Fun watch but that's about it...

Rating: 4/10 (20 May 2013)

Star Trek Into the Darkness Review:
When it was announced that Star Trek was going to be rebooted in 2009 as a prequel with the original crew from the TV series and first movies, I had some mixed feelings. On the one hand, I thought that a prequel with a younger/different set of actors but the same characters we know and love, along with new special effects, would be pretty cool! On the other hand, I knew they could easily screw it up if they weren't careful. In short, I think they did a good job in the 2009 Star Trek, but I think they dropped the ball on this one.
Spoilers are ahead so please, if you haven't seen this movie, watch it first.
I want to start out by saying that I actually really had a good time at the movie theater watching this. The special effects were great, the acting was excellent (especially from Benedict Cumberpatch!) and I liked that we didn't need an introduction to the characters as that was done previously. However, there was very much to be disappointed about here. Even though the action was good and acting was even better, in reflection, I do feel a bit cheated.
Since you must have seen the movie if you're reading this, I'll start to say that several parts were RIPPED OFF from the second original movie (1982) which is widely regarded as the best Star Trek movie ever. I would pretty much agree with Wrath of Khan's title as the best movie, but it was shameful to reuse so many plot devices in this movie, like the radiation room scene at the end, as well as the resurrection of a main character. This was incredibly disappointing, which was terrible as I was really liking the movie up until then (sparring a few very specifics I would have easily overlooked).
Benedict Cumberpatch said in an interview, I believe, that he is NOT Khan. While that wasn't true, I appreciate him saying that as it would have easily ruined the reveal (though there were a few hints, one being he was "genetically altered"). However, after seeing what the script did with the movie from there, I can safely say that THE SCRIPT RUINED IT ANYWAY.
Spock's "KKKHHHHHAAAANNNNNNN!!" along with the above-mentioned ending was SO disappointing, that everything else about the movie that was actually pretty good is easily forgotten. Doing my best to list some additional positive points, I did really enjoy the story BEFORE Khan's reveal, as well as seeing so much of London and San Francisco in the 23rd century! I particularly liked the very beginning where the crew of the Enterprise saved a primitive species on some "Class M" planet from extinction by stopping a volcano. It was very exciting to see that technology and I love how they were not to be seen (though they didn't succeed...) That parallels the "Ancient Astronaut" theories about spaceships and flying men that our ancient ancestors supposedly saw. I will say, however, that putting the Enterprise under water was fairly ridiculous.... I'm curious how they got the ship IN THE WATER without being seen... seems a rather large plot hole there, considering, as one reviewer said, they could easily have stayed in orbit and beamed back and forth and/or used a transport to/from the planet.
Did anyone notice the very attractive addition to the crew, "Carol Marcus"? I'm sure you would have still noticed her without her having to get half-naked for NO APPARENT REASON. While as a flesh-and-blood straight guy, that was nice, it had nothing to do with the movie and was clearly put in there JUST FOR THE TRAILER. Believe it or not, I went to see Star Trek Into The Darkness because the trailer made the movie IN GENERAL look good, not because I saw a half-naked woman on the screen and wanted more..... again, shameful. Speaking of Carol Marcus, if you remember Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, didn't James T Kirk have a fling with a Science Officer named Carol? The IMDb listing for her character simply says Carol, but if I remember correctly in the movie (though it's been nearly a decade since I've seen it), I think she was in fact "Carol Marcus" .... Hmm... obviously we'll see her in at LEAST one more Star Trek movie as Kirk needs to get busy with her if he is to have a son from her. While I realize events don't need to play out as exactly as they did in the other movies (the time-line has been altered) it probably will if the writers continue to be this absent-minded and unoriginal.
All-in-all, I'm a bit disappointed with the movie, THOUGH it was fun to watch. When the movie ended, I in fact said "Cool!" to myself and had a smile on my face, but in reflection I think the writers REALLY didn't put their "thinking caps" on for this one. This is so sad considering the budget they had as well as the importance of not disappointing all the Star Trek fans out there. No offense Trekkies, but I can see them not being INCREDIBLY accurate and pissing off a few people who pay too close attention to the details - it's a movie and it's supposed to be fun - but by ripping off an old villain with a different plot that ends in the SAME WAY AS THE PREVIOUS MOVIE WITH HIM but simply switching characters around is unoriginal and sacrilege in my opinion.
The question now is can we forgive them and can they do a better job next time?....
808Jordan@gmail.com