Monday, September 16, 2013

A Negative Review: Star Trek: Into Darkness Sucks

Typical reaction after seeing Star Trek: Into Darkness

Rarely, if ever, have I seen such an inept attempt at anything Trek as Star Trek: Into Darkness. Since seeing the movie, I am afflicted by hideously unsettling nightmares, which have since constituted such a tremendous impact on my psyche that the merest mention of sleep instinctively causes my spine to shiver and an all-encompassing sense of dead to take me over. In addition, any food I place into my mouth turns into ash, and everything I touch becomes withered and dies. In short... this movie, to me... is not a great movie. Into Darkness is Star Trek for those who know within themselves that they do not like Star Trek, yet insist on watching it anyway. The mess that results from this is a modernized geek aesthetic wedded with something perhaps less esoteric for the casual viewer, absent the philosophy, quirkiness, and admittedly silly ideals of the previous movies and series – but in doing this, Abrams has succeeded in stripping his movie of the very characteristics which define Star Trek. 

Not every component of Into Darkness fails, however; it succeeds as an action movie. From its very incipiency, the movie bombards the viewer with colorful visuals and uses highly kinetic camera movement to promote its action – and let's be honest here... Into Darkness is very much an action movie in costume and not at all science fiction. There is artistry in this, however, as unlike recent blockbusters, Into Darkness' special effects, numerous as they may be, are still not frequent enough to overload the audience's optics. There is the bright, multi-colored planet surface of the opening sequence, and then immediately following is the interior of the Enterprise, with its smooth sheen and sleek corridors. And this is consistent throughout the movie – there are many instances of the relatively chaotic/random visuals of an action scene contrasted every few moments with cuts to the Enterprise bridge. As far as this sort of thing is concerned, Into Darkness delivers just fine. 

Unfortunately, and unsurprisingly, Into Darkness is entirely devoid of any of the emotional or intellectual adversity that was at least looming around the borders and threatening to permeate 2009's Star Trek... in its stead, there is perhaps a sense of adventure more akin to how the original series would appear through the eyes of its captain, but this does little to appease longtime fans of Star Trek or give the casual audience a reason to care; because the script is weak, Into Darkness is weak. Perhaps this approach is effective with an economic interest in mind as far as the producers are concerned, but really, once the contrived stereotypes Into Darkness passes off as characters settle into their roles, there is little left the movie can do to surprise its audience. The characters take a backseat to the action, and by the end of the movie, there is a lot of action, as the characters act within their stereotypes – Captain Kirk is riled up and ready to punch everything in the face, Spock is contently labeling everything illogical, and... well, the rest of the cast is there too, I guess. A special mention goes out to Chekov, who's accent is perhaps more terrifying than Khan's plan is stupid; seriously, guys, I could probably pull off a more convincing Slavic accent. 

The logicality of the plot is so absurd that it would generate a list of complaints lengthier than Taipei-101. The endeavor would be completely pointless and as stupid and uninteresting as cataloguing the movement of glaciers using a yardstick. Suffice it to say, the logic throughout Into Darkness is offensive.

Overall, this movie is exactly what's wrong with modern science fiction.


  1. This is like you said a science fiction movie with no science. The amount of times Kirk killed himself or his crew because he did not adhere to basic physics was so ludicrous I lost count. Worst of all was that J.J. Abrams did not mysteriously drop the trans warp beaming device to the archives, as it was a ridiculous premise. It allowed Star Fleet to beam bombs to any location in the known galaxy making the entire film superfluous. What they should have named the movie was: Star Trek On Our Couches, a movie consisting of Star Fleet members just randomly committing genocide whilst sitting behind desks or on couches to anyone that pisses on there hushpuppies. I mean why bother with building space ships when you can just intimidate the entire galaxy to do your bidding, which was the plot of Star Wars and there were Star Wars officers in the movie too, why? I do not know. The entire movie made little to no sense when looking at it from the perspective of trans warp beaming. It would be more economically viable for Star Trek to just sit back on their couches and put the money assigned to ship building back into the economy, then just intimidate the galaxy through trans warp beaming bombs.

    Is this the universe that J.J. Abrams has created?

    This movie is like Skyfall is to Bond, the worst movie in the franchise by far, and after the travesty that was Into Darkness I can no longer enjoy Hollywood movies, which brings me to the conclusion that these movies are targeted towards the illiterate and stupid percentile of each nation, the bottom of the gene pool.

  2. It like a Star Trek movie written by someone who never saw the original show or any of the other movies. Gene Roddenberry must be puking in his grave. If you can't suspend disbelief you can't make it work. And if you can't bother to do your homework, don't bother to go through the motions. I agree completely with everything you said.

    Maybe the next movie can have Peter Pan and Tinkerbell team up with Spock and Jack Sparrow as the enterprise captain. That might be somewhat more plausible.

  3. It's so nice to find someone else who understands my pain...