Star Trek Into Darkness

Yes it's just pure fun. Not a Star Trek fan but I loved the action, the acting and the story. Good visuals and great entertainment. Recommended, 8/10

Saw this in 3D theatre in 2013. ReWatched it again recently. Still good entertaining film after 13 years.

This Trek film is made after Cumberbatch is famous for Sherlock. Here, he's true scene stealer, giving powerful performance, unlike his recent big budget films. Script has plot holes & copies from original outdated 1982 Wrath of Khan flick. Those complaining "why Latino not cast as Khan" forget original Khan (Ricardo) & his crew were all costumed BLONDE, his crew all white actors, Ricardo & crew portray whites - not Latino. Khan's full name is Mongloid Asian- not India nor Latino. FOCUS on one's ACTING instead of race in any film. An Asian actor could've played Khan here. There's very good American Asian actors & many overseas accomplished Chinese, Japanese, Korean, ASEAN bilingual actors but NONE are cast in big budget Hollywood films or series, incl animation, ESP ICONIC lead roles, even after w* *ke movement. Michelle Yeoh's recently created "Empress" character in "Discovery" & 2025 "Section 13" TV streaming flicks are low budget & poor script quality; cardboard character & waste of her talent. She's not cast as iconic Trek character nor creating unique memorable one like Borg Queen.

Back to this film - there's solid plot & script, cast chemistry, action, inventive quality sci fi, music & direction - ALL requisite elements for good film. Main Trek cast & guest leads give good performances. Spock transforming into action type mode is a big stretch but excusable bc of previous 2009 Trek film. This film has action throughout but not excessively. To the many Critics despising action in Star Trek, desiring "talkie" film: see MANY DULL NO action low budget "talking" Trek films released, esp 1st 1980 "Star Trek The Motion Picture." View all following "curing insomnia" 1980s-1996 no action talking Trek films. All slow paced, cheap production flicks even @ their release dates. All outdated few yrs after release.

THIS film script has humor that's well delivered. One good character / actor exits but it's key to plot. Ending is bit predictable but with twist.

Remaining fun & entertaining after 13 YEARS is TRUE TEST of ANY film. Enjoy it!

The previous Star Trek movie is a tough one to beat. It was (in my eyes) close to perfection (lens flares and all). So this movie had a tough up-hill battle ahead of it. I am happy to report that the writing, direction, cinematography and acting were all terrific. But it's not quite flawless. There are a couple of minor plot holes that distract viewer attention to some degree.

Cumberbatch is brilliant. I won't divulge any spoilers, but I will say that the throw back to the earlier movies is very very clever and well executed. The added depth we see in the characters of Kirk and Spock are icing on an already delicious cake!

Abrams is merely an efficient technician, uninteresting as a man of vision. But we need guys like him, conservative and mechanical in their efficiency, who will hold down the paradigm as others more adventurous fight to shift it, who will remind us by the arbitrary limits they impose that there must be a broader space. It's always the routine and familiar that kindles dreaming.

And this is just so routine. Abrams takes the Spielberg-Lucas model of climax after climax, starting with an Indiana Jones prologue. A few simple moral dilemmas form the backbone, inherited with a wink from the Trek genealogy. The hamfisted 9/11 allegory, enforced by terrorist bombings and a final 'plane crash' in Starfleet hq, is that we may covet revenge but we are dehumanized in the process. Khan as a vengeful mujahedeen, 'trained' by the secret military which is headed by a cowboy admiral hellbent on preemptive war. (Interestingly, everything about Khan's handling here bears Nolan's influence.)

Soulless.

So it is fitting that this guy is spearheading the next generation of established cinematic imagination, taking over from Lucas who is now retired, and Spielberg who is 'respectable'. I'm sure that in 20 years time he will be making his own respectable war movies. That kids growing up on stuff like this will fondly elevate the memory. And that his idea of artistry, Welles' action camera dotted by twinkles of color, lasers and flares, will be elaborated on in essays about his aesthetics, maybe.

All of which is just a natural state of things, nothing to get up in arms about. It just means that the interesting stuff will be defined by contrast to him.

Boldly going where no man (or woman or gender fluid) has gone before, climb aboard the Enterprise and let it fly and soar, as old friends gather, reunite, off to battle and to fight, strange new worlds, civilisations to explore.

A renegade from the future rewrites his score, it's as if he wandered through another door, it's a better incarnation, riven through with lamentation, leaves Ricardo full of wrath just like before.

Embrace it or you'll lose it, change is good, just let your imagination take you away, it's only a story after all.