Share TheDeepness's profile
TheDeepness
TheDeepness's stats
- Review count2
- Helpfulness votes0
- First reviewMarch 29, 2009
- Last reviewMay 25, 2013
- Featured reviews0
- Average rating3.5
TheDeepness's Reviews
Overall rating
4
/
5
Still Finding Itself
PostedMay 25, 2013
TheDeepness
from Richmond, VA
Age:35 to 44
Gender:Male
Goes to the movies:monthly
Dialogue
4
/
5
Special Effects
5
/
5
Art Direction
4
/
5
Acting
4
/
5
Story
3
/
5
Camerawork
3
/
5
J.J. Abrams definitely knows how to make a fun movie. The pacing, action sequences, and special effects are all spot on.
His weakness (in all of his projects, but especially for Star Trek) is story. This reboot franchise is great, but, with Into Darkness, it seems apparent that Abrams, his writers, and the actors still haven't quite dialed in to the universe of 23rd century Star Trek or these particular Star Trek characters.
Kirk, Spock, and McCoy form an inseparable triumvirate of drive, reason, and passion that Pine, Quinto, and Urban haven't been able to replicate convincingly just yet. Pine's Kirk is still too unsure of himself. Quinto's Spock, though understandably more connected to his human half following the events of the first film, does not deliver the superior intellect and expansive knowledge for which Spock was renown. Urban's McCoy perfectly channels the country doctor's sometimes explosive gruffness, but fails to capture the charm that DeForest Kelley so effortlessly infused into the character; Urban's McCoy just seems pissed off and annoyed most of the time.
For this reboot's second outing, I'd expected a more substantial presentation of these characters (as well as much more from Sulu, Chekov, Scotty, and Uhura). The first film worked better as an ensemble piece than this second one, though this one certainly didn't fail. But so much of it felt superficial, as if the effort referenced Star Trek rather than being an authentic Star Trek vehicle.
Curiously, and perhaps Star Trek fans are already debating this, but I wonder, considering the events of both of these films occur within what they themselves have determined to be an alternate time line, if these films qualify as true Star Trek canon. Aren't parallel universes fun?
**SPOILER ALERT**
That J.J. Abrams and the writers elected to resurrect Khan for this film, as well feature a Leonard Nimoy cameo, was bitter sweet in that it was certainly nice to see familiar characters (and actors) again (and definitely fun for a Star Trek fan to see how this alternate time line deals with them), but it's a little disappointing that the filmmakers didn't present entirely new material. Let's hope the next film (if there is a next film) doesn't involve a time-travel scenario that pairs this alternate reality 23rd century crew with an alternate reality 24th century Next Generation crew.
**END SPOILER**
Regardless, Star Trek Into Darkness is highly entertaining and a worthy sequel to J.J. Abrams' 2009 Star Trek film. I've seen, and really enjoyed, it twice and plan on adding it to my Blu-ray collection as soon as it becomes available.
HIGHLY RECOMMENDED
Pros well paced, great f/x
Cons sloppy science
Yes, I recommend this movie.
Share:
0points
0of 0voted this as helpful.
Overall rating
3
/
5
Targeted for VERY Young Viewers
PostedMarch 29, 2009
TheDeepness
from Richmond, VA
Monsters vs. Aliens was very entertaining, with several laugh-out-loud gags and a few others that fall flat. There wasn't a consistent stream of adult-oriented jokes or references to keep older views fully engaged and some of the plot devices were so utterly unbelievable one of the children sitting near me in the audience commented aloud how "stupid" something was. The real showpiece of Monsters vs. Aliens though is the animation/3D presentation, which was definitely on par with the best seen to date. Monsters vs. Aliens is worth an admission ticket for the 3D if nothing else.
Yes, I recommend this movie.
Share:
0points
0of 0voted this as helpful.