I grew up with a Star Trek fan for a dad. He wasn't exactly a Trekkie. He didn't dress up or speak Klingon. He never went to any conventions. He just happened to believe Star Trek was the greatest thing to ever happen to television. He's still convinced of that. So I spent countless hours on the living room couch with him, watching them all: the originals, Next Generation, Deep Space Nine, Voyager, all the subsequent movies, etc. You'll understand that I have a special fondness for the show, but that I don't take it too seriously. To me, it's all about people wearing silly uniforms in space, silly humor, phasers and crazy looking alien species. I enjoyed the hell out of the initial reboot of the franchise and unlike for most gritty reboots, it seemed to me like a good idea to go on. I went to see STAR TREK: INTO DARKNESS into whopping, revolutionary 2D last Saturday and had a wicked good time.
You don't need to have seen the 2009 movies to understand STAR TREK: INTO DARKNESS, but it's preferable if you're familiar with the characters. It picks up right after the events of the first movie as the U.S.S Enterprise and its crew are on an observation mission on an endangered planet and not following protocol in order to save its primitive species (business as usual). In the midst of the sanctions against James Tiberius Kirk (Chris Pine) and his crew, Starfleet was attacked by a mysterious man named John Harrison (Benedict Cumberbatch). Kirk's mentor Admiral Pike (Bruce Greenwood) is murdered in the process, so Kirk offers himself for a very dangerous mission: go into Klingon space and murder John Harrison. He quickly discovers that Harrison is in reality a man from another era named Khan (yeah, THAT Khan). Shenanigans ensues (that's barely sarcasm here).
I feel I need to address Devin Faraci's scathing review of the movie, because it bummed me out and made me feel stupid for even liking it. I usually like to read Devin, but I can't for the love of me, understand what was he expecting out of this film. I don't know why would anybody expect something different than a summer popcorn movie out of it. There is no Cronenbergian complexity to it. There is no contemplative tension like in Sergio Leone's movies. I was sitting, laughing and slapping my knee for most of the film, thinking: "Am I really enjoying it this much?" Of course I did. What STAR TREK: INTO DARKNESS is, is basically a series of well-crafted, blood-pumping action scenes, witty humor that understands the flavor of the series and special effects. A lot of special effects. But really, the action scenes are the glue that keeps things together here.
FOUR STARS
You don't need to have seen the 2009 movies to understand STAR TREK: INTO DARKNESS, but it's preferable if you're familiar with the characters. It picks up right after the events of the first movie as the U.S.S Enterprise and its crew are on an observation mission on an endangered planet and not following protocol in order to save its primitive species (business as usual). In the midst of the sanctions against James Tiberius Kirk (Chris Pine) and his crew, Starfleet was attacked by a mysterious man named John Harrison (Benedict Cumberbatch). Kirk's mentor Admiral Pike (Bruce Greenwood) is murdered in the process, so Kirk offers himself for a very dangerous mission: go into Klingon space and murder John Harrison. He quickly discovers that Harrison is in reality a man from another era named Khan (yeah, THAT Khan). Shenanigans ensues (that's barely sarcasm here).
I feel I need to address Devin Faraci's scathing review of the movie, because it bummed me out and made me feel stupid for even liking it. I usually like to read Devin, but I can't for the love of me, understand what was he expecting out of this film. I don't know why would anybody expect something different than a summer popcorn movie out of it. There is no Cronenbergian complexity to it. There is no contemplative tension like in Sergio Leone's movies. I was sitting, laughing and slapping my knee for most of the film, thinking: "Am I really enjoying it this much?" Of course I did. What STAR TREK: INTO DARKNESS is, is basically a series of well-crafted, blood-pumping action scenes, witty humor that understands the flavor of the series and special effects. A lot of special effects. But really, the action scenes are the glue that keeps things together here.
It also stars my favorite working female actress, next to Jennifer Lawrence.
Of course, it's not perfect. The script is a little weak. I say that, it's on a line-by-line basis. I have no problem whatsoever with the story STAR TREK: INTO DARKNESS is telling, but the more emotional moments are sappy at best and director J.J Abrams seems self-conscious about it, as most of them are rushed through to leave the necessary breathing room to the long and oh-so-awesome action scenes. I'm usually all about tension over action, but not in this case. Abrams does wide scope action amazingly well. The other bad thing about this movie is Emo Spock. Abrams has to stop with Emo Spock. We love him for having no emotion whatsoever, not because he's wrestling with them. I can understand the occasional outburst because of his dual nature (half-human), but you gotta stop this, even if it means letting Zachary Quinto walk. He is physically perfect for the part, but he doesn't have the Vulcan vibe. At all.
Other than for Quinto, the acting is in general solid despite the weak script. Chris Pine "gets" Jim Kirk. He doesn't have the effortless swagger of William Shatner, his performance is very technical, but who can blame him? Shatner was such a natural, he seemed to be playing himself, back then. Happy to see Zoe Saldana get work too. She's a competent Uhura and God knows she's the only one out there that's not afraid to show she has aged on screen. Much power to her for wanting to be a woman and not a botoxed lizard. Karl Urban is surprisingly accurate as Dr. McCoy and there is Simon Pegg. A man who mastered the art of being funny without really doing anything. In STAR TREK: INTO DARKNESS, he even runs funny. Can't pass Benedict Cumberbatch under silence either. "Sherlock" doesn't really have anything to do with the original Khan, but I prefer that he went his own way rather than turn into a weak parody of the character.
I loved STAR TREK: INTO DARKNESS. It didn't insult my intelligence because it didn't pretend to be something it wasn't. It didn't try to look cool or edgy. It's about a break-neck spaceship captain and his kind-hearted crew. If you're walking into this movie with the expectation of seeing anything else but people beating the crap out of each other in space for more than two hours, you might feel ripped off. Like I said, it's not intellectual filmmaking. J.J Abrams is the television-generation answer to Steven Spielberg. He grew up with STAR WARS and INDIANA JONES like us and now he's making movies like that. I can't think of anybody better to have taken the reins of the Star Trek franchise. Unlike other movie franchises, this one felt like it had untapped potential due to financial and technical limitations. This is not the case anymore. Welcome to Gene Rodenberry's wet dream.
FOUR STARS
