Quoted from BC_Gambit:
I was very pleasantly surprised by the first "new" ST film (seemed like it had some heart, not just stupid explosions). Into Darkness was "good enough" for a stupid summer movie, but not much more than that.
If you are satisfied by a bunch of action sequences strung together, then yes Into Darkness does that.
If you want a movie with some consequences to the characters actions and some interesting plot? Nope.
Highlights for me (SPOILERS):
- Remember when Kirk lost command of the Enterpise for an afternoon?
- Enterprise does not fire a single shot in the entire movie if I recall correctly. Not a deal breaker, but considering the "Wrath of Khan" aping it is weird.
- Starfleet communicators can now call from the middle of nowhere in Klingon space to a bar in our solar system. Huh?
- Personal transporter devices that can hop solar systems. Huh? If these exist, just beam a bomb somehwere you want it to go and boom. Movie over.
- nobody tries (apparently) to stop the Vengeance from killing 100,000's(?) of people near the end of the movie... at the very least the Enterprise should have called 911.
- Khan blood cures space herpes.
Lazy writing. It would have been more interesting to me if they did something surprising like:
- Khan's backstory was explored and made a sympathetic charater (e.g. yes he killed people back in the day, but it was to get his people who were being wiped out off the earth to prevent either a genocide of regular humans or his people)
- have him join the crew to prove himself... but there would always be a question of trust. Would he betray it?
- have him punch Kirk across the room to enter the warp core to save the ship. With his Khan blood it makes sense he would be more resilient than Kirk. Plus he could more convincingly align the warp core than Kirk does with his wimpy flail kicks
Yeah, STID is fun, as is all of Abrams' Trek...
... but I find it pithy.
Part of the historic coolness of Trek has always been its scientific plausibility. Indeed, there were and are lots of things Trek has predicted. Even the concept of warp drive is being examined as a theoretic method of going FTL without violating the laws of physics. That's what makes it so geeky cool.
But Abrams' stuff just is internally inconsistent beyond what Trek traditionally does.
It's fun, but it's kind of dissatisfying over the entire ST theme of a history of the future.
If preAbrams Trek was like a plate of steak and lobster with a matching wine, then Abrams Trek is like a box of Krispy Kreme doughnuts. Sweet but lacking sophistication.
These Treks are fun, but pretty plain jane scifi action. Not the prescient stuff that we usually associate with the franchise.
But there are worse things. I'll survive, somehow.