I don't know what the critics were saying in their preliminary reviews. I loved this film from start to finish and am looking forward to the next installment. As the whole universe changed when Nero attacked Kirk's father's ship in the first film and that Vulcan was wiped out, one cannot expect that these movies should follow anything that the original series and movies did. And because of the way Spock felt his race die, he will certainly have more "human" emotional outbursts at times. It is only "logical."
When the movie starts, the Enterprise is on one of their first missions and two things go wrong. Namely Spock needs rescuing and in doing so the Enterprise makes itself visible to a primitive group of people. This violates the Prime Directive of non-interference in developing cultures (when was this ever a big deal in the original series? All they did was interfere). Kirk does not record anything in the ship's log but Spock does, because he can't lie. (If you remember Taggart in the Beverly Hills Cop movie you will have an idea how this will play out later).
Kirk is briefly demoted and told to report back to Starfleet Academy for remedial training (I was wondering if he was going to meet up with Finnegan). This lasts until a terrorist attack on London wipes out a bunch of senior Starfleet officers. Kirk is told to get the terrorist (Harrison who goes by another name that us oldtimers know well) who has hidden himself in the Vulcan sector of space by Admiral Marcus.
The movie moves at breakneck speed as the Enterprise goes to bring back "Harrison," despite the lovers spat that is going on between Spock and Uhura. Mr. Scott seems to be on the "out" with Kirk and after an argument, quits the Enterprise and Mr. Chekov has to get Engineering up to speed.
The character that steals the movie is McCoy. The new McCoy goes overboard with spewing cliches that would make DeForest Kelly proud to the point of getting on Kirk's nerves. He is also worried about Kirk's health and will pick the "wrong" times to examine him.
Note possible spoiler - there is a brief mention of having to take care of Mudd's ship, so of course we will see a familiar furry friend make an appearence.
I really hope that Abrams will continue with a third installment of this film. If this film is any indication, then the Star Wars franchise is in good hands!
J.J. Abrams made quite a splash when he released 2009’s “Star Trek”. I suppose it was the right approach to revitalize the franchise, by creating a re-boot that gave him all the needed loop holes to do such things. His first “Star Trek“ flick left the ‘space opera‘ feeling and instead went for something that feels more like an action-adventure which was arguably needed. It was a fun, energetic visual feast that moved fast that it never lost its forward momentum. … more
Star Trek (2009) re-ignited the Trek world and set it on fire. Loved it or hated it, no one can deny what a reboot and shot in the arm it was for what was a tired series. The worst thing that it could be said about it was that it lacked the feeling of mankinds place in the galaxy which the older Treks at least attempted and that film was just a colorful action blast. Star Trek Into Darkness which is the follow up is certainly a sequel with characters shouting … more
I'm taking a risk in saying I actually liked Star Trek into Darkness. On a website such as Lunch.com where liking just about any damn mainstream movie (let alone J.J. Abrams) is considered not so good, it's a wonder how much I've come to embrace things. And while I understand liking Mainstream movies or even praising them is not particularly "cool" with the Lunch.com crowd, I'll take my chances anyway. See, I've always believed that there is an art … more
Don't be mislead by the Headline, oh and this review WILL contain spoilers, so if you haven't seen the movie yet I suggest you finish off this paragraph then go see it. Again this review contains spoilers so if you haven't seen the movie yet STOP READING, although the Headline itself is a big giveaway,. Anyways on to the review. Star Trek Into Darkness, it wasn't until the third trailer when … more
I might be the only person on Earth who liked this movie more than I liked Abrams' Star Trek 2009. Unfortunately, that's partly because I disliked the 2009 Star Trek. But Into Darkness does have stunning visuals, some fun moments, and a much more compelling villain. It seems overall that viewers who don't know much about Star Trek seem to enjoy this movie and Abrams' larger take on Trek, whereas many viewers who do know Trek despise this movie. I'm more of the latter category … more
It has been quite awhile since I've reviewed anything here on Lunch. I've been extremely busy with life and job duties. Those responsibilities have also limited a lot of my filmgoing experiences and I've pretty much been anchored to my house and/or work enviroment. With that said, I decided I would return to Lunch with a loud bang by reviewing Star Trek Into Darkness. I will probably insult a few people in this review, horrify others, and hopefully … more
I first got on this blog to discuss my first passion which is books. Since I have gotten on I find that books are only a piece of this blog and I can discuss just about anything that comes to mind. It … more
Consider the Source
Use Trust Points to see how much you can rely on this review.
A good portion of Trekkies (or Trekkers, depending on one's level ofStar Trekobsession) have special affection for episodes of the original TV series that related to Earth and other-Earth cultures visited by the crew of theEnterprise, version 1.0. Some of the shows unfolded in distorted forms of the past, some in the present day ofStar Trek's future reality. Director J.J. Abrams recognized the importance of this relationship in his origin-story reboot of the franchise in 2009, and inStar Trek Into Darknesshe has made it an even greater touchstone to the roots ofStar Trekcreator Gene Roddenberry's defining philosophy from nearly 50 years ago. The human home world is key to the plot of this spectacularly bold leap intoStar Treklore, which cleverly continues along the alternate path that was established as separate from the "original"Star Trekuniverse in Abrams's first whiz-bang crack at advancing the mythology. But it's not just Earth that is cool and imperiled in this rendering of adventure in the 23rd century;Into Darknessalso plays with the original conceit that Earthlings were member to a multi-species United Federation of Planets ruled by a "Prime Directive" of noninterference with other civilizations. The conflict comes when rogue elements in the Earth-based Starfleet Command hunger to shift focus from peaceful exploration to militarization, a concept that is anathema to the crew of theEnterpriseand her ongoing mission. The new cast...