Sorry for the lack of posts this past month. Things have started to heat up (pardon the pun) in the midst of Summer, and I've also been focusing my blogging efforts on building a second blog for a musical ensemble I work with. Stay tuned for several more backlog posts over the next few days.
Star Trek Into Darkness has been a bit of a controversy among hard-core Trekkies and new fans alike. Having seen the movie in 3-D about a month ago, I decided it was time to throw in my two cents. The film is the first sequel to JJ Abrams' Star Trek, the 2009 movie that rebooted the franchise. Much more action-oriented and fast-paced then past Trek films, we follow a still-inexperienced Kirk going after a new and powerful threat to the Federation.
The producers definitely went out of their way to replicate some of the most iconic scenes from TWoK, but didn't copy the film line-for-line or plot point-for-plot point. Some may still consider that a cheat, but on the same token, there aren't too many truly original sci-fi films out there these days. I have to give the producers credit for taking some classic scenes and remaking them (mostly successfully) for a modern audience.
The writers also try to show some evolution of Kirk's character in the process, depicting him as a cocky, brash young starship commander who's probably not ready to sit in the Chair. For example, at the beginning of the film, we see Kirk's rather...unique and reckless handling of a Prime Directive situation that nearly looses him his command.
Additionally, the movie introduces us to the new-universe counterpart of Carol Marcus, who, strangely enough, resembles Dr. Elizabeth Dehner (from TOS 'Where No Man Has Gone Before') far more closely than the TWoK Marcus. Why two unrelated characters were essentially merged is a mystery to me. Other than the familiarity of Dehner to TOS fans, there was really no reason to do this.
There are also hints of other previous Trek movie plots in the film, such as the destruction of the Enterprise (the poster above), the death and resurrection of a main character, conflict with the Klingons, etc. It makes one wonder where the producers plan to take the film series from here -- they've already managed to use many of the best elements from past films, already had an origin story and a movie focusing on a villain. Modern film-making won't allow another light-hearted movie like Star Trek IV, or a Cold War story like Star Trek VI. Despite all this and Abrams' commitments to Disney's new Star Wars trilogy, Star Trek 3 has recently been green-lighted for release in 2015.
Overall, STiD is a good action/adventure sci-fi film as long as you're not expecting some of the deeper messages (life, death, sacrifice, friendship, etc.) found in TWoK or a menacing villain like the original Khan. It's definitely worth seeing in 3-D if you don't mind the expense.
Star Trek continues.
