Posted on 05/30/2013 9:12:47 PM PDT by garjog
My Review of Star Trek Into Darkness -- short version: wait to rent it.
Long version: Disappointingly annoying.
What follows could be considered a spoiler, but there is nothing original in this film, so there is nothing that can be spoiled. Sorry.
We went to see Star Trek into Darkness on Saturday. Very crowded and had to sit close. I was an original fan, captivated by the television series in the late 1960s, with Star Trek scrap books and posters, models of space ships and everything.
There are serious problems with the Into Darkness script that are not merely anathema to Trekkies. First we discover that the villain is a famous one from the original series. He has a British rather than Latin accent and doesn't look at all like the other character. So the casting was wrong. But, we are baffled how this villain will re-appear in the future of the life of the crew who begins the Five Year Mission at the end of the film. Won't they all know who he is?
Also, a tribble appears. But, we don't see tribbles until the crew is well into their mission in the future. It is a life form that they discover in their voyage, which this crew hasn't begun.
THEN Spock has a romantic relationship with Uhura. Wrong. Officers in the military, or any professional, are not going to be kissing each other on duty. And we all know that Vulcans have a mating ritual that occurs every seven years. Vulcans don't date. This is out of character for Spock. (You know that a focus group of writers said that they had to add romance).
In the same way this dog's breakfast of a script adds a new female character, an admiral's daughter, as a "second science officer", apparently to add romance to planned sequels and perhaps for gender equity. So, in addition to Kirk, Spock and Bones, we now have a hot blond babe. This is like adding a fourth female Musketeer to please feminist reviewers .
Then Kirk is killed by radiation and resurrected exactly like Spock in one of the first Star Trek films -- that is taking allusion to other films a bit too far. It is more like cutting and pasting.
MORE.
Star Trek shows often made commentary on social or international controversies. Into Darkness apparently is a tip to the Truthers because the Admiral uses deception to purposefully start a war. Every story needs conflict, but to moralize that the war on terror was started by Bush is just plain stupid (and insulting on memorial day).
ALSO, Into Darkness begins with a suicide bombing in which we are led to sympathize with the suicide bomber. He HAD to do it, see? (No, committing suicide and killing 40 innocent people to get what you want is immoral.)
And Chris Pine doesn't look or act like a military trained captain. He looks like an actor rather than a commanding leader.
Finally the show is two hours long, too loud and has long close cuts of faces better suited for television. I could tell that my wife Teresa wanted to walk out about an hour into the show.
Positives: wonderful special effects and endearing imagery that reminds us of what we love about the Star Trek universe.
Let's hope that each and everyone of the writers of this twisted, just-plain-wrong insult of a film are replaced before the next sequel.
I thought it was ok for what it was: mindless popcorn fare. I thought Cumberbatch was a poor choice for Khan, but as Nameless Villian #3, he could have been very good. Many of the things you brought up in the review could be explained away as being part of the alternate reality of Abram’s Star Trek series. Spock’s relationship with Uhura, the fact that it is Adm. Marcus’s team that finds Khan instead of Kirk (there was the line about Starfleet had been seeking more power military assets to counter the Klingon threat). The Hot Blond babe character was Carol Marcus, who would later be the mother of Kirk’s son, David. They would develop the Genesis torpedo on Ceti Alpha 5, where they would meet Khan.
That said, the radiation death scene was copy/paste of the same scene in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. My eyes rolled so far I thought they were going to fall out of my head.
The scene at the beginning where the Enterprise was under water was probably the stupidest thing I have seen in a Star Trek movie since the whales on a Klingon bird of prey.
They were hiding the ship from the native population. Fine. Except for the Earth shattering sonic boom created during entry. Enter else where on the planet and fly to the temple location? A Constitution class starship (which I’m assuming this one still is) was never designed for atmospheric flight. It would have shaken itself apart with the first 1000 miles. They would have had to divert every bit of power from all over the ship the inertial dampers to make it halfway safe. /nerd
“A Constitution class starship (which I’m assuming this one still is) was never designed for atmospheric flight”
Ahh, but you see. This is an ALTERNATIVE universe in which the constitution class starship was designed for atmospheric flight.
It explains everything.
In this universe it is actually great sci fi writing that Kirk dies and is raised to life exactly like Spock in the other film then takes the captain’s chair fifteen minutes later like nothing happened.
AND babes in underwear actually look better than in our universe.
I was not real happy with the first one with this bunch that paradoxed the entire history of Star Trek into oblivion with this “alternate reality” crap.
I was kind of hoping they would fix the timeline in this sequel, and get back to doing what they promised to begin with... visiting the early years.
You know the writers don’t have anything left when they start playing with the time line.
These writers are probably responding with “Rodenbury who?”
In the last movie, they established that there was a split in the timeline when Kirk’s dad was killed. They are effectively in a parallel universe. That was a clever idea, because they can incorporate any elements of the original series, yet change anything without having to worry about fans saying “that’s wrong”.
I was a little slow figuring out it was Khan, though some other things that were about to happen were quite obvious.
I picked it up on Hulu starting at the 3rd season.
I’d watch 3 or 4 a night.
It was ridiculous and outlandish, but fun along the way.
That car is going to need some Rust-Oleum
Ummm...because Ricardo Montalban is dead? ;)
I meant he should still look Asian, of course. They missed a good opportunity to pick up more international box office, they could have hired a big Bollywood actor to play the part of Khan, since he was supposed to be Indian.
And we all know that Vulcans have a mating ritual that occurs every seven years. Vulcans don't date.
I understand your point, I was just being silly.
Ever thought that the fault might have been in the 60/80s versions? As entertaining as Ricardo Montalban's accent is, it's really not very likely for the character.
Nor does it jibe.
Regards,
Personally I am glad their is no fixed future and that there is always a change possible.
Adhering to canon scripts 300 miles from now would be like everyone being forced to drive Stanley Steamers and zeppelins.
I can place the original series aside and welcome this alternative version and who knows in a couple of decades they will make yet another version, who really wants to relive the past over and over?
“I liked it well enough for what it was. However, it didn’t stick close to the canon, imo.”
Actually, the problem is it stuck too close to canon in that it was - as the reviewer alluded to - a cut and paste job from Wrath of Khan, Search for Spock, and the TV episode Trouble with Tribbles.
The first of the Abram’s movies established a new timeline of events that set the story in, essentially, an alternate universe, wherein Kirk saves the ship and Spock yells “Khaaaaan!” That was the effect of the original Spock having come back in time and screwing everything up.
I was actually quite bored by this movie because it was such a rehash of the earlier movies. The special effects were great, but special effects can’t save a script that was a cut and paste job from movies that were written 30 years ago. This wasn’t a sequel so much as it was a remake.
The problem is, Nicholas Meyer’s original Wrath of Khan was so good, this one pales by comparison.
He impressed me as well.
Yep, they should’ve gotten him to play Khan.
Just how much of a ST TOS fan are you?
Khan was suspected to be Sikh, from the northern region of India. As a person from a former British colony it makes a bit of sense for him to have a British accent, and none at all for him to have a "Latin" accent.
Note that I'm not defending this 'reboot' of ST, as I think JJ has blown it big time by changing the characters which is what I enjoyed most about ST TOS.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.