Star Trek Into Darkness Reviews
The crew is back, with splendid characters and natural chemistry. Kirk is immature as always -- and some romance is continuously developing between Nyota and Spock. It's not the most character-driven film -- they seriously lack more development and inside. Antagonist does on the other hand deliver relatable motivations even if a more "want-to" to win against him would have made it an even greater film. Cumberbatch brought a big win! It's a more action-anger driven version of what we know Star Trek used to be -- with a mix of mystery, corruption & some "meh:s". Visuals & cinematography is a pure wonder yes, but it simply isn't that much of a "wow" -- with its less passionate story with fragments of convenient/illogical events & plot holes. The latest installment "Beyond" success over this when it comes to character depth -- this is however a better directed and got more focus on story. It's a popcorn-flick for the sci-fi/action fan -- that's for sure. But a "meh" ride for others.
Personal rating: 80/100
Critical rating: 74/100
It doesn't have time travel, but it does have ridiculously awesome action sequences and a lot of jaw dropping visuals.
This time around, Captain Kirk, Spock, and the crew must face the killing machine, Khan, played by the always-macabre, Benedict Cumberbatch.
What's at stake here may not be as catastrophic as the 2009 film either, but you wouldn't know otherwise. It provides an interesting and detailed story without a complicated or convoluted narrative--sucking us right in.
The jokes are kept appropriate to the situations. They're never forced or too comic-booky. The film is fun without ever resorting to silliness, which is common among this reboot franchise. It tends to avoid the Avengers route. The quips are delivered with conviction and the banter usually comes from a place of stress, providing just the right amount of levity.
2009's Star Trek mostly blind-sided us. Fanboys were shocked at how awesome it was, and non-fans were surprised at how much they loved it. This one didn't have as much to prove, but it delivered regardless, giving us 132 minutes of gripping story, compelling characters, and near-perfect pacing. I'd say it did just fine.
Twizard Rating: 99
Thankfully Kirk has charisma that could outshine a third-world dictator, and kept me interested throughout. Other characters felt less fleshed out, often appearing for brief vaudevillian flashes amidst already flashy destruction/peril scenes. I love the international flavour, but why are the aliens, aside from "Pointy" , given only enough screen time to make us raise an eyebrow? You see a few in shot that are more like a freak show on a speeding conveyor belt than characters you come to know and love. Star Trek's strengths came from the humanity of its treatment of alien culture, no matter how many pounds of make up the actors worked under.
But when it came to gratuitous underwear scenes and a female-male ratio that implies humanity may be experiencing some fertility problems, Star Trek feels like a futuristic 60s, complete with casual misogyny and whitewashing of coloured characters. Only two women are of consequence, both defined by other male characters - Urhura as a girlfriend, and Blondy Bra Girl as a daughter of one of the 'villains' as well as this movie's only iconic image.
Star Trek into Darkness indeed. One of the greatest merits of the show was showing how great the future could be, rather than endless science fiction cautionary tales about the power of technology. But the future is a grim mix of sexist uniforms, speciesism, and explosions.
That said, they were pretty explosions. And Khan was a barrel of tribbles. And the opening was still one of the best all year. And the action sequences were pretty fun, if also kind of like having your head stuck in a sliding door.
Next time, though, let's trek somewhere nice...I hear the REST of Kronos is lovely this time of year...