TAKE 1: One Man’s Opinion
…because
film is largely subjective
Star Trek into Darkness (IMAX
3D)
Release Date: 16 May
2013 Runtime: 132 Minutes
Review Date: 19 May 2013 Rating: 5 (of 6)
Whoa!
While the first installment was a good origin story, I would
quantify this as separate but equal. There
were a couple of twists and turns, some that became apparent towards their conclusion,
others evident from the get-go but still a fun ride nonetheless. They also did a pretty cool thing with the
Enterprise that certainly hasn't been done in any previous film and not in any
of the series to my knowledge/recollection either.
Other than that, I don't want to say too much more as you'd
appreciate discovering the surprises and being Uwed and Ahed on your
own. I, myself, purposely did not read
any reviews or even watch the trailer.
All I saw was the movie poster plastered all around town--couldn't avoid
it--which alluded to possibilities of what may be going on but nothing like I
imagined.
I think Benedict Cumberbatch, who played the villain John
Harrison, gave an excellent performance.
Really, anything else I'd want to say for or against would
be a spoiler so I'm doing my best to hold my tongue.
However, I will address the ongoing debate wherein really
hardcore, staunch Trekkies dismiss
J.J. Abram's rebooted series as blasphemous sacrilege. Their argument, as I understand it, is
essentially that the original series and movies were more character driven and
focused on social, moral, ethical and philosophical issues whereas Abram's is
an action-packed, popcorn flick with no real depth.
It is true, in this one there isn't any real character
development, aside from Kirk and Spock (and maybe the smallest pinch of Uhura)
of which there is a substantial amount--in both of these films, they are the
lead characters. Though, this is at the
expense of the supporting cast in this outing, Chekov and even Sulu being
little more than extras on the set with hardly any lines when they are rarely
seen. If they were cut, there'd be no noticeable
change in the film. This is almost
likewise for Dr. McCoy, too. And Scotty,
while he shared little screen time as well, his role was pivotal. But in fairness, there are both episodes and
films of the past alike that focused on certain members of the crew more so
than others, depending on the plot and storyline itself. So you can't come down on this film too hard
solely due to that.
The other gripe was addressed more in this film (almost completely
absent in the previous), wherein several of the characters discuss, react and
deal with social, moral, ethical and philosophical issues. While certainly not on the level of any of
Abram's predecessors (or should we say the predecessors of writing team Roberto
Orci, Alex Kurtzman and Damon Lindelof), fans should be happy that they at
least made a small effort to take a baby step in that direction.
But it is a fair assessment to say that this is still very
much the action oriented, popcorn flick, making it more akin to Star Wars as Abrams had always set out
to do (which will prove invaluable practice now that he'll be helming that
franchise as well). That being said, I
don't think that "action, popcorn" flick always needs to be
synonymous with a film lacking all else.
I think this one was well executed and entertaining, even heartfelt at
times.
(And, with a SMALL popcorn being $6 and upwards, the best
action is to skip the junk food that's pricier than some admission tickets,
anyway!...)
