Like many men of a certain age who grew up in the New York Metro Area, as a kid 6:00PM didn't mean dinner time, it meant reruns of Star Trek on Channel 11. I am not now, nor have I ever been a Trekie, but I am familiar with the original '60's series from having episodes repeated six nights a week during my childhood. Better yet were the second and third installments in the movie franchise from the 80's that featured the original cast. They weren't as advanced special effects wise as the Star Wars films, but what they lacked in high tech flash they made up for in humanity, and the simple pleasure of feeling like you were off traipsing through space with old friends you had grown up with.
In 2009 we got a reboot of the film series with new actors taking on the original rolls, which I loved. Now we have the sequel Star Trek: Into Darkness
(both films directed by J.J. Abrams). I was really looking forward to
this, and before I go on and you think this is going to be a negative
review; I did like it, just not as much as the first. And let me get
the two big "buts" out of the way before I go on to praise this latest
adventure.
First off: DO NOT SEE THIS MOVIE IN 3D. I found that it added nothing for the extra money they charge for it, and the cheap Ray Band knock off you have to wear make an already dimly shot film even murkier (in general the most common complaint about 3D). I've heard that the IMAX 3D was good, which may be true, but if you're not into paying even more money to see a movie, stick with the standard projection.
Second, while this is not a remake of an earlier Star Trek movie in the strict sense, there are certain plot devises recycled from the past, to mixed results. On the one hand
they do put a new twist on an old storyline which I thought was done really well. But when the big reveal happens as to who exactly the Enterprise crew is up against I made an audible groan. I figured it out a few words into the bad guy's expository speech and felt a deep feeling of despair build to the crescendo "UGH!". Maybe this will only matter to real Trekies and people over 40,but it really felt like a cheap gimmick, and the movie almost lost me at that point. But I held my nose, kept on going and in the end was glad that I did.
On the positive side, the new actors who take on the main rolls of Kirk (Chris Pine), Spok (Zachary Quinto), Uhura (Zoe Saldana), "Bones" McCoy (Karl Urban) and the rest of the familiar bunch all do a great job of channeling the spirit of the original without resorting to out and out impersonation. The most interesting development is in Spok, the half human, half Vulcan First Officer. On the show we only really saw his logic driven, detached Vulcan nature. Here his human side is explored, which is only logical. There are times when lines are delivered that I could hear in my head coming out of the mouths of the old cast, but the new guys give them a different emphasis, which made the proceedings nostalgic and fresh at the same time. In the hands of Abrams both of the newer Star Trek movies have a level of special effects sophistication the old ones never came close to, but at the same time he hasn't lost the humanity. In the end that saved Into Darkness for me in spite of my misgivings over the plot.
As for the plot, James T. Kirk and his crew chase after a suspected terrorist who may or may not be as bad as he seems. They are under orders to kill, not capture, him by an admiral who may or may not be going rogue. There are ethical debates over whether they should follow the order, since summary executions are not a part of the Star Fleet manual, and their actions could start a war with the Klingon Empire (a tip of the hat to the Star Trek tradition of using futuristic science fiction as a way of commenting on contemporary issues). There are more holes in the plot than a slice of baby Swiss cheese so I could spend a ton of space exploring the implausibilities and inconsistencies, but I simply don't don't have the time, energy or inclination.
In the end a mixed, but positive review. The true believers aren't going to miss it anyway, but for the rest of us it's a good rainy day entertainment. And my guess is that the less you know about the "Old Days" the more you will like this one.
1 comment:
Fr. Tom,
Great review; you have expressed my views of the movie as well. I thought the acting very well done; amazed that actors can express such emotions saying such odd dialogue. Did enjoy it, though my better half was less complimentary.
Again, great review -- God bless you!
Post a Comment