Saw the latest in the Star Trek movie series last night, “Star Trek: The Never-Ending Franchise.”
I liked it.
The real title is “Star Trek Into Darkness,” and though it isn’t much like the original TV show, in some ways that’s a strength. It has a much bigger budget and modern special effects, and has pretty much everything you need in a modern-day blockbuster. Except, oddly enough, an audience. There were maybe 20 people in the multiplex on 31st & 2nd where we saw it, which made no sense to us. Is it because the opening was on a Thursday and people were waiting for a Friday opening? Weird.
It was fun. Silly, light, insubstantial, but loud, fast-paced, funny, sexy, and engaging. It’s got great action, a fantastic cast who make these characters their own while acknowledging the predecessors, and a fantastic villain in the amazing Benedict Cumberbatch (is that the greatest, coolest name you ever heard on a real person or what?). You might know the actor from the PBS Mystery! Series “Sherlock Holmes,” or from the movie “Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy” among others. There’s a surprise to his identity in the movie which I won’t reveal, but there have been a few unabashed spoilers in the media. If you want the full effect of the reveal, you’d better see this movie quick.
I love the cast of these films. Chris Pine makes an excellent Captain Kirk without being an imitation of Shatner. He’s sly, funny, mischievous, impulsive, macho, a little arrogant, and a player. Pine brings real charisma to the role and I think has made Kirk his own to today’s younger audience. Zachary Quinto is brilliant as Spock. I remember him from the TV show “Heroes” where he played a villain, at least in the first or second seasons I saw, and when I heard he was playing Spock in the initial Star Trek reboot I thought it made sense. He’s even better than I’d expected. And they were fortunate enough to cast the scene-stealing, hysterical Simon Pegg as Scotty. Say what you will about James Doohan who played Scotty in the original TV show, but Simon Pegg is an actor working on a whole different level. Now if they can find a way to cast Nick Frost…
There are some amazing images in the movie, it’s CGI done right. The shot of the Enterprise popping up through the cloud bank of a planet is almost emotional it’s so cool. And there’s good attention given to the characters and their relationships. The bromance between Spock and Kirk is played up big in this one, and though it’s a little corny and obvious, it works.
There were things I didn’t like about it. We saw a 3D showing which I thought made sense because if a film is made in 3D that’s the way I want to see it, but today I learned it was shot in 2D with the intention of converting it to 3D after the fact. So what’s the most “authentic” way to see this? In 2D, as it was filmed, or in the artificial 3D that was done later? I’m not really for or against 3D, but I couldn’t see where it added anything to this one. I know it’s the kind of movie they use 3D in a lot today, but it’s unnecessary. I’d recommend seeing it in a 2D iMax screening if you can.
It was also a largely forgettable and dispensable summer movie. Fun, but kind of empty, a Six-Flags roller coaster ride. That’s OK, most Hollywood blockbusters are empty. That’s not a real flaw; it’s what Hollywood blockbusters are. This movie accomplishes being the movie it sets out to be. Ebert used to say you have to judge a film on how good it is at what it wants to be, not at what you want it to be. “Star Trek Into Darkness” is very successful at being the movie it wants to be. I think it will do very well, and I liked it.
I’m curious to know what my friends think of it a day later. Guys?
