Contrarians may disagree, but I find Abrams’ first Star Trek to be as strong a “reboot” as we’ve seen in cinematic history. A terrific young cast, a fast-paced origin, and an epic scale led me to believe Star Trek would be a strong contender for the best summer blockbuster franchise moving forward. Abrams’ sequel, Star Trek Into Darkness, certainly lives up to the blockbuster status: it’s big, it’s fun, and it’s jam-packed with tense action designed to make you squeeze the cupholder on your armrest until it shatters. However, you can’t help but feel a slight letdown from the first. Nothing sniffs the first ten minutes of its predecessor for majesty and emotion, as this one is bogged down to some degree by a massive plot. Abrams also inserts one too many “references” for Trekkies that make no sense: an extraneous character here, a forced line there. The first entry felt fresh and light, whereas Star Trek Into Darkness strains under the burden of trying to please both non-Trekkies and Trekkies alike, potentially fully satisfying neither in the process. It’s hard to complain about a film that is still an extremely enjoyable diversion in the theater: the actors shine, the set-pieces impress, the effects sparkle. It’s just noticeable that Abrams is trying to include too much plot, too many references, too much that gives the sequel a clutter that its predecessor didn’t have. Dammit, JJ, you’re a director, not a magician.
Continue reading ‘Star Trek Into Darkness: Abrams’ Wrath Is Convoluted But Consistently Fun’
