Director JJ Abrams came back toward the canon with this effort after pretty forcefully stating with the 2009 reboot that he intended to go off in a different direction. Some would say he's still in that unchartered territory here - hell, Uhura is still lip-locking ol' pointy ears after all and Scotty still has his decidedly un-TOS armadillo-lookin' sidekick - but the difference between the two films is that in the first one "Old Trek" was used sparingly just to remind us from time to time what franchise we were warping around in while here it's the "Old Trek" themes, characters and characterizations that are front and center and the "New Trek" that's used sparingly (just to remind us from time to time that we're in that alternate reality created in the first movie).
All that said however I for one have no problem with Star Trek leaning heavily on, well, Star Trek for inspiration and the fact that for this film they've leaned on the best of all Star Trek movies means that most Trek fans will find this movie as easy goin' down as a baby finds a bottle of warm chocolate milk.
The film starts with a couple who are dealing with the life-threatening illness of their daughter. On the verge of giving up hope the father is approached outside their child's hospital by a man who says he can deliver the daughter to health. Offers like that don't just fall out of the sky however and you know there's got to be an enormous "if" attached to it, and there is. In return for his child's health the father - a member of Starfleet as it turns out - agrees to help the stranger with his plan to rain ruin down upon said organization. The father's actions - during which he sacrifices his own life - also sets up a theme that will reverberate throughout the film: that of men giving the last measure of their being in the service of their family. Whatever form those families may take.
The man with the magic healing powers and bad attitude turns out to be John Harrison, himself a member of Starfleet whose motives are at first unclear. Kirk (who's been ousted from the Enterprise's big chair for his willful disregard for the prime directive) sees Harrison's gambit for what it is; a setup that will bring the top Starfleet brass together in one room where he can have at them. But Kirk's too late in alerting his colleagues and before the blood letting stops in the conference room he'll be thrust back into the Captain's chair and set on a collision course with Harrison.
It's soon revealed however that Harrison is not Harrison at all. He's Khan. A genetically modified superbeing from the past full of sound and fury signifying nothing. On the one hand he's principled enough to notify Kirk of malfeasance on the part of Starfleet hierarchy on the other hand he's self-absorbed enough to use that treasonous behavior as little more than flimsy justification for the implementation of his own self-serving agenda. His is the paradox of the wistle-blower: without them society would be markedly worse off, but who wants anything to do with a rat? Especially one who thinks he's better than you?
Kirk, when faced with the dual problems presented by both the threat Khan represents and the unmistakable truth of his accusations, must grow up in a hurry if he's to prevail and does just that (though the late-game heroics of another crew member will take some of the starch out of the nobility of Kirks actions).
If there's a problem with "Into Darkness" other than the fact that it's really a remake of an earlier Trek film its that the film simply never slows down. No one in Abrams' universe has apparently heard of walking. If there's bi-pedal movement to be done then one must run and if by some weird circumstance one should find oneself standing still then it's the steadycam guy/girl who must be running - at you, by you, around you. Action movies have slowly been evolving toward little more than elaborate dance numbers ever since "The Matrix" married slow-mo, stop-mo, accelerated motion and digital effects some 14 years ago. "Into Darkness" while devoid of bullet time is nonetheless every bit as much "Flashdance" as it is "2001".
To it's credit though "Into Darkness" is part "Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy" as well; unafraid to poke a stick into the ribs of power and ask: "What the hell do you think you're doing?" By that I'm referring to Abrams and the writers broadside at the Obama administration's incredibly short-sighted and misguided policy of summary execution of alledged enemies on foreign soil by way of unmanned drone strikes. Anyone who thinks that policy isn't going to come back to haunt us sooner or later simply isn't living in the real world and even the headstrong and narcassistic Kirk is smart enough to steer clear of its equivalent in this film.
The cast here is once again first rate. Chris Pine holds down the big chair just fine and Zachary Quinto is doing an admirable job growing into his pointy ears. Benedict Cumberbatch is impressive as well and, for my money, a much more suitable Khan than Mr Corinthian leather was some 30 years ago. (Forgive me Ricardo, wherever you are.) But the real star of the cast is Karl Urban who disappears completely into the role of Dr McCoy. While his character is not crucial to the development of the story he nonetheless impresses Gary Oldman-style with the ease of his talent.
All in all "Star Trek Into Darkness" is a bold step back toward the center of the Trek universe in the form of an energetic, visually breathtaking and well acted remake of the one Trek film that has rightly hovered above all others for 3 decades now. It may not be quite on level with "Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan" - mostly because of a few cheap twists it applies to the original story which seem to speak more to the writer's lack of imagination more than anything else - but it's not far behind and is well worth an evening at the multiplex.
Verdict: ★★★★☆
No comments:
Post a Comment