Star Trek Into Darkness - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

Star Trek Into Darkness Reviews

Page 2 of 758
January 12, 2017
I love this film the action is great and the story was great. I just thought the songs could have been more prominent. I thought this was a musical
January 9, 2017
The 2010's reboot of Star Trek gets better and better with the second instalment: "Star Trek Into Darkness". Although I thoroughly enjoyed the first movie, this sequel was much more enjoyable for me, and as someone who had very little knowledge of Star Trek before these movies, "Star Trek Into Darkness" has got me hooked on the series. The acting is probably the one thing that stands out the most, and I have to mention the absolute best part about this movie here: Benedict Cumberbatch (John Harrison/Khan). He killed every single one of his scenes, and Star Trek went from having one of the worst villains in the first movie, to one of the best villains in the second. Every line he delivered, every action he made, was done so well, with an art of perfection that made the movie more thrilling than it would've been without him. The plot I found was also an improvement from the first movie, it had a little more depth, and while it got a little all over the place at some rare points, it still stuck with a solid premise that kept me engaged throughout. The main thing that knocked this movie off the high horse that I am putting it on, is the ending. It was extremely rushed, and you go from thinking there's about 20-25 minutes of movie left, to suddenly just the quick wrap up and ending in about 5 minutes. I felt if they took the time to just fine tune that ending a little bit, the movie would've left you with a much better impression. Nonetheless, "Star Trek Into Darkness" was an extremely solid second instalment to the Star Trek 2010's reboot, and is one hundred percent definitely worth the watch.
January 7, 2017
Star Trek into darkness is a really good movie, I definitely like this a lot, even though that I wish Khan wasn't the enemy in this movie it's still a really good movie
January 7, 2017
My full opinion: 3/4.
January 3, 2017
Not quite as good as the previous one but very entertaining.
January 3, 2017
The cast is amazing, the story is intricate, the visual effects are astonishing, and the action is exhilarating.
½ January 2, 2017
Was good, but not great. 3D was a waste of time, it had a lot of corny jokes, and some plot holes. Very cool effects though. The first scene before the credits was jaw dropping. Worth a watch and probably a Blu-ray purchase, but not as good as the first one.
December 30, 2016
Adequately entertaining. But no matter how bombastic the action, and despite a brilliant villain performance from Cumberbatch as an adversary formidable in both brain and brawn, it is hard to shake off the generic nature of the whole affair - plotting skimpy enough to not qualify as story, a villain's plan so intricate and dependent on coincidence as to draw attention to the screenwriters' labored scheming, and generally coloring entirely within the outlines laid down by other recent action franchise reboots. A bit of a stumble after the previous movie.
December 30, 2016
JJ Abrams = Hack. He couldn't come up with an original idea if his life dependent on it. This movie is a turd. Just has he has destroyed Star Wars he put Star Trek in the toilet along with it.
December 30, 2016
Not a bad movie, just wish they didn't do a retread on Wrath of Khan.
December 25, 2016
While not as satisfying as the firat film in this reboot series, this is still highly enjoyable. Loved the fact that Scotty, one of my favorite Star Trek characters got such an action laden part.
December 24, 2016
In my opinion, best Star Trek yet. It's super dark, creepy, and Cumberbatch perfectly portrays the Khan that we were all scared of as kids. Acting is amazing, solid Trek movie.
Super Reviewer
½ December 23, 2016
A solid alternate story that ought to leave most trekkies and aficionados with major goosebumps thanks to its many awesome and well-inspired references - which compensate for how formulaic and intensely action-oriented it aims to be above everything else.
December 22, 2016
This one is just as great as the first one.
December 21, 2016
GRRRRR!!!! What was this?!!! This wasn't good. While as fun a ride as 2009's Star Trek was, this lacked any real imagination or originality. They had a chance to tell a real story here, but inside the took a path that ultimately made this a real disappointment. There are parts in this movie, that really pissed me off. I like Cumberbash, but he wasn't Khan- nor did he need to be. He could have simply been another of Khan's people from the Botany Bay. But if they were insistent about doing Khan, they really should have gone with Benecio Del Toro, and told a WAY more cerebral story, and pit Kirk's experience against Khan's intellect. Instead we got Cumber-Khan, a warmonger Robocop, and the most asinine plot I've ever scene. Please, Mr. Abrams, Mr. Orci, Mr. Kurtzman, & Mr. Lindelof don't do this shit again.
December 19, 2016
A movie that could have been good and original, but in the final act steals an iconic ending from Star Trek II in a way that really doesn't work well.
½ December 17, 2016
While I don't care for Star Trek in general, I do enjoy the cast of this new incarnation (mostly Pegg and Saldana) ... and there was plenty enough excitement for them to shine a bit here.
½ December 15, 2016
I think there are a lot of angry Trekkies out there who disapprove of the amount of action that Star Trek: Into Darkness has, while believing it's a dumbed-down version of Star Trek II: The Wrath Of Khan. The truth is I myself have yet to see The Wrath Of Khan, but as far as Into Darkness goes, I thought it was an amazing movie in its own right, as it blends old and new ideas to have a bit of everything for everybody (whether they know their Star Trek or not) to like, just like the predecessor. And in many ways, I consider Star Trek: Into Darkness an even better movie than its predecessor.

The movie starts off with action, which may not seem related to the actual plot. On the contrary, it was quite important to begin that way, because that's how it sets the characters feelings and actions for the real plot. In comes Benedict Cumberbatch, who I believe was the right choice for the reimagined antagonist, Khan. He and his character are what made the plot far more memorable than Eric Bana's Nero (though to be honest, starting off with a new antagonist like Nero was a good thing, rather than bringing up an existing foe so early in the new series).

Cumberbatch delivers in manipulative fashion, similarly to Tom Hiddleston's Loki. His character also has a strong emotional commitment to back up his motives, and in that aspect, Cumberbatch's effort pays off. And I can't believe I'm saying this, but Chris Pine deserves an award for his performance this time around. Unlike the past movie, his role as Kirk was MUCH more likeable and respectable here, as his character is more fleshed out with depth, adding to his more heartfelt performance. Zachary Quinto's Spock also has a lot more depth this time around, while also being just as goofy with his "logic" as before, only even funnier. In fact, the humor in this movie has doubled since Star Trek '09, with Karl Urban's Bones as worrywart as ever, and Simon Pegg's Scotty getting more screen time, therefore exponentially increasing the amazing goofiness one would expect from Pegg. Sure, there's a notable amount of arguing involved, but at least the drama is believable. It puts the crew's trust to the test, and it also brings them closer together like a family. My god, that sounded incredibly cheesy, but you know what I mean, right?

The visual effects are as phenomenal as they were since 2009, only this time, we get bigger panoramic views of futuristic skyscrapers and foreign lands that truly look like they're out of this world. A few subtle changes here and there as well, notably the Enterprise ship going into warp speed, now with a new starting sound and a shiny disappearance, similar to Serenity. Even the camera work resembles that of Joss Whedon, which possibly could've inspired it. The action sequences are tightly edited and are exciting to watch, thanks to J.J. Abrams' assured direction. Again, he does cut corners here and there as the director usually does, but the increased depth of characters here as opposed to Star Trek '09 makes up for the speed. A lot of people seem to complain about the director's fetish for lens flares, but I actually thought he toned it down in this entry, therefore not being nearly as distracting as in his first attempt at Trekking.

And last but not least, the musical score is just as epic and beautiful as it was previously, but now included are some beautiful piano ballads that are effectively used in certain areas of the movie, adding to the emotions undergone throughout those moments.

With all that said and done, any problems I may have had with the movie feel left behind hundreds of thousands of kilometers as Star Trek: Into Darkness has officially become my new favorite J.J. Abrams movie. Again, I'm positive that this movie doesn't intend to be better than The Wrath Of Khan, but merely a different take on it and featured in an alternate timeline, while also paying homage to the original timeline. Those who're angry about it must have overlooked the characters that drive this movie. But I can't argue any longer if they did take the performances into consideration. Either you'll love it like I did, or you'll refuse to accept the new events that don't necessarily replace the old ones.
½ December 9, 2016
The brilliance of the first reboot film was how it walked the line between the new and the old, respecting what came before by not entirely jettisoning it, using to shape the new and guide the audience to it, but not being afraid to chart its own course. The sequel doesn't judge the balance so well, at times being so in awe of the past that it suffocates the present. The more interesting new ideas aren't allowed room to breath in favour of recreating past glories, which vary in how well earned they are.
Still, a lot of what worked about the previous voyage remains; the faster pace and fun new crew, it is not clear whether it is more apparent here that some of them can't hold a candle to their predecessors or that they are becoming their own characters, stepping out from the original crew's shadows. Some of them are given limited time to shine, but this is made up for by new memorable heroes and villains. The limitations of the new vibe do start to show through, however, by being a more generic, fast-moving action film with less emphasis on social commentary it is more forgettable that the best of Trek. The worst thing may be the lens flare, distracting in the last movie, here it outright robs some dramatic moments of their weight. It's by no means a bad film, just not as flawless as the film it follows and perhaps the cracks are starting to show in the new premise of repeating the series in a more blockbuster style.
½ December 5, 2016
One of the best films of the year!
Page 2 of 758