Friday, May 17, 2013


STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS


The Simpsons have a great parody of the 70’s Schoolhouse Rock ditty I’m Just a Bill. In this version, an Amendment to Be explains that congress could pass a law against flag burning but the Supreme Court would simply declare it unconstitutional.  Then coyly adds, “But if we change the constitution…” The kids, catching on, jump up and cheer: “Then we can make all kinds of crazy laws!”

Essentially, this is what J.J. Abrams did to the Star Trek franchise with the 2009 release of Star Trek. The space-time continuum got rent apart, changing the destinies and – more handily – the well-known histories of the original crew of the USS Enterprise, so now he’s free to pursue all kinds of crazy ideas.

This has really gotten under the skin of all the Trekkies, Trekkers, Trekkelomaniacs and distant Trekkistanis. Therefore, I have to offer two opinions. For fans of the Rodenberry/Shatner/Nimoy troika you will like or dislike this film as much as you did the first, perhaps more. If you like good scifi adventure with top-of-the-line special effects, you’ll be seeing Star Trek Into Darkness.

I should mention that regardless of the changes wrought in the next 300 years, I still think gravity will be a factor and because of that some of the science in this film – space smoke, inner atmosphere star ship flight -- is  a bit shaky  This is no small criticism because scientific integrity was usually a hallmark of the series, although like Captain Kirk, they always knew when to ignore the rules.

Star Trek Into Darkness

All of the cast returns from 2009 Star Trek and they’re a little better worn into their characters. The belaboring of well-known characteristics is not as annoying this time – in fact some, such as Dr. McCoy’s famous asides, are much sharper. In a sparkling moment of self-awareness he even gets called on it. We see some old friends and meet, briefly, a couple of new, interesting characters. As with the first reboot, this film benefits from a very strong villain portrayed by Benedict Cumberbatch, my new favorite Sherlock Holmes. 

Chris Pine is an able captain who has wisely chosen to boldly not do a William Shatner impersonation. (I’d love to see the audition reel with the rejects.) Zachary Quinto is probably the only actor on earth (or Vulcan) who could play Spock. The rest are the best and brightest of the next generation of actors who, perhaps not in a good way, will be tied to this franchise for a long time.

There is a little too much action and a little too much introspection; however the latter is a long-honored tradition of Star Trek. I get the feeling that Abrams would rather be directing a Star Wars film, which he will get a chance to do soon enough. I know I’m going to enrage some Trekkelopods when I state that most of the Star Trek films of the past were just not all that great to begin with. One, maybe two with the original cast and several featuring The Next Generation are quite good, so the Abrams films are an overall improvement. There, I said it, obviously I've been assimilated.

One quick note, apparently I've lost my ability to read theater listings so I found myself at a 3-D showing. I have to say, it didn't suck all that much. Abrams has definitely made a story with 3-D in mind. Shamefully, like the cat chasing birds on a TV, I caught myself twitching to the side to avoid debris. I hope this doesn't confirm anyone's suspicions that I'm really an idiot.

This is the kind of movie mom can send dad and the kids off to on a rainy Saturday afternoon so she can enjoy a spa, shopping or just catching up with the laundry and for that, I’m giving Star Trek Into Darkness three tribbles out of four.

   

This week’s Overlooked Film of Significance:  Bottle Shock – A loosely-based true story of how the upstart wine industry in California came to prominence. Chris Pine is the upstart kid trying to get his laid-back Cali dad to step up to see the bigger picture.




5 comments:

  1. I saw this last night in 3D IMAX, and while I give this movie a full 4 tribbles -- I think it is the best Star Trek yet -- it does have some problems. For one, there is a glaring inconsistency in which Cumberbatch's character is stunned with a single phaser shot but later seems to be almost completely immune to a phaser set on stun. (Perhaps women's phaser models are less powerful ... or maybe Cumberbatch was faking the first time?)
    I found the 3D gimmickry to be very, very annoying - c'mon, are we still using these 1950s effects to demonstrate or justify 3D? And the sound was completely over the top.
    But Quinto was born to play Spock, and while Pine is just adequate as Kirk, the rest of the casting is excellent.
    But the real factor in anyone's ability to enjoy this movie is going to come down to one's attitude about entertainment franchise "reboots." This movie is an alternate retelling of one of the prior Star Trek movies, a "remake," if you will. Personally, after all that's been done in comics and movies with Batman, Superman, and many others, I feel comfortable with every liberty taken with the franchise. I look forward to seeing this on DVD on my laptop, where the effects will be neutralized and the story must carry it -- I think it will hold up.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks for the input. BTW, I'm trying to hold off on 4 of 4 ratings. Only a couple of those types of films are released each year. For instance, of the movies I saw in 2012, only Beasts of the Southern Wild would receive a 4 of 4 rating.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Very good job on this. I loved the movie. I also love how they did not just copy the others and he made it his own new world. Hope there is a Number 3.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I didn't see if 3D (can't stand 3D to be honest), but had great fun watching it. (Yes, I am a longstanding trekie). I did notice they paid tribute to Rodenberry's wife's long-ago slight, by accepting a second female science officer. Those of you familiar with the original Star Trek pilot will remember that Rodenberry's wife played Science Officer #1 before Spock, but the studio nixed it for the series because she was a female. She then came back to play the nurse, and many roles afterwards in many of the series...

    ReplyDelete
  5. Thanks for reading and leaving a comment. I didn't intend to see the 3D either. It was that or wait another 1/2 hour for the 2D.

    ReplyDelete