Tuesday 16 July 2013

Star Trek Into Darkness

What's it about? After earning the captaincy of the Enterprise in the first film, Kirk has been leading the crew and the ship on a series of adventures. After a run in with a far less developed planet involving saving them but violating the Prime Directive, Kirk is chastised by Admiral Pike for his attitude. Before much can be done (other than taking away Kirk's captaincy), a terrorist by the name of John Harrison unleashes a campaign on Star Fleet, to which Kirk volunteers to respond.

What's it like? I really like Star Trek. Really. A lot. The 2009 reboot was an absolute master-class in rebooting, prequelising, whatever you want to call it - respectful but free, exciting but character-driven, JJ Abrams showed himself to have the Midas touch. All of this puts a lot of pressure on his return to the much-loved franchise and he doesn't buckle. Yes, some of the characterisation is sacrificed in the rush to keep it all moving, but there is still time and space for each character to develop, still a compelling story and of course, so much lens flare.

Kirk is still cocky, but needs to learn to toe the line. Spock is in control of his emotions, but at times, like all of us, needs to be able to cut loose. Harrison is an excellent villain, played with lip-curling relish by Benedict Cumberbatch who handles the Lector/Starling-like sequences in the Enterprise brig with as much aplomb as the physical fights and chases. His background is well fleshed-out and the resonance with the original Star Trek series is threaded through convincingly and cleverly. The space battles are thrilling, as are the scenes of hand to hand combat, with a real heft and crunch to one particular "altercation" where the eventual futility of all of Kirk's rage is shown to him. He can exhaust himself in anger, but he cannot undo what has been done.

As with the previous film, this stays close enough to the tone, spirit and style of classic Trek to keep die-hard fans happy, but still manages to be its own beast. Many of the third act developments will bring a knowing smile to the lips, but there are still surprises in store, even for those who might think that they know what is coming. Excellent entertainment.

Should I see it? I guess it's not for everyone and it doesn't quite hit the heights of the previous film. It has a better villain, but less compelling character work, more action, but fewer affecting emotional scenes. There is an infuriatingly gratuitous underwear scene, but mercifully little bad language. There is some violence but little blood and there are clear consequences for both the victims and the perpetrators of that violence. The spectacle of course lends itself to big screen enjoyment, but this might just as well be enjoyed for a family DVD night with a wheelbarrow of popcorn.

No comments:

Post a Comment