll see what I mean when you watch the film). Overall, 8/10. A lot better than the first.… Expand
May 17, 2013This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Star Trek Into Darkness should be renamed Star Trek In Name Only. What has always distinguished Star Trek from other sci-fi is the thoughtful and nuanced way that philosophical and sociological commentary was woven into the stories. Star Trek is not just a lot of sci-fi nonsense but a meaningful exploration of what it means to be human. In the past, Star Trek has been intelligent and character driven. Now it is all fancy CGI and snappy one-liners. Abram’s Star Trek is an action-for-action’s sake Kirk and Spock buddy flick. The “surprises” Abrams plants aren’t surprises if you’re familiar with the Star Trek universe. His preference for violence and political intrigue makes Abrams’ vision more Star Wars than Star Trek.
The fill-in-the-blanks plot is a repetitive onslaught of video-game like CGI sequences separated by brief breaks used to set up the next CGI spectacle. The first half begins with a scene taken from Raiders of the Lost Ark and quickly moves to The Return of the King’s Mount Doom. Cumberbatch’s attack on Starfleet HQ is a scene stolen from Godfather 3. When Cumberbatch is captured, he and Pine briefly become caricatures of Hannibal Lecter and Agent Starling from Silence of the Lambs. The second half attempts to remake The Wrath of Khan but is backwards and upside down. Instead it is practically a beat-for-beat repeat of the identically plotted Star Trek Nemesis.
The cast was the best thing about the last movie but not this time. The other familiar crew members each get a brief moment in the spotlight but for the most part they fixate on comedic asides. The romance between Uhura and Spock is unnecessary and actually diminishes Uhura’s character. Alice Eve is little more than eye candy. Peter Weller’s Admiral Marcus is a disappointment. Karl Urban was eerily good as McCoy last time but stays in the background this time, a third wheel on the Kirk/Spock bicycle. Pine’s beefy frat-boy Kirk is an exaggeration of Shatner’s Kirk. When he is angry he sounds like a bratty child. Cuberbatch’s performance is the best thing this time and overshadows everyone else.
I left the theater thinking that my free passes were over-priced.… Expand
May 17, 2013Star Trek Into Darkness in one word, fantastic! For sure as a Sci-Fi fan I was always going to love this but I believe its that good, that anybody that goes to see it will enjoy it. Like all good Sci-Fi it actually mirrors real life more than people would like to admit, with hunting down terrorists no matter the cost. Even if you don't want to read into it and take it as "Popcorn" movie it has explosive action, good acting, great story and funny well placed comedy. Most important is the emotion and heart beneath the shiny exterior. A must see.… Expand
May 17, 2013Full disclosure: of all the Stark Trek chapters whether in books, TV episodes and movies I have only seen 2 of the 6 Star Trek movies. Being fairly new to what has been around for nearly 50 years I hope “Star Trek Into The Darkness” as a stand alone movie doesn’t represent all the previous stories. I felt a lot depended upon being a ‘trekkie’ and knowing what came before.
The current film, in spite of the title, has more strobe lights and different colors than any movie I have seen in a long time. Between “Oblivion” and “Iron Man 3” this movie had very poorly executed non-special effects except how San Francisco will look years from now. The fights whether between men or machines were very lame.
The screenplay by Alex Kurtzman, Roberto Orci and Damon Lindelof offered some looks into the human side of all from a possible romance between Spock (Zachary Quinto) and Nyota (Zoe Saldana) if not a bromance between Spock and Kirk (Chris Pine) though I didn’t know who the latter was until later in the film when he is referred to as Captain James T. Kirk and, for whatever reason, I immediately thought of William Shatner.
The standouts were Benedict Cumberbatch as the villain with Simon Pegg as Scotty offering the only laughs along the way. Whether the rest of the cast were satisfactory to Trekkies I didn’t have any problems with John Cho, Alice Eve, Bruce Greenwood, Peter Weller or any of the other actors.
A new director and other screenwriters would bring a lot more to the sequel than those involved with this did. With many more ‘summer’ special effects blockbuster movies on the way I would suggest skipping this one.… Expand
May 17, 2013This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Very seldom do I experience something that have the capability to render me dumbfounded. Absolutely speechless. JJ Abrams was able to accomplish this with Star Trek Into Darkness. After not only rebooting, but rewriting the Star Trek mythos with his 2009 film, dedicated and new fans alike were given a new look at the adventures of James Kirk, Spock, and the rest of the Enterprise crew.
Leading up to the release, subtle clues, that were not missed on me despite attempts from those in Paramount's PR, everything about this movie continually screamed Wrath Of Khan. From the man Kirk was sent after, who turned out to be Khan under another alias, to Dr. Marcus, the movie gave so many nods to the original second film. Abrams ran right along with it. And I'm glad he did.
At this current time, I've been out of the movie for about 30 minutes. And my heart has finally calmed down. From the start of the movie, it was a non-stop ride that was not only exciting, but a bit nostalgic throughout. Even right down to what was reversed with Kirk and Spock, and the shriek of the first officer with the infamous words: KHAN!!!
In short, I cannot wait until it is released on video. I will be watching the first and this one repeatedly. Abrams took one of the best series of our time, a benchmark in modern sci-fi, the catalyst of everything we love about the genre, and completely turned it on its head. And, if I could ever have the opportunity to meet him face to face, I would thank him for not only rebooting the series, but breathing new life in it altogether.
If he were here today, and could see what Abrams has done to an already great series, I believe Gene Roddenberry would be in as much awe as I am. My only question, though, how will Abrams top this?… Expand
May 17, 2013This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Into Darkness and the 2009 film which preceded it represent much more than simply the abandonment of almost 50 years of meticulously-maintained canon. Instead, something far less tangible and far more devastating has been lost.
What is it about this show that compels people (like me!) to obsess over it? And why is it so difficult to explain to others why it means so much to us? Or why we think that there is something unique and special in Star Trek.
It’s not easy to articulate an answer for that question. I’ve seen many interviews where even the actors who play the characters in the shows have trouble explaining it in a way which really outlines the totality of the premise.
I think the biggest problem is that we currently lack the shorthand language needed to express certain ideas represented by Star Trek at its best to other people in a way which is clear and simple to understand.
Star Trek showed us the world through a very wide angle lens, so we saw much more. I’m not speaking of the physicality of the place, but of the ideas. Star Trek brought us out of the pettiness of our own small daily lives to consider ideas different than those we might normally encounter. After watching at length, one might begin to realize that it’s actually a way of thinking; a different approach to the world.
There is a certain amount of optimism about our ability to solve our own problems together as a species. Because many of our contemporary problems have been solved, there are new problems to face. While they live in a utopia from our present day vantage point, I think the crew of the Enterprise would argue that they face problems all the time theirs is not a perfect world. They do have problems, but theirs are different.
Although Star Trek has fallen short in many ways over the years in presenting this idea. It had seemed that the core thought had managed to survive for a while. It was very clear from very early on what the basic idea was. A good summation about the mission of the show was given in a very early episode by a character named Keeler:
“One day soon, man is going to be able to harness incredible energy maybe even the atom. Energy that could ultimately hurl men to other worlds in some sort of spaceship. And the men that reach out into space will find ways to feed the hungry millions of the world, and to cure their diseases. They’ll be able to find a way to give each man hope and a common future. And those are the days worth living for.”
While very interesting, taken on its own, Keeler’s charter probably didn’t resonate as easily with people as “…to seek out new life and new civilizations. To boldly go where no one has gone before.”
In the 1960s, Keeler’s was a message that you just did not see on television. You had your all-American families, your spy shows, and your mysteries. Science fiction itself was confined to the domain of strange aliens who always seemed hellbent on killing the Earthlings.
Even today, we still haven’t appeared to move much beyond this place in our media. When people think of science fiction, it is seen as either being an action adventure in space or some esoteric about a madman who wants to change the nature of being human or otherwise offend our present day sensibilities.
J.J. Abrams’ understanding of Star Trek appears to fall within these bounds. Gone are the stories about unmasking self-proclaimed gods, or the stories wherein the abandonment of the future’s ideals is seen as a wrong rather than a somehow heroic and necessary evil but not totally evil because our hero is infallible.
His vision of Star Trek is more about some nebulous battle and seemingly unending war between good and evil a theme which seems to resonate well in our culture. It’s a very simplistic message: Our guy (Kirk) is good, the other guy (this time, Khan) is bad.
But Star Trek is about bigger things than this round-robin. Said Gene Roddenberry: “Star Trek was an attempt to say that humanity will reach maturity and wisdom on the day that it begins not just to tolerate, but take a special delight in differences in ideas and differences in life forms. If we cannot learn to actually enjoy those small differences, to take a positive delight in those small differences between our own kind, here on this planet, then we do not deserve to go out into space and meet the diversity that is almost certainly out there.”
We cannot go out into the universe and try to impose our will upon it with the gut certainty of being absolutely right. This will only lead to more conflict and probably our destruction by some far more powerful species.
Star Trek was an appeal to us to look at things as they could be and to ask… why not?… Expand
Abrams and his screenwriters (Robert Orci, Alex Kurtzman and Damon Lindelof) are so obsessed with acknowledging and then futzing around with what we already know about Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Uhura, Scotty and company that the movie doesn’t breathe.
You wind up feeling doubly bullied -- first by the brutal enormity of the set pieces, and then by the emotional arm-twisting of the downtimes. [20 May 2013, p.122]