Movie review: 'Star Trek Into Darkness' has issues

(6 stars out of 10)

(132 minutes. Rated PG-13 for intense action and violence, adult situations, and profanity.)

The second big blockbuster of the summer came warping into the theaters this past week in the form of wünderkind J.J. Abrams' second installment of the rebooted franchise "Star Trek Into Darkness."

If you are big into an edge-of-your-seat popcorn movie starring your favorite sci-fi characters, then no doubt Abrams knocks this film out of the park for you. If you are a die-hard-built-phasers-with-legos-as-a-kid-hate-everthing-Star-Wars-Trekkie, unfortunate(ly) for you, chances are you are going to be mildly disappointed at the end of this two-hour Trekfest.

Abrams brings back the original cast and, to his credit, this is a rather spectacular cast because, boy, when given a chance to demonstrate their acting chops (and not in front of a green screen), they show again and again how well they can act. And given Hollywood's recent 10-year penchant for taking well-worn 1960s television series and bringing them back to the big screen, never before has a cast been able to capture and embody their characters so well — from all their quirks and mannerisms to speech patterns and physicalities — and yet go beyond and grow those characters something that a 21st century audience would embrace.

Chris Pine (who is also the next Jack Ryan) brings the wild-west cowboy/golden boy persona of Captain James Kirk to life yet again. Believe it or not, he is better this time around and has a lot more screen time if you can believe that. While the script lends itself to more action than dialogue it is painfully obvious that Pine understands the subtleties and nuances of acting that Shatner never garnered.

The best acting done in this movie began with Zachary Quinto as Spock and was emphatically punctuated by Benedict Cumberbatch as the unnamed antagonist (oh, he has a name. I am just not going to give it to you). If you have not followed the acting career of Quinto, his first big break was in "24" and just like this movie, he stole every scene (I know. Like that was a challenge). His depth of character and his ability to grow Spock into something more than we ever saw out of Nimoy is wildly entertaining. Maybe it is because Nimoy played Spock so close to the vest that Quinto's Spock becomes much more than we have seen to date. Regardless, it is fascinating.

Cumberpatch as the primary antagonist plays evil exceptionally well and is as good as anyone we have seen since Tom Hiddleston in "The Avengers." While he does not have the name or face recognition that other British actors of his age enjoy, he is likely to be the next biggest acting sensation from across the pond. At least that is what my household of teenage girls report.

It is not just the primary actors who stand out in "Darkness." Karl Urban as McCoy, Simon Pegg as Scotty, John Cho as Sulu, and Anton Yelchin as Chekov round out the principal characters from the old TV series. Unfortunately I found myself wanting more screen time for all of them. Partly because they were so good, but for some unexplainable reason the writers forgot to give them much to do in this movie. I do not know if I am alone in this regard, but as a quasi-Trek fan myself it was almost maddening not seeing these characters grow further in "Darkness" as they did in the first reboot.

In particular, Yelchin (who is so good in everything he does and was a standout last time) had so little screen time, I wondered if he had other movie obligations at this time or perhaps there was an issue that left Abrams with no choice but to give him no more than two minutes of dialogue.

This lack of story telling was part of a bigger issue that I had with this movie. Abrams is an exceptional filmmaker — perhaps the most talented of his generation — but to be honest I was hoping for and expecting more. For the most part the plot was as thin as a good piece of prosciutto and had as many holes as the accompanying Swiss cheese. But if you are into cliffhangers this movie starts with a great one and moves from one to another to the end of the movie.

Please do not misunderstand. I like that the movie was fast, brisk and paced well. However, the brilliance of Star Trek is something much more. Star Trek has always related back to issues that permeate the society of today, placed its characters against moral issues and quandaries, and had an über amount of geeky science stuff to blow past you.

Star Trek was cerebral.

This movie, conversely, was too busy keeping the audience on the edge of its seat rather than considering anything else.

If you are a fan of special effects and CGI, then run — do not walk — to the nearest movieplex. I can honestly say I have not seen such jaw-dropping special effects with such expanse. Be warned, however; in exchange for these effects there is a complete lack of respect for the laws of physics, nature, and Star Fleet. How can a starship with such forward surface area not snap at the neck when leaving water? How can a starship get bumped at warp speed and not disintegrate? How can a starship take at least 50 direct laser strikes, blowing major holes in the hull and spilling tens upon tens of people into the vacuum of space, then still report its shields at 4%?

But for all that was bad for my closeted-Trekkie self, there was much to admire. The costumes, sets and cool tech props (when we saw them) were all outstanding. Abrams and his crew can edit a movie and move a story like few others.

In the end, this movie was a lot like a good stack of pancakes. It was awesome going down, but did not offer much substance and you were hungry again in an hour.

Let us hope that the Force is with Abrams on the next "Star Wars" film and he offers up more story and a little less lens flares.

I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

About the Author

Who was that mysterious man you saw in the theater last night? You tried to get a look at him but he quickly disappeared in a puff of smoke, his cackle trailing in the air, leaving behind his calling card: a half-eaten box of popcorn and a lukewarm soda. He is Our Movie Reviewer named Tim!