While it somewhat misses its mark in areas that feel like retreads of prior films, "Star Trek Into Darkness" is still another strong win for J.J. Abram's rebooted series.

Rating: 7/10 (1 December 2013)

Since it's release just over six months ago, J.J. Abram's sequel "Star Trek Into Darkness" has been the subject of much debate, scrutiny and back-and-forth's between fans and film-goers. Despite enjoying a very strong critical reception and generally very positive fan reception, there are some who are very critical of the film's merits, themes, storyline and characters.
Where do I fall in this debate? Somewhere in the crowd who quite liked the movie, yet also is open and understanding about the common fan complaints, and able to acknowledge that it's not a perfect sequel.
This time around, the crew of the Enterprise is sent on a mission of revenge against renegade Starfleet Commander John Harrison (Benedict Cumberbatch) after he murders Admiral Pike (Bruce Greenwood in a small but significant role) and repeatedly attacks Starfleet bases in several terrorist-like attacks. However, various revelations about the nature of the mission will force Captain Kirk (Chris Pine) to question not only who Harrison really is, but also if his Starfleet superiors are even on his side.
This is a film of many, many strengths.
For starters, the cast is unanimously magnificent. Newcomer Benedict Cumberbatch makes for one heck of a compelling villain, giving Harrison much mystery, emotion and a very threatening nature. He's a phenomena in the film, and is easily the biggest highlight. Other newcomers including Peter Weller and Alice Eve are also fantastic in their supporting roles.
And the returning cast is an absolute blast. Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto stand out as Kirk and Spock, our two leads who are the focus of the film. Karl Urban and Simon Pegg also give a nice balance in their slightly lighter-hearted roles of McCoy and Scotty. And John Cho, Zoe Saldana and Anton Yelchin round out the cast, giving admirable performances as Sulu, Uhura and Chekov, although in somewhat smaller roles than the prior film, as the main focus is predominately on Kirk, Spock and Harrison.
Abram's visual direction, as in the first film, is a blast and a half. He's one of the only working directors today who has figured out how to properly use the "shaky cam" style of camera-work. And his design choices, choice in shot and composition, and visual storytelling are first-class. (Although I will join the crowd in saying his apparent fetish for lens-flares does get old.)
The set and costume design is fabulous, and it really feels like an accurate depiction of the future. The effects are absolutely awe- inspiring, from several deep-space battles, to a great sequence where out heroes are forced to drift through space from one ship to another, it's all amazing. And the musical score by Michael Giacchino, as in the first film, is an emotional, memorable masterpiece of sound, and is one of the highlights.
The slight problems in the film lay in the strong, but flawed script by Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman and Damon Lindelof. Now, I know they are popular guys to hate on due to their other projects, but I do feel these three are talented writers when they are working with good material. They also are (unfortunately) capable of mistakes. But I don't hate their work by any means, and I do think the script for "Star Trek Into Darkness" is well-written, tightly paced and generally tells a very good story.
However, there is a problem that is very hard to delve into without going into spoiler territory. So I will have to remain vague with this, as I don't like giving away spoilers in my reviews. And that is the fact that this film contains many callbacks and references to a famous "Trek" film from the original series. And in fact, it could be argued that this film is almost an unofficial remake of a certain "Trek" film from the classic series. And in that sense, this film does pale in comparison, and it unfortunately does negatively impact this film. There's simply no way to watch this without comparing it to this other "Trek" film, and it does lower the score of this one a little bit, as it comes off as more unoriginal, less polished and worse written as a result. Just as I may give an official remake a lower score than an original, this film just isn't as good as the original film it is obviously trying to emulate, and thus it deserves a lower score.
Still, that fairly major complaint being said (and it is a major complaint, as it is a huge elephant in the room while watching this movie), this is still a fun, solid, well-made sequel to the 2009 reboot. And I do think it's easily well-worth checking out.
I give "Star Trek Into Darkness" a good 7 out of 10. It's not perfect, but it's a lot of fun, and is an admirable film.