Star Trek Into Darkness
As I’m writing this, the first thing that comes to my mind is why is there no colon between Star Trek and Into Darkness? JJ Abrams, you’re so silly with your lens flares and your flagrant inaccuracies of Trek canon. I kid, this isn’t going to be one of those anti-Abrams rants that my friends and family have had to endure since the last film. This one was actually good. (The last one was to, I’m just bitter that the cool kids now have their own trek.)
The first thing I’ll say is that I love the nods to Wrath of Khan. It was alluded to in the beginning with nuSpock quoting NemoySpock’s famous Needs of the Many speech, but not enough hints were dropped to ruin this trekkie’s brix when Cumberbatch (lol) name dropped Khan. That’s one thing I’d like to thank Hollywood for, is not spoiling that epic twist.
One thing that I don’t like about the Abrams films is the lack of fundamental Trekness. They have plenty of Kirkness and Spockness but there’s not a sense of wonder or curiosity. I don’t really miss the TNG diatribes about ethics, but I feel like if you replaced Kirk and Spock with idunno, Bruce Willis and Don Cheedle or something, you’d just have a generic summer scifi action movie. However I was pleased that this was thematically addressed in dialogue. “We’re not a war party, we’re explorers” or something along that line. Hopefully the end of this film set up a more traditional exploration themed threequil.
I feel I can judge a film with the conversation I have with whoever I went to the theater with after the movie, so here’s a snippit. “Yeah, I was pleased. Can’t wait to see it again. Loved the role reversal and the nods to TOS. loltribbles. Data was the first android in starfleet, I call shenanigans. Klingons have a robust legal system, they wouldn’t have ‘tortured and killed’ them. They should lead this fandom into starting a new show, with less Backula and more Q and Borg.”