‘Star Trek Into Darkness’ Review

Published 1 year ago by , Updated May 22nd, 2013 at 11:07 am,

Star Trek Into Darkness Captain Kirk Commander Spock Star Trek Into Darkness Review

J.J. Abrams’ Star Trek Into Darkness continues the voyage of the Starship Enterprise and her crew – following the director’s 2009 origin story/alternate reality reboot of the classic sci-fi series. The sequel catches up with Captain Kirk (Chris Pine) and Commander Spock (Zachary Quinto) several months after the events of the original film – as they, along with their iconic Enterprise crew, begin going (“boldly”) where no-one has gone before. In Kirk’s case, that means ignoring a prime directive, endangering the lives of his shipmates, and defying Starfleet regulations (not without consequence).

However, when a massive terrorist attack rocks London, Starfleet scrambles to maintain order and bring the perpetrator to justice. Ignoring Spock’s pleas for restraint, Kirk refuses to back down from the fight, putting him at odds with members of his crew, as he commands the Enterprise in deadly pursuit of the mysterious attacker – known only as John Harrison (Benedict Cumberbatch).

Star Trek Into Darkness International Trailer Enterprise Star Trek Into Darkness Review

The USS Enterprise in ‘Star Trek Into Darkness’

In Star Trek Into Darkness, returning writing team Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman (as well as Damon Lindelof) seek to expand on their alternate Star Trek timeline and dig deeper into this version of the Enterprise crew members (along with the larger movie universe). Casual filmgoers flocked to the 2009 “reboot,” reigniting interest in the beloved sci-fi property, but in spite of the positive response, certain die-hard Trekkies were less smitten with the resulting variations of fan-favorite characters. Does Star Trek Into Darkness build upon the success of its predecessor and present a fun adventure that also pays homage to the classic series with smart additions to the expanded Star Trek canon?

Overall, Star Trek Into Darkness benefits from a much more focused storyline than its predecessor – since the franchise is no longer saddled with bringing the crew together, establishing each person’s respective duties, while also juggling an inter-connected time-traveling arc. Surprisingly, the film actually evolves key themes and character dynamics, via a journey that includes engaging riffs on the classic source material. As a result, Star Trek Into Darkness will easily please the same moviegoers who enjoyed the 2009 effort – but there are definitely going to be a few controversial choices that will irk longtime fans of the series who are not already onboard with Abrams’ rebooted take on the franchise.

Star Trek Into Darkness Kirk and Carol Marcus 570x294 Star Trek Into Darkness Review

Carol Marcus (Alice Eve) and Captain Kirk (Chris Pine) in ‘Star Trek Into Darkness’

Chris Pine once again delivers as a young Captain Kirk, continuing to find a good balance between the traits and disposition that made the William Shatner character so memorable, without relying on imitation or caricature. Kirk’s story arc once again serves as a motor for the narrative, drawing heavily on his reckless “impulsiveness.” Thankfully, Pine is also given plenty of room to develop and grow the Captain throughout the course of the film, allowing for the kind of sincere insight and thoughtful evolution that makes this Star Trek reboot more than just a standard Hollywood cash-grab. Commander Spock (Zachary Quinto) is equally enjoyable this round – especially when the filmmakers probe the ongoing conflict between his Vulcan and human emotions.

One of the sequel’s biggest strengths is its management of the large ensemble cast. Every core Enterprise member – Dr. “Bones” McCoy (Karl Urban), Lieutenant Hikaru Sulu (John Cho), Lieutenant Nyota Uhura (Zoe Saldana), Ensign Pavel Chekov (Anton Yelchin), Lieutenant Commander Montgomery “Scotty” Scott (Simon Pegg) – along with side characters like Admiral Pike (Bruce Greenwood) – all have their own individual arcs (as does the ship itself). Not only does each one result in fun or exciting payoff, they’re expertly interwoven into the larger Star Trek Into Darkness plot, resulting in a smartly-paced storyline. The unrelenting velocity of the film does undercut one or two key moments that deserved (and needed) a bit more time to unfold, but overall the film juggles a lot of different elements without becoming bogged down in minutia (especially considering the 132 minute runtime).

John Harrison Examined by Bones McCoy Star Trek Into Darkness 570x378 Star Trek Into Darkness Review

John Harrison (Benedict Cumberbatch) and Bones McCoy (Karl Urban) in ‘Star Trek Into Darkness’

Newcomers Alice Eve and Benedict Cumberbatch (Dr. Carol Marcus and John Harrison, respectively) provide memorable performances in roles that had been dissected and analyzed for months leading up to release. For that reason, the characters will likely be a point of contention for moviegoers – especially anyone clinging to pre-conceived notions about Harrison and Marcus ahead of time. The pair would have benefitted from a bit more development, and some casual moviegoers will be lost on some of the film’s subtle nods – but onscreen they serve the story at hand, driving plot beats as well as juxtaposing key traits in the mainline Enterprise crew members. Harrison and Marcus might not quite live up to the pre-release hype, but moment-to-moment they’re both quality additions brought to life with nuanced performances.

Much like its 2009 predecessor, Star Trek Into Darkness prioritizes character and sci-fi world-building over large-scale action beats. There are plenty of eye-popping effects and tense set-pieces, but compared to similar blockbusters, certain sequences are a bit more restrained. That said this is a Star Trek film, so even when action is depicted through ship-versus-ship destruction and crumbling CGI environments (instead of in-your-face hand-to-hand brawls or large-scale battle sequences), the film still offers an engaging blend of big-budget spectacle, humor, and heartfelt character moments.

Spock Zachary Quinto Uhura Zoe Saldana Star Trek Into Darkness 570x378 Star Trek Into Darkness Review

Spock (Zachary Quinto) & Uhura (Zoe Saldana) in ‘Star Trek Into Darkness’

Star Trek Into Darkness is playing as premium 3D and IMAX experiences – and it’s easy to recommend either version to interested moviegoers. Abrams relied on subtle depth-of-field for his 3D approach – which definitely enhances the scale in larger action beats, while adding shape to the twists and turns of the Enterprise bridge and hallways. Viewers who are typically underwhelmed by less-noticeable 3D will not find pop-out effects (or other gimmicks) – but to those willing to invest in the added cost: the 3D post-conversion from StereoD is clean and crisp. Similarly, roughly 30 minutes of the film was shot using IMAX cameras, resulting in some genuinely breathtaking big screen visuals accompanied by an amplified soundtrack featuring booming Star Trek sound effects and Michael Giacchino’s rousing score.

J.J. Abrams has delivered a true follow-up in nearly every way imaginable – successfully exploring the iconic characters and expanded universe of his alternate timeline. The film is bigger and more personal than its predecessor, presenting another fun Trek adventure with captivating character drama that draws from the foundation established in the 2009 reboot (not to mention larger Star Trek mythos). The result is another bold voyage for the Starship Enterprise – one that will likely wow most moviegoers (even if it irks a few die-hard Trekkies).

If you’re still on the fence about Star Trek Into Darkness, check out the trailer below:

517746396 3v1 620 439 Star Trek Into Darkness Review

-

[poll id="592"]

Star Trek Into Darkness runs 132 minutes and is Rated PG-13 for intense sequences of sci-fi action and violence. Now playing 2D, 3D, and 3D IMAX theaters.

Let us know what you thought of the film in the comment section below. If you’ve seen the movie and want to discuss details about the film without worrying about spoiling it for those who haven’t seen it, please head over to our Star Trek Into Darkness spoilers discussion.

For an in-depth discussion of the film by the Screen Rant editors check out our Star Trek Into Darkness episode of the SR Underground podcast (featuring an interview with the film’s writer Roberto Orci).

Follow me on Twitter @benkendrick for future reviews, as well as movie, TV, and gaming news.

Our Rating:

4 out of 5
(Excellent)

TAGS: star trek into darkness

161 Comments

Post a Comment

  1. So can’t wait to see this in IMAX on Sunday….

  2. Got tickets for the midnight showing! I’ve been looking forward to this one that’s for sure!

  3. i watched it… IT WAS SOOOO GOOD!

    i dont think it was better than the first but i think that was just because of Spock and Kirks origins. that is one of my favorite origins ever but i LOVED this movie and i cant wait to see it again.

    • That’s kinda’ scary, as I thought the first film sucked. I was hoping the sequel would be much improved, especially with Cumberbatch in it, and not having the stupid Scooby Doo kids intro to the characters.

      • WOW. I think that is the first time I heard anyone ever say that the First Star Trek movie sucked. You are the 1%.

        • He is not alone. Let us be clear. The first star trek movie (1979) did not suck. The JJ abrams effort produced 30 years later sucked. It is star trek in name only. It has no connection to the prime universe in any way shape or form, bad acting, tons of lens flare, CGI battle sequences so chaotic they are hard to follow, terrible mishandling of a time travel plotline completely inconsitant with established trek. Any time there is a drastic alteration to the time line a vistor from teh distant future (26th-29th century) comes and corrects it. The time travel plot was stupid and unnecessary the ship design was completely illogical. the ist goes on a million miles. Abrams Trek will never be cannon in my book. I will never understand why all these pTachs are so charitable.

          • Oh Lord, please tell me you didn’t mispronounce a Klingon word?

            Hab SoSlI’ Quch!!! The word is petaQ…petaQ!!!

            :-D

          • The 1979 Trek movie was a bore and was made for Trek fans only (of which I am one). The Trek movies didn’t get good until Wrath of Khan through Voyage Home and the Undiscovered Country. The TNG films were hit and miss. Without Abrams, I seriously doubt Paramount would be putting out ANYTHING Trek. I really enjoyed the last film because it kept the SPIRIT of the original series and parlayed it to a modern audience. The only people who complain about the 2009 films are old geezers who don’t like change.

            • Actually I’m 26 and I thought the Star Trek reboot was a major missed opportunity.

            • Im 27 and support the prime universe fully!

        • Dude he isnt the only one to not like the first one…

      • I liked the first one, but otherwise I agree. The intros, especially young Kirk, were really awful and unfortunate. The villain was barely a character, and the whole thing felt rushed and packaged for mass consumption instead of carefully crafted with love. It was still fun, interesting, and deftly set the stage for better stories. I expect that this will be the film that proves that idea. We are in a place to have better stories now, and anything that is NOT better than the last one shouldn’t be made. Not because it was bad, but because its growing pains and awkwardness were a warm up round.

    • I liked it better than the first. The Villain was significantly better, and each character was developed a little more than the first. I actually never got bored. the pacing was very sharp. I left the theatre with a WOW as opposed to a Whuh?? after Iron Man 3. I’m looking forward to repeat viewings, and yes, we saw the new [latest] Superman trailer in 3D IMAX!

  4. How did the movie do in “lens flare” department? Anyways, I just can’t wait to watch it in IMAX.

    • Less lens flare than the last one – but still a lot of lens flare!

      • There’s even a red lens flare!

  5. i seriously cant wait for the next movie. I wonder if they will decide and do the war with the Klingons, i feel they are no were near finished with them because of the 10 minutes they were in this but i could also see them doing the Borg and the Klingons need to team up to take them out.

    i would like the Borg because i think JJ would make them so awesome. even more than they are but i can see them just skipping them entirely because they have been done.

    • JJ Borg would be awesome but at the same time my mind rebels at the thought of Kirk vs The Borg.

      They were always Picard’s foil, weren’t to impressed with their extended presence in Voyager (although it made sence being in the Delta Quadrant).

      Also the biggest problem with the Borg is that they’re supposed to be virtually unstopable so the more you have them and stop them you diminish there threat.

      Kilngons next, maybe with a garnish of Andorian or Romulan

    • There won’t be a next one..it’s going to go into a new direction with new people in charge of it. J J Abrahams will be to involved with Star Wars to make another. Hopefully they get someone in to clean this garbage of a timeline up and restore the original, would make a cool story to tie in Sisko to help restore the timeline.

    • I don’t think the Borg would work in this time line. Picard’s timeline couldn’t beat them without Data, and that was with tech 100 years more advanced than Kirk’s timeline.

  6. You review pretty much mirrors what I think about Into Darkness. I don’t know if I’d qualify as a die hard Trekkie (even though I have seen every single episode of each of the 5 TV shows multiple times), but I really, really like this movie. It’s a great modern take on the original Star Trek show and movies.

    Now I’m worried, though. I really hope they will not do that silly IMAX thing on Blu-ray that they did with Tron: Legacy and The Dark Knight (Rises) and open up the format during those scenes. I hate that.

  7. Saw it two days ago. A typical popcorn movie; cinematography is messy; the title should be Star Trek: Meaningless Subtitle; there’s no real darkness in this one. Trek fans will be divisive to the plot. Cumberbatch’s performance is top-notch and steals every scene he’s in, but his character is underwritten and he is shockingly underused, considering how heavily the marketing has been focusing on his character, which is a shame; another example that the writers didn’t deliver.

    • Will see this on Thursday night but a good friend of mine from the UK told me pretty much what you say about Cumberbatch. Very little screen time (compared to the rest of the cast) is what she told me.

      She expected a lot more from him because there was so much focus on his character.

      • Yeah, not as much screen time as the character should have; it doesn’t matter if it is played by Cumberbatch, the character is just not flashed out enough. Not if Cumberbatch has the real acting chop to bring dramatic weight to that character and make it completely convincing, in particular physically and three dimensional as possible as he could, that character will be a laugh and this movie is going to flop. It’s a waste of Cumberbatch’s talent.

        • Well that’s kind of a bummer. So much of the the advertising centered on Cumberbatch and the mystery as to what kind of villain he would be and WHO that villain would be.

          It’s always been my contention that the TWO VILLAINS that will be the most fascinating and exciting to see this movie season will be Cumberbatch’s character ( I won’t spoil who he really is ) and Michael Shannon’s GENERAL ZOD.

          Still, my friend had many good things to say about “Into Darkness” but based on what she said ( and now you have confirmed what she’s said) it now looks that Shannon’s General Zod will be THE VILLAIN to beat.

          • Here continues the summer of seemingly underused villains show prominetly in trailers apparently lol. See Iron Man 3 for the first.

            Kind of sucks to hear it but if he serves and drivea the plot and the actor does a great job, I am sure it will still be entertaining. Hopefully.

            But I agree it starts to sound like General Zod is the villain of the summer movie
            season! Hopefully there would be an opposite effect since Zod barely is present in the advertising, thus not as hyped or seemed to be the focus and really knocks out of the park

            • Cool, cool.

              Well, I still have high hopes. Will see “Into Darkness” tomorrow and will see for myself. Cumberbatch is such a talented actor. With all the promotional build up I was thinking the whole flick was going to revolve around his performance.

              Couldn’t agree more about IM3. Was finally thinking that the MANDARIN would be seen in all his glory only to find…. WTF??

              But Michael Shannon never disappoints. Just that one line from the MOS trailer, ” I WILL FIND HIM !!! ” That alone tells me his performance is gonna rock!

          • Well, the thing is, the movie is not what it was advertised, but it’s a decent summer popcorn movie, by which I mean that people shouldn’t expect this movie to be innovative or artistically stunning, just relax and see if you can have fun. I do find the camera work distracting. As for Cumberbatch’s baddie, funnily enough, even though people like me think it’s underwritten and underused, but he’s mostly been winning rave reviews, and some even go on saying that he owns the film while I’ll only say that he owns every scene he’s in, so, we shall see.

          • the problem is just by saying you won’t “spoil who he is” still gives away who he is. Lets face it, in star trek lore there is only one true villain.

            • Harry Mudd, Gary Mitchell, Kang, Kord, come on man, who is it??!! :-P

              BTW, don’t answer that.

    • It’s a little disheartening to hear that he’s slightly underused. He is phenomenal in Sherlock, and I was looking forward to have him be the relentless adversary that the trailers made him out to be.

      That said, I really hope they leave the option open to have him come back for a further movie, expanding his role a bit. Not every movie needs to kill the antagonist; hell, in the show, they left most of the antagonists alive as often as they could, why not translate this to the films.

    • a pity you didn’t enjoy it. I loved it. I thought BC was pretty amazing in his scenes.

  8. Can I take my seven year old girl to see this.

    • Alex – I agree with TheLostWinchester. It definitely depends on the child. As mentioned in the review, the film is rated PG-13. and there are plenty of legitimate reasons for that rating this time. I’d say it’s mostly on-par with the 2009 film in terms of adult content and violence – but this one is slightly “darker” and more intense.

      • thx

  9. That really depends on your daughter’s development. Some movies are suitable for some 7 year olds while they can be too intense or scary for some 10 year olds. Without knowing your daughter it’s impossible to give a useful recommendation. There are certain scenes that could be too much, though. For example the scene when we see what the Klingons look like, and the fighting is pretty intense in some scenes, too. I can see how this could be a bit too much for some kids, although I would have loved that stuff at that age. ;)

    If you absolutely want to take her you should definitely have a good talk with her about the movie afterwards, to make sure it was okay for her.

  10. I loved it the first time, loved it much more the second time.

    Not perfect perhaps but such a great movie anyway.

    The Kirk/Spock dynamic was really well handled. I just hope they can now get the Kirk/Spock/McCoy dynamic set for the next installment.

    • I agree! I was kind of disappointed that they didn’t focus much on McCoy. I guess that’s just how the storyline worked, but it felt like it was all about Kirk/Spock/Uhura. Don’t get me wrong, I love Uhura, but I guess it just feels wrong to me.

  11. I’ve been waiting for your review, and I’m so glad you guys loved the movie; I always trust your movie reviews. Can’t wait to go see it this weekend!

    • Thanks for reading! Hope you enjoy it!

  12. Great review, Ben. You do not deal 4 stars lightly and this hand is most assuring.
    I had started feeling a little apprehension I might be let down a bit after the
    relentless promotion of clips for this which was wearing out enthusiasm.

    With the running time, it seems another 10 minutes could have been added if
    as you say come character development ans plot points could have used more.
    And, of course, as much time as possible of Alice Eve stripped down to her skivvies.

    • Hope you enjoyed it! Yeah, it’s well-paced but I wouldn’t have minded 10 more minutes to develop a few core elements.

  13. I have to wait till the 7th of June to see this :(
    Hopefully it’ll be worth the wait…

    • Oh No, that sucks big time, are you off planet or in prison or something, why so long :(

      • Yeah… I’m on a distant planet called Africa ;)
        I honestly don’t know why there’s such a big gap though. We’re also getting Man Of Steel two weeks after the US. It’s surprising because normally, movies are released in South Africa around the same time as they are in the UK…

        • Wakanda? :-D

          • I think you were looking for, Jumanji ;)

            Don’t forget Avenger, you got to see a few films before we here in the US last summer!

    • Surprising particularly in light of the trend of
      opening in foreign markets before the US.

    • And here I was feeling bad that I would not make it tonight at 8 pm. That really sucks. For this film and the Man of Steel. Its strange though as I imagine it would premier there before us

  14. Doubt I’ll go see it, at least until it’s on Netflix. I feel they ruined it the last time, and this time is not going to be any better. Basically it’s JJ Abrahams taking an existing script and having it re-written backwards so everybody who died in the original is alive in his version. I read the movie plot on Wikipedia. (Yes, it’s already there.)Even that showed its nothing but a bad remake.
    If Abrahams had taken Star Trek and went, say to Kirks first days at the academy, or first days as a captain and then started going with new, unexplored territory I would have bought it – even if he did do it like Star Wars! But no, he has to repeatedly (and I mean repeatedly!) rewrite an existing story line to suit himself and call it an alternate universe. Nothing to see here…

  15. PS. The original Star Trek (the good ones) were about a theme. Wrath of Kahn was a retelling of Moby Dick, a tale of obsession and the acceptance of loss. Undiscovered Country was about the battle with one’s own prejudices and a unwillingness to accept change. That’s the difference between Star Trek and Star Wars. THEME.
    I saw none of that in the new Star Trek.

    • Common Factor – Nicholas Meyer who wrote (co-wrote VI) and directed both.
      He also did all the earthbound dialogue for Voyage Home.

      As JJ is reduced to producing the inevitable third maybe it’s time to call in the big guns and get Meyer back…. to write the script if nothing else.

  16. As an avid oldschool trekkie I thoroughly enjoyed this movie. The characters are well fleshed out and storyline engaging, a different take on a classic episode ;) some will not like it but hey it’s a alternate timeline. If your a trek fan grown up seeing episodes like ‘Mirror mirror, timeless, Yesterdays Enterprise, Parallels etc… Then you should be able to embrace, but not necessarily like this parallel universe.

    Regarding the film with the closing chapter I hope the 3rd film is a full on exploration film, with some weird unknown stuff going on, but also expanding on my favourite quote of the film “War with the Klingons is inevitable” not sure how they will accomplish this as its difficult to do an exploration film compared to an episode, which is probably a reason why those have been the weaker of the star trek films.

    Overall I love the new modern star trek, and this film delivers 110% imo but I’m just a fan of all things trek. My only gripe and it’s a minor one is that the Enterprise did not fire a single shot or phaser through out the whole movie :(

    • Like you I hope that they will explore in the next film. Maybe they could create a brand new villain/species. Why not I say, it could be interesting. The potential war looks very interesting but considering they have just left on a five year mission I do not see it being the main focus of the next film.

      Maybe, the next film could pick up 3 or 4 years into the 5 year mission and they could go to explore a strange reading that they find in a particular solar system. It could turn out to be the Klingons, who have responded to the weapons Admiral Marcus created by enslaving a far off solar system to build weapons for the Klingon Empire. This is the only way I could think of including the Klingons without it feeling shoved into the film for the sake of having Klingons in. It just would not make sense any other way as they have gone on an exploratory 5 year mission. This would then set up a full out war in the 4th film. Upon reflection, such a discovery may be better so save as a third act reveal.

      What ever happens I hope that the inevitable next instalment is not the last in this series as Star Trek is sooo much bigger than a trilogy.

  17. Not since “Book Of Eli” have wanted to get up and walk out of a movie.

    Abrams and his writers have once again taken science fiction and turned it into science fantasy.

    The cast was great, but the story had so many plot holes you could fly a Constellation class ship through.

    The romantic involvement between senior bridge officers alone would have Roddenberry swirling in his urn.

    Good science fiction should be grounded in reality, I’m not talking about “inventing” physics every week like DS9/Voyager and to a lesser extent NextGen, the original series for it’s day was ground breaking, it inspired people to develop tech we now take for granted.

    When science and engineering become simply “plot devices” you have to wonder.

    A cold fusion bomb that “freezes” a volcano?
    Using a transporter across hundreds of light years?
    A warp drive that is so fast it can cover hundreds of light years in seconds?

    I think Abrams and his writers have not only squandered a great cannon, but squandered a great cast as well.

    This movie will date so badly.

    Abrams has become THE most over-hyped director, the fact that the mainstream public think his work is so wonderful is a serious indictment of how badly our education system has slid and how short peoples attention spans have become.

    • and you end up with Honey Boo Boo, who according to the advert I saw yesterday is “taking America by storm…”

      Deity of choice help you all…..

  18. I just saw the Movie.. it was Awesome! All I can say is that Abrams just convinced a Jedi to enlist in Starfleet. Brilliant

  19. Just re-watched the 2009 Star Trek to brush up on characters and story arcs. Well four years later it’s still a great film and from this review sounds on par with that one, which would be really hard to surpass the 2009 Trek. But if Kirk is Kirk and Spock is Spock and Karl Urban(who should voice Rocket Raccoon) is stealing scenes throughout. Sounds like
    a winner to me.

    • I wasn’t a big fan of the original film (weak villan and plot, too many contrivances and conveniences, unexplained tech, some lapses in logic, a young cast uncomfortable in their roles, gross nepotism), so I was very surprised to find that I enjoyed this one a lot. Cast feels more settled, better plot etc etc.) There are still some dumb moments, but they are fewer and farther between.

      Big improvement on the original.

  20. I enjoyed but like many stated cumberbatch is underused and some references from the old star trek (that i know nothing about) flew right over my head. 4\5 but not the 5\5 i gave the first one

  21. Thanks for the review, from what I have read it sounds really good. It seems to be visually stunning with great performances, especially from Quinto. Can’t wait.

  22. i have seen every star trek, movie produced. i also knew capt. james t kirk, personally! {william shatner} of course. BUT taking everything into consideration, this movie matched, or in some cases serpassed, some of the best star trek movies. i would give it a 10 out of 10. captain clay cote’

  23. Just saw it on IMAX. Very little thinking involved. Just sit back, turn off your brain, and enjoy. Very fun Summer movie.

  24. Really had a good time watching this movie on IMAX. I really liked the 2009 movie and I really like this one as well. I will be going back to see it a second time while it is still in theaters. Cumberpatch was a surprise to me, I don’t find him all that physical in Sherlock, but in this movie, he was a force to be reckoned with and I too would have like to see him fleshed out a bit more.
    Beyond that detail, this was fun fun fun and and I enjoyed the Spock/Kirk back and forth very much. Some of the other characters were rather lost in the shuffle but I don’t know how you could have brought them in without making this movie into a 3hour long slog..so minor quips aside, a really good movie and for me just as good as the first.

  25. It was a load of crap!

    • Yup… Absolute rubbish…..no spoilers needed….

      How much lens flare???!!!!
      Matey has just shat all over Gene’s grave…

  26. Just got back from seeing it in IMAX 3D and I loved it in every way. As much fun as The Avengers in my opinion. Emotional and funny and hold on to your seat exciting. Everything I was hoping for. Great summer popcorn movie!!!

  27. If this is the best J.J. can do, then I feel sorry for Star Wars. Its common knowledge that this guy didn’t even like Trek, so why give him access to play around with something he clearly can’t understand? Granted, with every reboot there will be some changes made. And some works, like the Doctor Who reboot. J.J.’s strength is taking something fresh and new and taking us along for the ride like Super 8. He did great there. Here…its just messy. Hopefully Paramount will get a new group in to clean up the mess he made. So the Great bird of the Galaxy doesn’t poop all over its fans once again.

  28. This was the first Star Trek movie I was ever disappointed in. I think they committed sacrilege by trying to tie in “The Wrath of Khan” which is my favorite Trek flick. I really hated when they reversed the roles of Kirk and Spock during the famous Spock death scene. Also they totally overdid the special effects and action sequences to the point where it looked like the 5 million apocalypse movies that are out there. I need to cue up a Star Trek – Next Gen episode to clear the bad taste out of my mouth.

  29. Just saw it a few hours ago.

    I am a hardcore trekkie, having watched the original series so many times that I lost count, as well as the movies with the original cast. I have memorized lines and nuances of each character from many different scenes throughout the years. I’ve also watched a lot of TNG, DS9 and VOY, as well as read some of the paperback novels.

    So, it’s really no surprise that, to me, there really aren’t a lot of new ideas explored in the film. You could see the reveal coming a mile away, and what little surprises there were in the film were nothing to write home about, and simply served to get the story moving.

    Cumberbatch and Eve are new/old characters to this Trek universe, and in my mind, Eve does an OK job, while Cumberbatch is decent, but not exceptional (which he needs to be).

    I guess the fun in the story is watching how the alternative timeline unfolds, and seeing how their counterparts react. The action sequences are well staged for a Trek film (gotta love seeing the Enterprise again), and the mixing and matching of cast members with Cumberbatch and Eve (for particular film sequences) were unique to the series. All in all, a fun ride, and nothing more.

    Pros:
    Good action sequences.
    Alice Eve!
    Memorable scenes with Pine/Quinto and Cumberbatch.

    Cons:
    Recycled ideas.
    Cumberbatch.

    My score: 3.5.

Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.


If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it.

Be Social, Follow Us!!