STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS, a review (part two)

(Sorry for the time delay, for now on assume that every time I say "I will continue this tomorrow" it actually means "I'll get to it in a couple of days". Real life is tough on bloggers, you know)

Now then....

I'm getting a bit tired of mainstream blockbusters full of CGIs and non-stop action set pieces who have no other logic than the hey, wouldn't it be cool if... school of film-making. Of course, some of the stuff done with this philosophy is actually cool, yet when it's done with no regards to story, characters or plausibility then the whole thing becomes a tiresome, over-inflated mess.

Basically, what Abrams is doing with Into Darkness is the same as he did with the last Trek movie, only with everything cranked up to eleven. For comparison, pick you favorite tune and listen to it with the volume turned up to an impenetrable din. Your ears will hate you for the rest of your life. This is the visual equivalent. Abrams figured out that every goddamn frame needs to have a hundred things going about at once. At some point, I completely lost interest of what was going on.

Next...I marveled at how much Star Trek pegged familiar characters down to a T. All the while showing us entirely new aspects of these old friends, due to this whole "changing the past" sort of thing. Here, it's like I barely knew who these people were.

Kirk, for instance, was always a maverick captain, bending and sometimes "interpreting" Starfleet regulations to get out of tight spots. Remember, Kirk never believed in No-Win scenarios. And yet, as a member of a military organisation with a strict chain of command, Kirk also has had a very healthy respect for the institution he devoted his entire adult life to. In that regards, the scene where he argues vociferously with Pike about the "botched" mission is completely out of character and pictures our good captain not as a "maverick" but as a hot-headed lunatic rashly endangering the lives of the people under his command for no good reason. Yes, Shatner-Kirk did put his people at great risk, yet only within the acceptable risks entailed by being a Starfleet officer. Shatner-Kirk was always very reluctant to risk ship and crew when only he (and his entire command staff...) should get zapped by the alien thingy of the week. I remember him often telling Scotty or Sulu to high-tail out of planet Dangerzone III if anything bad could happen to the Enterprise.

Remember the trial scene at the end of Star Trek IV? Kirk was facing some very serious charges there. Something that would've gotten him drummed out of service in disgrace. So what did he do? Endlessly and aggressively argue with his tribunal that he was in the right all along? No. He took it like a man. He shut up, accepted the charges against him and even pleaded guilty. No arguments, no disputes. "You are right, I was wrong". This is what makes Shatner-Kirk more heroic. He did something in Star Trek III he knew was right and yet was wrong if you take the Law into account. He did it anyway, but never shirked from his responsibilities to facing up to his superior officers afterwards.

Hardly sounds like the loud-mouthed jerk we see here on the screen, does it?

Ah, Mr. Spock. Since when have you become a regulation-spouting computer, endlessly telling anyone withing earshot what they already know: "the stuff you are about to do is a) dangerous, b) against regulation and c) illogical". I don't remember Nimoy-Spock saying that at all. In fact, our Vulcan friend has always been very keen to join Kirk in whatever crazy scheme he was on about that week. If only to relieve the boredom of being a Vulcan. And betraying Kirk by ratting on him to Starfleet Command? N.E.V.E.R. Spock has learned long ago that "What happens on the Enterprise stays on the Enterprise (or whatever planet the ship happens to orbit around to)".

There's not much more to say about Spock in this, as he is basically only there to piss off Kirk and Uhura on a regular basis. Yes, Spock is logical, yes Spock always favoured the most rational course of action open to his shipmates, yes he never took risks for the sake of taking risks but Spock was never the Brainy Smurf always telling Kirk "do this, don't do that". Dr. McCoy should really operate on the stick in his butt.

Speaking of the good doctor. Hey, Man, where were you? Abrams seems to have forgotten that you're the third major character on the show. Not a bit player. Shit, Scotty gets more lines than you (no slur on Scotty, I like him a lot, be the golden triad of Trek is still Kirk-Spock-McCoy).

I could go on, but you get the point. How could Abrams have gotten it right the first time, and so wrong for Take Two?

Beginner's Luck!!!