Scott Hardie: “It ruled.”
Liked: The great special effects, CGI artistry at its best. The small touches of humor with these fine characters, of which there were not enough. Benedict Cumberbatch's very intimidating villain. Benedict Cumberbatch's hair. The fact that something from Deep Space Nine became a major plot element. The re-design of a classic Trek race. The neat title.
Disliked: The overworked script, which introduced plot elements and forgot about them. The bad-faith re-staging of a classic Trek moment. The filmmakers' conviction that there is no scene that can't be improved with explosions. The lack of any apparent feelings about the villain's mass murders. The way that it's easy to guess "surprises" in advance, because the film always chooses to be clever instead of smart.
− May 19, 2013 • more by Scott • log in or create an account to reply
Scott Hardie: DS9 was the red-headed stepchild of the Trek spinoffs, and the least likely series for later productions to revisit. It liked to push the boundaries of Gene Roddenberry's future utopia, and Section 31 was one of its most heretical ideas: An illegal intelligence operation that secretly did the goody-goody Federation's dirty work. Somehow after DS9, Section 31 went on to inspire several episodes of Enterprise, and now here it is in this movie, providing Admiral Robocop with his dangerous and illegal warship, and introducing a pissed-off Benedict Cumberbatch bent on revenge. Neat. The Roddenberry purists must be on the verge of a riot over this film sullying his perfect utopian society.This reply contains spoilers. Reveal it. − May 20, 2013 • more by Scott
Scott Hardie: In hindsight, some of the things that I thought were "forgotten plot elements" really weren't:
- Kirk's lack of accountability in Pike's office came up later when he offered up himself to the Admiral instead of his crew.
- McCoy's concern about Kirk's vital signs, and more importantly Kirk brushing off that concern while busy with departure, existed to foreshadow Kirk later risking his health for the good of the ship in a much bigger way.
- Most importantly, it bothered me that the movie went to such lengths to set up a war with the Klingons that never happened, even after what sure looked like a major international incident. I have decided that this is probably sowing seeds for a third movie.
Those were some of my biggest problems with the movie, and I like it more without them. I have a feeling I'll like it even more on a second viewing once I'm past the shock of it not being what I expect from a Trek movie. It's not unlike the much-maligned Nemesis, which I also didn't like the first time but came to appreciate much more on repeated viewings.This reply contains spoilers. Reveal it. − May 20, 2013 • more by Scott
Scott Hardie: On further reflection, I'm upgrading my rating on this. I think I was a bit too overwhelmed and a bit too close to the brand to appreciate my feelings about the movie at first. I keep thinking about it and it's better than I gave it credit for. − June 26, 2013 • more by Scott
Want to join the discussion? Log in or create an account to reply.
Erik Bates: “It ruled.”
Lens flare aside, Abrams has hit us with another stellar piece of work. I was taken aback a bit to find that they decided to stick to a similar timeline with Khan, though Cumberbatch did a superb job in playing him.This review contains spoilers. Reveal it.
− December 9, 2013 • more by Erik • log in or create an account to reply
Want to join the discussion? Log in or create an account to reply.
write your own review of Star Trek Into Darkness
Other Movies from 2013
