Very Good, but flawed.

Rating: 8/10 (19 May 2013)

Overall I liked Into Darkness but it did have some major flaws (SPOILER ALERT). First, Star Trek is about a utopian future, and this version is all dystopian. We are supposed to be able to trust the values and the leadership of Starfleet. Second, what's with the cheap ugly warehouse/oil refinery style sets that make up the guts of JJ Abrams' Enterprise? They look like he was too poor or too lazy to design real starship sets. The inside of starship should not look like inside of a Costco. Where are the bulkheads? Third, what's up with the blinding halogen lights on the bridge of the enterprise? Previous versions of Star Trek have used the bridges and combat control centers of Navy ships and subs as models for their Enterprise bridges. This Enterprise bridge looks like a Beverly Hills hair salon. Fourth, what's up with the stupid re-imagining of the Klingons? Abrams was true to the Vulcans, but the new Klingons look small, silly, and undignified - not things one usually associates with Klingons. Fifth, what's up with casting Benedict Cumberbatch as Khan Noonien Singh. In one scene Khan is shown being led to the brig with Enterprise security towering over him. He's supposed to be stronger than normal humans but Benedict is totally unconvincing. When Ricardo Montalbán played Singh he was tall, powerful, imposing physically, charismatic and very convincing as a superior specimen. Cumberbatch has the passion, but none of the charisma, none of the physical presence that Montalbán had. In the end he suffers from the same weaknesses of Abrams previous Star Trek villain, he just isn't memorable.