Falcone's Crossroads

Where This Meets That

Movie Review: Star Trek Into Darkness – 2013, J.J. Abrams

SS Vengeance In today’s culture of overblown, ever-climaxing summer blockbusters, J.J. Abrams pushes the limits as well as anyone.

In 2009, Abrams brilliantly resurrected the Star Trek franchise with a full-throttle extravaganza that was equal parts tongue-in-cheek homage to and a refreshing departure from the original.  With Star Trek Into Darkness, he picks up where he left off, with mixed results.Spock goes "Vulcanic"

Events continue to shape our favorite characters into those we know and love, although Abrams frequently teeters on reducing the characters into mere caricatures of their former selves.  One bad slip could fatally brand the revamped franchise as mere parody.  Fortunately, he holds on by crafting enough emotional depth to keep us rooting for the crew, even when the irony of how he borrows from previous Star Trek films at times can dilute the wallop.

Conversely, Star Trek Into Darkness works a little too hard to keep us on the edge of our seats.  The movie’s first act involves an erupting volcano, a primitive humanoid race, and lots of surrealistic foliage, but little more.  It’s a hook, but it doesn’t sink very deep.  While it stretches to set up some of the story that follows, it unfortunately also initiates a number of fallacies that the film can’t quite outrace.

Vulcanic UhuraAbrams’ crew is adept at finding solutions to storyline crises that certainly ratchet up suspense but too frequently fall short of, ahem, “logic”.  For instance, when a certain leading character wants to kill the main villain, his hand is stayed by his crew, who insist the villain is required alive because the hyper-regenerative nature of his blood alone can save a certain other leading character.  Meanwhile, the crew already has 72 others just like the villain on ice; certainly, those would have made for a more convenient transfusion, while also giving one of our heroes a satisfying final revenge?  Alas, such a logical solution would have also shortened the movie and killed a last wink of irony.

While Star Trek Into Darkness suffers some from such superficialities, it also thrives in them.  After all, like its predecessor, it is a fun film, great for crunching popcorn to.  It is a visual feast, with beautiful special effects.  The scene of a massive starship crashing into San Francisco Bay is as gorgeous as it is harrowing, and perhaps the first ever warp speed chase is also a sight to behold.

In the end, Star Trek Into Darkness is a worthy sequel to Abrams’ original but falls well short of the franchise’s high point from three decades ago, Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan.

Star Trek Into Darkness score: 3.5 Falcone Rings
3.5 Falcone Rings


4 comments on “Movie Review: Star Trek Into Darkness – 2013, J.J. Abrams

  1. grrgoyl
    May 30, 2013

    I had the same thought about using the blood of any of the other 72 frozen supermen. One one hand I rationalized it by imagining it involved an elaborate thawing process that might have been too complicated/risky; on the other, I shouldn’t be creating rationalizations for someone else’s story.

    Still, I agree this movie was fun and enjoyable, if not particularly deep and meaningful.

  2. Grande Falcone
    May 30, 2013

    Well, it was blood, which should have been pretty easy to thaw out. And super-self-healing blood at that, so it should have been a fairly simple process; just throw one of the guys into the same holding tank that held the fully thawed Khan.

    I know, I know, it’s escapism. Still, seems like one of the re-writes would’ve caught some of the logic failures.

    Thanks for posting!

  3. CMrok93
    May 31, 2013

    Nice review. I honestly liked this movie more than the first movie and that says a lot, since Star Trek still ranks as one of my favorite sci-fi movies of the past decade or so.

  4. Grande Falcone
    May 31, 2013

    Thanks CMrok93. I found it a worthy sequel, good for the its purpose. Since I saw it, I’ve been thinking about all the old generation ones, and both of Abrams’ films probably top all of them, except for Wrath of Khan. I just re-watched the Wrath this week and still found it engrossing, by far the darkest and least campy of the older generation.

Add Comment:

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s


This entry was posted on May 30, 2013 by in Books & Film and tagged , , , , , , , , , .
%d bloggers like this: