Comments on: Star Trek Into Darkness is all flash, no substance

By: Ruby

Ruby — Sun, 19 May 2013 05:27:19 +0000

Gosh, with all my complaining I forgot to mention something positive – as a fan of DS9, I liked the integration of Section 31 into the story.

By: Ruby

Ruby — Sun, 19 May 2013 03:40:34 +0000

I thought this movie was better than the first one, particularly in term of the performances. In the last movie, I simply could not see Pine as Kirk, but this time around he really felt to me like a younger version of Shatner’s character. Cho as Sulu was also really excellent, and, again, I could see him as a younger version of Takei’s character. Urban and Quinto continue to be great as McCoy and Spock. But one of my gripes with Abrams’ Trek is that Uhura has usurped Bones’ place in the trinity of Kirk, Spock, and Bones. I get that he’s trying to give the only female officer more to do, but was the only way to accomplish that to make her “the girlfriend”? Why not let her be her own person? This (completely illogical) relationship with Spock has pushed Bones to the periphery and also diminished Spock’s relationship with Kirk (the death scene was touching, but then Uhura was shoehorned into the scene because she’s on an equal level with Kirk in Spock’s life – what?!). I love Zoe Saldana, even more so because I met her on the street in LA and she was really nice to me, but this whole “Spock’s girlfriend” thing is ruining what is otherwise a kick-ass female character.

I also felt that they should not have rehashed elements from Khan – they could have tried to make Cumberbatch’s character an original villain instead of glomming onto the lore of TOS’ most iconic baddie. And, as good as Benedict was, how is an Englishman playing a character who is clearly supposed to be of Indian descent? I realize Montalban was not Indian, but at least he was a brownish dude with an accent. It would have made so much more sense for Cumberbatch to play an original villain or even Gary Mitchell, as was rumored.

Being a few credits shy of my degrees in astrophysics and biotechnology, I can’t speak to the science of this movie – but it seemed ridiculous. Khan’s superblood bringing the dead back to life? *snort* This is why Abrams preferred Star Wars – he knows how to make entertaining popcorn flicks, but he’s dumbed Star Trek down for the masses.

Is this movie entertaining? Yes. Better than the first one? Yes. Great action sequences? Hell yeah. Beauty shots of the Enterprise? A few! Fine performances? Sure. Fun nods to classic Trek? Yup. (My favorite: they used Harry Mudd’s cargo ship to fly to Kronos.)

Overall, it’s a good, entertaining movie. I’ll buy it when it hits DVD. But the gripes I mentioned above really irk me because they could have been avoided by a director who knows and loves Star Trek and is not primarily interested in turning this franchise into a space opera.

By: jimi jack black

jimi jack black — Fri, 17 May 2013 14:22:40 +0000

J.J. Abrams runs a hit factory. Block busters are guaranteed . I enjoyed Star Trek. Anyone who is a fan of the tv series
can easily identify with the perfect casting of Chris Pine(Capt. James T. Kirk), Zachary Quinto(Ofc. Spock) and Zoe Saldana(Ofc Uhura). If you could put the tv cast along side the new cast on a split screen, one could easily see how
the young whipper snappers involved into the tv cast. Greast casting. The plot involves a one man act of terrorism
from within the Starfleet. The villain Commander Harrison(Benedict Cumberbatch), spoiler alert, later revealed to be
Khan is great. See Star Trek in Imax but no D is better then 3D, which is just a way to charge more ticket money. Of
course there is a cameo appearance from the tv series. The opening sequence reminded me of the 1st Indiana Jones
movie where he was being chased by the local natives throwing spears. Next time get a more thrilling opening.The bromance between Kirk and Spock looked and felt genuine whereas the love scene between Spock and Uhura felt
forced. Kirk seeing a beautiful woman in just her underwear and not putting on his moves actually happened in the movie. Rounding out the cast is Bones(Karl Urban), Scotty(Simon Pegg), Sulu(John Cho) and Chekov(Anton Yelchin)
whose accent comes and goes, is the weak link in the chain. Put Star Trek on you movie list.

By: Chuck

Chuck — Thu, 16 May 2013 22:08:17 +0000

It sounds like I’m hating on the movie, but that’s not totally the case. I did enjoy the visceral thrill ride of it all, I just wish they hadn’t relied so much on Wrath of Khan for the story. And I’m with you on the other 72. When Bones said to bring one of them to him, I assumed that since he was out of Khan blood, that he’d try one of the others. Maybe it was just “easier” to go with the known commodity.

By: Ivey West

Ivey West — Thu, 16 May 2013 20:22:37 +0000

Looks like I enjoyed the flick much more than you or my local critic friends did.

Don’t get me wrong, their are criticisms I agree with you on (Urban continues to be wasted), but I didn’t think the story was nearly as convoluted as you did.

And to Do: I wasn’t bothered by that nearly as much as the fact that they didn’t even bother to test one of the 72 other folks to see if they had the “magic blood” too.

By: Do

Do — Thu, 16 May 2013 11:14:43 +0000

More spoilers:

Yeah… and think of all the plotholes. I mean really? Distilling a rise-from-the-dead-serum from the blood of Khan? Within a few hours? Should the Federation be able to – you know – copy that for the future.

Bah. I. have. to. stop. thinking. about. this. movie.
Or else I will start hating it. Which I don’t want to.

By: Cisco

Cisco — Thu, 16 May 2013 11:01:45 +0000

CHUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK!!!!!!