(SPOILERS for STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS)
A while back, in preparation for the release of STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS, I watched J. J. Abrams' first foray into the world of James T. Kirk, Spock and all of Gene Roddenberry's intergalactic creations. I had never watched a single full episode of any of the various television shows and although I knew the characters by name and appearance, I was otherwise clueless. While watching STAR TREK, one of the things that stood out most to me (and one that I had never noticed in other immensely popular "geek/nerd" franchises likes STAR WARS or LORD OF THE RINGS) was the seemingly blatant pandering to fanboys and fangirls. Even some of the most emotionally intense moments were almost ruined from this inexplicable need to appease the die-hards with things that make them say, "Oh, man! He just said 'Live long and prosper!'" Unfortunately what I'm getting at is that this same pandering is seen again pervading STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS. In fact, what's seen pervading STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS makes it basically the exact same movie that I saw in preparation months ago.
It's hard to lump the portrayal of the characters into the kind of pandering I'm talking about. I mean, who would want to see a really camp Spock prancing around saying things like, "Oooooh, Captain Kirk. Set phasers to stunning!" Actually, okay, that'd would awesome. But you get my point. And thankfully the character work is one of the best things about STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS. The relationship between Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto as Kirk and Spock is spot on. The progression from the last film where the pair were just figuring out how to handle each other feels organic and transitionally appropriate. The pair also bring a much need dose of humanity to a film set primarily in space and one full of various aliens and emotionless killing machines (looking at you, Sherlock). For the most part the supporting cast is equally brilliant and each actor makes his or her character unique and easily identifiable. However, while Zoe Saldana and Simon Pegg (and to a smaller degree John Cho and Anton Yelchin) continue to breathe fresh life into their characters, the same cannot be said for Karl Urban and Benedict Cumberbatch.
Look, I get that Bones' thing is that he's this hard-nosed doctor full of these terrible sayings. That's who he is. But that kind of character just doesn't fit in these new adaptations. From what I can gather, STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS is being considered one of the funniest STAR TREK films to date. That being said, this type of comic relief just feels old to me. While Simon Pegg nervous energy and wise-cracking feels right at home, Bones McCoy feels like they just cut DeForest Kelley out of the 1960s TV series and hoped no one would notice. It's just a constant reminder of the series' age that simply reminded me of the previous film's shortcomings.
Equally disappointing, Benedict Cumberbatch's John Harrison is another old face that does little for the film. The problem is, unlike Bones, HE'S KHAN! He's the main villain of the film and one of the greatest villains in STAR TREK lore. And he doesn't really do anything new. Is he menacing? Yes. Does Cumberbatch do all he can to make him extremely hate-able and seem practically invincible? Oh, yeah. But he's basically the same villain that Eric Bana played in STAR TREK - an off-kilter outsider, clad in black who will do whatever it takes for his "people." I really enjoyed it the first time around. But this time it just felt lack luster. Maybe it's because I expect so much out of Cumberbatch. Maybe it's because Khan isn't just any old villain. Whatever it is, the more I ruminate on STAR TREK INTO DARKNESSS, the more it seems like a simple re-heating of last night's leftovers rather than a fresh, new summer entree.
And that's the biggest problem with STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS. The acting is good, the action sequences are extremely well done, Michael Giacchino's score is spot on again, and the film is beautiful. But so was STAR TREK. It's like J. J. Abrams saw how successful the first film was and said, "Listen, I've got EPISODE VII to worry about. Let's just do the same stuff again. They'll love it!" And it seems like people do. And, for what it's worth, I thought it was a perfectly enjoyable and serviceable summer popcorn flick. However, I just kept thinking about how much I liked this movie when I saw it earlier this year. It feels like all they did was put INTO DARKNESS on the end of the title, slap a British accent on Eric Bana and sent it to the theatres.
We all know how J. J. Abrams works. His films are gorgeous; they have witty writing full of self-referential humor and fanboy lip-service; and there are lots and lots of lens flares. And while he cut back on the lens flares (perhaps a product of all the fan complaints), STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS is simply a standard Abrams film. This is not a bad thing, don't get me wrong. However, it leaves much to be desired. While the first STAR TREK had me itching to watch any of the old series that I could get my hands on, STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS only makes me nervous for the future.
7 out of 10
