SPOILER ALERT! You probably won't want to read the following
until you see the movie! Some plots critical to the storyline of the
movie will be revealed and could affect your movie-going experience!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"To boldly go where no man has gone before...." is the well known motto of the USS Starship Enterprise and it's crew of space explorers. In the new "Star Trek Into Darkness", the second prequel to the popular 1960's TV show, the writers instead decided to tackle some very familiar territory. And in quite a unique way.
Taken partly from Star Trek's 1967 episode "Space Seed" and mostly from 1982's "The Wrath of Khan", the writers chose to explore the origins of perhaps Captain Kirk's greatest adversary, Khan Noonien Singh. Khan was one of a group of genetically engineered "supermen", bred to be superior to man in every mental and physical capacity.
Khan had been the most successful of the group, ruling western Asia until he was deposed and put into a "cyro sleep" (with his crew of 72) before being discovered some 300 years later by Kirk and crew. What happens next depends on whether you believe the TV show or the movie.
Set some 20 years before the TV series, "Star Trek Into Darkness" again focuses on the earlier days of Captain James T. Kirk and his popular crew of Mr. Spock, Dr. McCoy, Uhura, Chekov, Sulu and Scotty. Not to give too much away, but Kirk and Khan are thrust together and lock horns as a result of a vengeful act committed by the latter. Or was it a vengeful act? That's actually one of the writing highlights of the movie, as we really don't know what Khan's motives are. Revenge or self-fulfilling? Feel sorry for him or root against him? We're really not sure.
This battle continues throughout the movie with many nice twists and turns included that keep us guessing. Some blatantly obvious references and parallels to "The Wrath of Khan" are shown, and although I'm sure some people thought them cheesy, rolled their eyes, or snickered when seeing them, I actually thought they were done well and a nice touch overall. And as expected, there is frequent non-stop action and special effects out the kazoo, with the Dr. McCoy and Scotty characters providing the occasional but much needed comic relief.
The movie concludes with Khan and his crew being put into "cyro sleep" tubes, which is where the TV episode picks up the story some 20 years later. To refresh my memory, I watched the 1967 "Space Seed" again prior to writing this. Inconsistencies between the two are inevitable, but there are some that really stood out. First and foremost, when Kirk and company first confront Khan in the TV episode, it is very clear that they had never met him before (unless the crew of the Enterprise suffered from some sort of space amnesia which we're not aware of). Also, Khan is described as being Indian and from India. Ok, Ricardo Montalbán (actor who played the original Khan) is certainly not Indian, but Benedict Cumberbatch, the actor portraying Khan in the movie is a blonde Englishman....not even close! Finally the 20+ years Khan was "asleep" seemed to have zapped him of much of his powers. In the movie, he was quite the fighting machine. In the TV show, although stronger than an ordinary human, he didn't have anywhere near the physical abilities he had in the movie. These inconsistencies, and a few others, however, didn't take much away from my enjoyment of the movie. It was thoroughly entertaining and lots of fun.
The writing was fabulous, as I mentioned earlier, and the acting spot on. The makers of this film and it's 2009 predecessor did a terrific job casting the roles of a younger Kirk, Spock, etc. As a fan of the original TV show, I was initially a little skeptical that this could pulled off. But it was. In fact, I'd love to see Zachary Quinto, who plays Mr. Spock in the movie, get some real attention during award season early next year. He took a big risk by agreeing to portray an icon TV character, and he's really nailed it. Spock is a complex character, and I don't know how many other actors could have pulled it off the way he has. He was good in the 2009 Star Trek movie, but really excelled here.
Speaking of Spock, there is one storyline in this movie that was introduced in the prior movie I don't really care for, and that's his relationship with Commander Uhura. Never really made sense to me. There is no inkling at all of a past relationship between the two in the TV show. Plus I don't get the attraction. I suspect that the writers (or movie execs) insisted on some sort of love interest plot be included. Most movies seem to include one these days, whether they have anything to do with the story or not. So why not Star Trek as well?
As an added treat for us bay area folks, the majority of the non-space scenes in the movie take place in San Francisco, somewhere in the 23rd century. You'll be glad to know that the Golden Gate Bridge is still around! So if you've ever wondered what San Francisco is going to look like 200 years from now, or had the desire to witness a space craft crash into the
San Francisco Bay, you'll get your chance here.
In conclusion, the movie did have some storyline contradictions with the original "Khan" story, and there were certainly a few "check in your brain" moments, i.e. Chekov holding on to Kirk AND Scotty with one arm as the two dangle perilously off a bridge. And yes, some of the high tech, futuristic gadgets used by this Enterprise crew are not only more sophisticated than the ones used some 20 years later, they no longer seem to even exist 20 years later. And I still don't get how the current Spock is able to channel in to the future Spock. But despite all of that, I found the movie very well made and particularly enjoyable. My favorite 2013 summer movie so far.
If you haven't seen "Star Trek Into Darkness" but plan to, I'd HIGHLY recommend watching the original 1967 Star Trek episode
"Space Seed" and the 1982 Star Trek movie "The Wrath of Khan" first. And if you have seen the movie but neither the TV episode or 1982 movie, definitely try to watch them (both are on Netflix instant streaming and Amazon Prime). You'll appreciate and enjoy "Star Trek Into Darkness" more if you do.
Using my rating system (1= skip it, 2= rent it, 3= worth a matinee,
4= worth full price), I’d give it a 3.5. Worth the price of a full ticket, but try and see it at a matinee if you can.
No comments:
Post a Comment