J.J. Abrams might be the greatest filmmaker of our generation. He has made four awesome movies so far: Mission Impossible 3, Star Trek, Super 8, and the latest, Star Trek Into Darkness. He has now been given the reins of the new Star wars trilogy. When I first heard about this, I was not like most. I was not excited. I thought J.J. Abrams was a good fit for Star Trek, and I was looking forward to more great Trek films. Will he be able to do both? Do we as fans want that?
The Star Trek and Star Wars camps have been at odds for years. Are you a Trekkie or (for lack of a better Star wars geek moniker) a Jedi? Why can’t we like both? I have simplified Trek and Wars in my head, to try and figure out why some fans prefer one or the other. Trek is about humanity, all that we could be. Peaceful, not full of greed or corruption. Trek is about humans pursuit of science and discovery. Traveling the stars in search of amazing places and new civilizations. The protagonists are humans. Although it is far fetched sometimes, it is still “science.”
Star Wars is about people in a galaxy, far far away. These are not humans. Wars is a fantasy story, same as is Lord of the rings or Willow. They even have magic, The Force, and swords of great power: lightsabers. The heroes are even called Knights. This is not what we will become. It might as well be set in another dimension. Humanity will never have the Force, or see these planets, just the same as we will never go to Middle earth, or use magic. We love Wars because it is a fun adventure, and it is pure escapism. Do we really want one man having power over these two very different worlds? I have no doubt that J.J. Abrams will make a great film, but I am still unsure about if he can make a good Star Wars film.
Star Trek Into Darkness is holy-crap-bad-ass! This movie is a roller coaster start to finish. But what makes this movie great is the plateaus in the middle of the ride that build actual characters. The last hour is pretty much one giant battle. These are not just mindless computer generated, explosions in space, the characters are faced with tough choices and tell you who they are. They all have interesting perspectives and influence each other, almost like they are real people.
The films plot is pretty straightforward with some twists and turns that I will not ruin. John Harrison (Benedict Cumberbatch) attacks the Federation, and Kirk (Chris Pine), Spock (Zachary Quinto), and the Enterprise’s crew are charged with bringing him to justice. There are some very serious moral choices to make about apprehending him dead or alive. It’s a simple setup, but Into Darkness does not feel simple. The complexity grows with the characters. The plot does very much thicken. Cumberbatch steals the show; you both love him and hate him. He is so intense and frightening. You can’t stop watching him for fear that he could turn and murder you at any moment. The tension is fantastic. There is a scene that really makes you feel like Cumberbatch could do anything, and you would believe him. I really hope to see him in more films.
Very mild spoilers to follow. My only real problem with this movie is that they pull from previous Trek content. The first film, besides the main characters, had pretty much a fresh plot and villain. The story in the first Star Trek was about shaking things up. Into Darkness seemed to me more about paying homage to past films. For that, you as Trek fans will get some repeat content. It is good and bad, playing up on your nostalgia, but also not fresh or new. I am torn about how I feel about his. I think it hurts the film more than helps it. End Spoilers
I noticed far less “lens flares” than Star Trek had. I was never really bothered by it, but I think the fans ripping on getting blinded every few seconds. They were kind of silly. What I found interesting in the style of the film was the close up intensity of shots. These were then contrasted with distant shots, to make you really feel the weight of objects in space. Especially certain shots at the end of the film, which make you feel like you could be a distant observer. You are then flown right back into the thick of the action, showing all of the elements of the events that are transpiring. I stay obscure about this, to stay spoiler free.
It is a very interesting thing having a Star Trek movie without a show. With the past Trek films, you knew the crew, you had been with them through the galaxy, getting to know them as the show unfolded. We know the crew from the original series, but these are new actors, with their own take on their characters. Chris Pine as Kirk is not trying to be William Shatner Kirk. No one has delivery like Shatner. So we have a very short time to get to know these sort-of-new- characters, and I feel like they do a great job, without boring you with filler. The story and the character arcs are intertwined like many movies seem to forget these days. Not sacrificing one or for the other. I really thought this movie was great and I will be looking forward to more Trek films, but now I do not know what the future holds for the franchise. Thank you, JJ Abrams, you have entertained me.
The Rating System:
Production (Directing, Editing, Music) 4-5
Story (Plot) 4-5
Characters (Likability, Acting) 5-5
Writing (Dialogue, Cleverness) 5-5
Emotions (Was it; Fun, Scary, Sad, Do I Care) 5-5
Overall Score 23/25
LOVED it too!! I wonder if JJ Abrams will expand more on the Klingon arc for the third film...he does have good reason to go that route.
ReplyDeleteAlso I read and interview he gave about the "homages" to the previous films, and he said the main story line has to be there to satisfy the fans, but also the changes were necessary as he set in motion a new 'timeline' with the first film. So essentially, he created a new universe with which he can do anything he wants. I don't think he intentionally tipped his hat to all sorts of story lines in previous films and episodes of the original show (I loved the tribble tribute!)