Star Trek Into Darkness: Disciplined and Direct

Star Trek Into Darkness almost contains enough over-the-top CGI to distract you from the fact that it's a good movie. If its 2009 predecessor sometimes straddled the line between science fiction and Iowa, this one looks a bit more like an MCU movie, one that often and regrettably does away with the grounded atmosphere that served parts of the prior film so well. And yet, even if the way it looks often lacks the spine of the original, Into Darkness makes up for this visual tepidness with ferocious performances from its entire cast and a story that aims for the kill with dangerous stakes and a lean, mean structure. It’s less unique but more polished than before, infused with an inescapable sense that what is happening really matters. 

What are your thoughts on terrorism? John Harrison, a Federation officer gone rogue, has just detonated a bomb in the heart of London, among other wicked things. His exploits attract the attention of both the Federation and Starfleet, and the Starship Enterprise is sent out to stop him from ever again raising a hand against his former allies. Among its crew are Kirk, Spock, Uhura, and Scotty, the same lovable heroes the first film reinvented so well, and their directive is simple. By any means necessary, Harrison must be stopped, come hell, high water, or whatever weepy reasons he comes up with in his mind to justify the mass murder he and others like him are drawn to.

Into Darkness is a simple and well-defined movie with simple and well-defined goals, and the clarity and simplicity of its mission are tremendous strengths. Harrison has declared war on both the Federation and its way of life, and the goal of our heroes is nothing more than to track down and apprehend or kill him, no matter the political cost. Controversies over whitewashing a man who ends up being a famous franchise character aside, Benedict Cumberbatch brings this audacious, deliberate villain to life as the best antagonist of the new trilogy, striking at the heart of the Federation with a calm, almost clinical precision. He’s unsettlingly controlled in the face of everything Starfleet can throw at him and a truly tragic figure, firmly in charge of every scene he’s in. He’s a frighteningly smart and intense villain, but in a way that feels subdued and calculating.

On the other hand, the highlight of our heroes is Spock, a great character whose level demeanor ironically makes all of the emotions he does express pop with raw urgency. Into Darkness doesn’t devote as much screen time to interpersonal relations as the first movie, but the acting remains just as good on most levels while actually improving on a few others. The dynamic, well-acted characters of this trilogy are its greatest strength, and this movie is the strongest of the three in that regard, because while it's more narrative-centric than before, its character beats are also more efficient and affecting. Mr. Spock acts as something of an emotional anchor for the cast, who rely on him to stay calm in the face of a crisis that even he may not be able to handle. He really helps a movie that sometimes aims to please everybody, one that can be a little generic when it stops taking risks.

You see, this movie isn’t bad, but it is more generic than the one before it. Apart from a brilliant design for a futuristic London, it looks and acts like any other science fiction popcorn movie you’ve ever watched, though its execution is commendable. It pains me to say this about a movie whose technical parts all work, but too much of it is too vanilla. Only a few of its action and spectacle scenes land any real punches, though they hit hard when they do, and the rest tend to look weightless when put through the gauntlet of safe, crowd-pleasing mediocrity. The movie is competent, but the problem is that it repeatedly aims lower than it should have and even could have with some of the ideas its characters are juggling. This is a better-executed movie with a more interesting villain, but the trade-off is that it's a lot easier to forget.

Into Darkness is notably more effects-heavy than its predecessor, and that’s saying a lot for a science fiction franchise like Star Trek, even though London’s Victorian aesthetics shine through the computer-generated noise. However, what stands out to me about this movie is that it never seems to lose its focus or its characters, whether in its vast, alien worlds or its relatively familiar human ones. Even if it is safe, it remains single-mindedly set on bringing Harrison to justice and does not veer to the left or the right in pursuit of this goal. Its worldbuilding might not always measure up to the statement-making thoughtfulness of the first film, but its characters matter to it, and they are treated with far more importance than I’m accustomed to for a big-name blockbuster. Kirk, Harrison, and the consideration extended to their writing prove without a doubt that they mattered to the writers.

Ultimately, I appreciate this sequel for not losing itself in spectacle, for its willingness to go after the secretive, enigmatic Harrison like a heat-seeking missile of justice. He is an important villain with an elaborate scheme and some personal secrets that may blow your mind a little. I also appreciate its willingness to dig below the surface and treat these characters as more than just plot devices. Into Darkness shares a lot of similarities with 1982’s The Wrath of Khan, but the context of that movie has been flipped here. This is Star Trek, both as you remember it and as you’ve never seen it before.

Star Trek Into Darkness - 8/10

Proverbs 14:12