Review: "Star Trek Into Darkness"

J.J. Abrams' 2009 reboot of Star Trek was a shot of adrenaline into the arm of an ailing franchise. But, let's not kid ourselves, it's far from a perfect picture. The script gets the character moments right, but fails to make much logical sense. (Please explain to me how the chain of command works in Starfleet, when a cadet on academic suspension can be promoted to Captain in, like, a day and a half? And, why does Kirk fire all the Enterprise's weapons on Nero after offering him assistance? I could go on...) Luckily, Abrams has a great visual sense, a terrific eye for casting, and carries out his storytelling with a sense of urgency -- all of which made the film highly enjoyable. For Abrams' second outing as "Captain" of the franchise, Star Trek Into Darkness, the same strengths and weaknesses are amplified in ways that will thrill and amaze you in the case of the former, and perhaps, make you throw your 3D glasses at the screen in a fit of nerd-rage over the latter.



The film begins with a humanitarian mission to save a primitive race from annihilation, but in order to save a member of his crew from certain death, Kirk (Chris Pine) must break the rules, which puts him at odds with Spock (Zachary Quinto) and gets him into some hot water with his superiors -- the kind of trouble that even Admiral Pike (Bruce Greenwood) can't entirely spare him of. Of course, it doesn't last long though -- nothing in this furiously-paced adventure does -- because John Harrison (Benedict Cumberbatch), a renegade agent who is responsible for two devastating attacks aimed at crippling Starfleet, has retreated to a part of the universe where the only one brash enough to follow is Kirk.

Of course, Kirk and Spock are accompanied by the usual cast of characters, including "Bones" (Karl Urban) the ship's prickly doctor; helmsman Sulu (John Cho), who clearly has the potential for advancement; the heavily-accented Russian wiz-kid, Chekov (Anton Yelchin); engineer-extraordinaire "Scotty" (Simon Pegg) and his alien sidekick, Keenser; the ship's expert linguist and Spock love interest, Uhura (Zoe Saldana); as well as Carol Marcus (Alice Eve), a science officer assigned to the Enterprise for the mission. While each crew member gets their moment in the film, Into Darkness is possibly more Kirk-and-Spock-centric than the 2009 movie, leaving little room to flesh out any of the supporting players.

I would be remiss not to praise the performances in the film, especially Chris Pine. He has really made the character of Kirk his own in a way that makes it nearly impossible to compare him to William Shatner. Pine impressively nails every single moment given to him in the film: the small, the big, the comedic, and the thunderingly dramatic. On the other hand, Zachary Quinto has to walk a tightrope with his performance because the character of Spock is defined more by his mannerisms than Kirk. It seems that when Abrams re-imagined the character, he wanted a constant battle between the human and Vulcan halves, and that gives Quinto the room to make subtle changes that fit such a beloved character, while also serving the need to be more emotional than Leonard Nimoy's Spock ever was. And then there's Benedict Cumberbatch in a performance that seems both steely cool and bubbling over with ferocity at the same time. Cumberbatch has one of those "Mona Lisa" type of faces that always seem to be hiding something. As Kirk reluctantly partners with him to take down a larger threat, we can't help but think, "Was this his plan all along?" 

For fans who thought Abrams' style was too "busy special effects spectacle," this film does nothing to course-correct the series back to the science-fiction roots of Gene Roddenberry's original vision. That's not criticism, just fact. If you didn't like the 2009 Trek film because you want compelling, hopeful, and intelligent stories about peaceful resolutions to intergalactic problems, you won't like this one either. The action is heavy, the pacing relentless. There are no less than seven big sequences -- a few of which could easily be the highlight of a different film. I felt it was a bit too much and needed to slow down a tic, but that roller coaster feel will satisfy the fans looking for blockbuster entertainment. In that regard, this film totally delivers.

Unfortunately, instead of striving for something wholly original, the final act cannibalizes some of the series' most iconic moments -- hoping for either (1) the good nature of audiences to mistake theft for homage, or (2) ignorant bliss. I don't consider myself a Trekker or a Trekkie or whatever they're called these days (like Abrams, I'm much more a Star Wars guy), but every time they took something I'd already seen in a Trek film and lazily twisted it into something "new," I became very agitated. Depending on when you grew up and which Trek you consider the best, you might take issue with Abrams and his screenwriters (Alex Kurtzman, Roberto Orci, and Damon Lindelof) for, at best, a lack of originality or, at worst, blasphemy. The sad part is that I felt as if the story didn't need those moments at all, and using them comes across as ill-advised fan service, especially since the promise of this new series was to "boldly go" in a new direction.

Guess what The Avengers, Skyfall, and The Dark Knight all have in common with Star Trek Into Darkness?