nerd radio

Tune in live Thursday from 9pm est

MOVIE REVIEW: FTN reviews Star Trek Into Darkness

May 8th, 2013 by Marc 3 Comments

Star Trek Into Darkness (PG-13)
Directed by: J.J. Abrams
Starring: Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Simon Pegg, Zoe Saldana, Karl Urban and Benedict Cumberbatch
Running time: 132 min

Oh, this is a thorny one. Not since the whole ‘did Han shoot first’ debacle has there been such a kerfuffle in a movie. Well, with Star in the title anyway. Just who is John Harrison? Well, you’ll not find the answer here friends…

Into Darkness is a confident movie that wastes no time in set up and kicks off mid-adventure, starting with a great action scene where Kirk, Spock and Bones must save a still-developing race on a planet called, wait for it conspiracy heads, Niburu, while sticking with the Prime-Directive and not interfering with the alien race, it hits the ground running and rarely comes up for breath.

And perhaps this is one of the first issues the hardcore Trek fans will have with this – and the previous – movie from JJ Abrams. Rather than stick to the rules of classic Trek, once again Abrams is making a movie that will appeal to a wide audience. You don’t need to know your Romulans from you Tribbles to have a blast here, the story is self-contained and has a tidy beginning middle and end, it’s two hours in the Star Trek mythology – the NEW Trek mythology – and it sets up a much bigger universe than the last movie and leaves in no doubt that, should there be follow ups, anything can – and probably will – happen next time.

Continuing on from the first movie, this time out the focus is very much on the relationship on Kirk and Spock and how Spock is dealing with his human half, this leads to more thorny encounters with Bones and struggles with love interest Uhura. It is the core of the movie and it works well, especially when Kirk and Spock lock horns as it develops part of Spock that has so far in this new franchise gone untapped.

But let’s cut to the chase: from early on in development fans have been chewing the bit as early rumours suggested that Benedict Cumberbatch’s, John Harrison, was actually Kahn, despite JJ Abrahm’s denial and while I now know the answer, I’m saying nothing except this: This movie is much more of a love letter to Trek of yesteryear than a remake, so while some things in here will annoy some – not all – of the core fans, there is much to love too.

It is important during this movie, even more so than before, to keep telling yourself that this is not the Trek of Shatner and Nimoy. It is firmly its own creature, some things stay the same, some things are tweaked and some things… well, let’s just say not everything is constant.

Providing you aren’t the sort of fan that gets rabid over the smallest detail – I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with that by the way – there will be much for you to get your teeth into here.

It’s fast-paced, noisy, fun and exciting but it’s clever, has a heart and in Pine, Quinto and the delightfully scene-chewing Cumberbatch it has three actors who are channeling what has gone before but making it fresh, yet familiar, exciting, yet clever and fun, yet serious.

However, there are downsides too. Many of the characters, especially Karl Urban – who owned the first movie channeling DeForrest Kelley – are merely set dressing, with Kirk, Spock, Uhura and Scotty getting the choice lines and screen time. That said, they all get a minute in the sun with some forshadowing of where the characters may eventually go – or, in this case, where they have already gone years ago. My brain hurts.

Another issue is that some of the writing is a bit, let’s just say, predictable with the true villain of the piece’s reveal being more of a ‘yeah, saw that coming’ than a ‘wow, that was unexpected’ and the inclusive of another familiar Trek species in a throwaway line means that a seriously dramatic piece near the end of the movie is undermined, but that said, overall the movie doesn’t suffer for it.

In conclusion, it’s a better movie than Abrams’ first venture into the Star Trek universe. It does seem to pander to the popcorn crowd a little too much, but when there’s this much energy and fun on the screen it’s hard to care… at least until after the credits.

Abrams too seems to have relaxed the camera flair a little, meaning the movie still looks and feels like his, but also feels a little more classic Trek. So it ticks a lot of boxes. And yes, unticks a few too, but you can’t make an omelette…

I have heard some people say that he’s ruined Star Trek and he’ll ruin Star Wars but as a casual Trek fan and a total Star Wars nut, I’ll just say this – if the next time we see the words ‘A JJ Abrams Movie’ is in the end credits of Star Wars Episode VII then I’ll be a happy man.

Live long and prosper…

4 out of 5 Nerds


Let us know your thoughts below, @NerdFollowing on Twitter or on Facebook

Marc is a self-confessed nerd. Ever since seeing Star Wars for the first time around 1979 he’s been an unapologetic fan of the Wars and still believes, with Clone Wars and now Underworld, we are yet to see the best Star Wars. He’s a dad of two who now doesn’t have the time (or money) to collect the amount of toys, comics, movies and books he once did, much to the relief of his long-suffering wife. In the real world he’s a graphic designer. He started Following the Nerd because he was tired of searching a million sites every day for all the best news that he loves and decided to create one place where you can go to get the whole lot. Secretly he longs to be sitting in the cockpit of his YT-1300 Corellian Transport ship with his co-pilot Chewie, roaming the universe, waiting for his next big adventure, but feels just at home watching cartoons with his kids….

  • Andrew

    I agree largely with everything you say, saw it not long ago and spent the last couple of hours writing my review for The Monday Movie Show website. I don’t think that Abrams’ ruined Trek, I think he revived it, and not only that, managed to take it to the level it had been trying to do for years that rivalled that of Star Wars in terms of a cinematic series.

    I do have issues with the pacing of the movie, it’s uneven throughout, once the opening scene takes place, the pace slows far too much for things to happen which we don’t need to see and it’s unnecessary. The time that could have been saved removing the scenes of Noel Clarke (sorry Noel, but it’s true) could have been spent on the other main characters who got short changed around this time.

    I would have given it 3 and a half out of 5.

    • Phil Wilce

      As an action film, its good. But as a Star Trek film, this is bad on so many levels – 2 out of 5 (and I was left screaming “ABRAMS!!!!!!!!!!!”

      • Andrew

        Yeah, don’t know if you heard my comments on tonight’s FTN show, as a die hard Trek fan I didn’t likeit as much as I hoped. Didn’t hate it, but the last half is predictable for any Trek fan. And that moment you’re referencing, instead of having the desired effect, resulted in laughs from the audience. Have tickets booked for the Imax tomorrow i booked a while back, will see ifi feel any different on second viewing.

Proudly Powered By WordPress