Star Trek Into Darkness' origins and impact

25-May-13 11:09 AM by
Filed under Films, Star Trek; 6 comments.

Four years after J. J. Abrams rebooted Gene Roddenberry's original television show, the youthful crew of the original NCC–1701 have again taken to space in Star Trek Into Darkness. As is now our tradition, my father and I attended the film's opening night. Two hours later, I left the theater feeling a way no other movie had ever left me: overwhelmed. The layers, implications, and consequences of the Enterprise's latest mission are too complex to be boiled down into a simple recommendation. Although I do wholeheartedly recommend this film, it's not enough to say that it's a good film, as it's much more than that.

I'd walked into the movie having successfully avoided all trailers, teasers, rumors, and revelations. I cannot promise I will do the same in this review, so proceed with caution. For example, the latest trailer has a single word that would've ruined for me the identity of the antagonist, which some might consider an already poorly kept secret — but even as I watched the film, I was never sure of myself right up until the big reveal. It would be impossible to comment on the film without including that moment.

Spock in flames

What better way to start a summer blockbuster than with a volcano?

More broadly than those specifics, it's important to first acknowledge that this is no longer Roddenberry's Star Trek. Some have criticized Abrams for dumbing down Star Trek from its ideological origins into a generic action-packed blockbuster. But with these two films, Star Trek has undergone a natural evolution from philosophy defined to philosophy realized. Star Trek is no longer about debates around tables and in turbolifts, as it so often was in The Next Generation, a series I adored. Now it is about making difficult decisions in the heat of the moment — and dealing with the consequences. The most talkative we see this crew of the Enterprise is Kirk's confrontation with Scotty, which does not go the way either Scotty or the audience expected; the look on his face says, "Did we really just pull the pin on this grenade?" Other conflicts, such as Uhura and Spock's spat, seem almost comically timed and forced. But even these moments move the story and the characters forward through challenging times. Just because the set has moved from a conference room to the heat of battle does not make the decisions any less difficult.

That gravity is carried by the excellent acting of the cast. Although the credits list the actors in alphabetical order, implying an ensemble cast, it is very much Kirk and Spock's show. Most everyone else gets their chances to shine: Scotty is integral to the plot; Bones and Uhura have some fantastic scenes; and Sulu's moment in the spotlight is the first time I've seen a hint of the man who will eventually captain the U.S.S. Excelsior. Chekov, unfortunately, is mostly wasted in this episode, serving as a poor substitute for Scotty. But the movie is ultimately about Kirk and Spock's friendship and their diametrical approaches to situations, as indicated by McCoy's answer to Kirk's early question, "If you were here, Spock, what would you do?" The returning cast is joined by Alice Eve (Men In Black 3) as Carol, Peter Weller (RoboCop) as Admiral Marcus, and Benedict Cumberbatch (Sherlock) as John Harrison.

Harrison vs. Kirk

A new rivalry…
or an old one?

John Harrison? Yes, that is the name of our villain, at least at first. His early act of terrorism was brutally unwelcome here in Boston, where we had just suffered a similar tragedy. From there, his actions are pettier than I'd expect. His escape to the Klingon homeworld gave us a first glimpse at this re-imagined alien race, but they are otherwise a red herring. Harrison was neither conspiring with them nor enticing the Enterprise into a war with them. Given those missed opportunities, what was he going to do on Qo'noS — hide? It seems an unfitting and unambitious fate for the tyrant he eventually reveals himself to be. Had he succeeded, we might once again have had a movie where Kirk and Khan never come face-to-face — a missed opportunity from the 1982 film, finally realized in 2013.

Carol and Jim

Watch their love explode across the screen!

Cumberbatch's character is one of the film's many ties to the known Star Trek timeline. Another is Section 31, the brief mention of which elicited a gasp from this long-time fan. It indicates a familiarity with Star Trek lore, both the unaltered timeline that precedes Nero's incursion — Section 31, although introduced in Deep Space Nine, was alive and well in the age of Captain Archer — and the implications of what it could become in the future. The same occurs with the introduction of Carol Marcus: her introduction to Kirk produced little unique chemistry, but we know what it could become.

But no character, alien, or organization carried as much weight as a scene revisited from The Wrath of Khan. Kirk's rescue of the Enterprise came so suddenly that, when I realized what was happening, it hit me like a ton of bricks. "Not again!" I despaired. Leonard Nimoy's Spock had just said that Khan was defeated "at great cost" — a heavy statement: how many people can reflect on their own deaths, then be chilled by the knowledge that their murderer has risen from the grave? Now here we are, seeing it happen again, this time with Kirk as the human sacrifice. The captain who'd started the film with the proud proclamation of having never lost a member of his crew had more than a perfect record in mind; the agony with which he had, moments ago, apologized to the bridge for what he thought was their ultimate defeat was palpable. Kirk cares for every member of his ship as much as he cares for Spock — the latter being a friendship that is no less weighty for having been witnessed across only two films instead of two decades, as it was the last time Khan threatened the Enterprise. Kirk bookends the film by saving Spock's life, and the evolution we see is in Spock's reaction: from a detached betrayal of his captain to Starfleet, to a vengeance-fueled hunt his friend's killer. Through Kirk's selflessness, Spock has gotten in touch with the best and worst of his own humanity.

Spock and Kirk

Watch their love explode across the screen!… or not.

This scene, combined with using Khan as the film's protagonist, may suggest an unoriginality among the scriptwriters. Four years ago, Khan seemed the least likely candidate for the sequel, lest Abrams walk the same cinematic path laid out in decades past. But critics clamoring for this new generation of Star Trek to go on an original adventure need look only four years to the past, when the Romulan Nero arrived on the scene.

By contrast, this sequel is not a rehashing of an old plot but rather a brilliant exploration of destiny. How much of these characters' fates are their own to decide? Are Kirk and crew destined to always clash with Khan, no matter how much the circumstances may change? Just how far-reaching are the effects of Nero's destruction of Vulcan? The exhumation of the SS Botany Bay is a small change with dramatic consequences. Will the next film continue referring to the pivotal moment in time when a villain from the future set a new course for the galaxy?

With the full weight of Star Trek's history behind this movie, it is hard for me to say if this sequel is as much meant for a general audience as the 2009 reboot was. You can get away without knowing what Section 31 is, or who Carol Marcus becomes — but is Khan a good villain on his own merits? There is no reference to the Eugenics Wars, which may be too much backstory for one film to deliver, lest it become the preachy Trek it is trying to move away from. Not only his origin, but also his ambition, may be lost on an audience that is not as likely to respond to Khan's identity with "Holy crap!" than they are with "Who?"

Star Trek Into Darkness opening night

Star Trek: Generations.

For those filmgoers who take this film as just another summer blockbuster, there's still plenty to enjoy on just that level, and plenty to gripe about, too. As with any Trek (or even sci-fi in general), there are plenty of plot holes and technological inconsistencies. Some were elegantly addressed: when I wondered how Khan could beam himself to Qo'noS, they tied back into the 2009 film with a reference to Scotty's transwarp beaming technique, a direct result of Nero's temporal incursion. But then the question becomes: why send the Enterprise to Qo'noS when they could just beam there? Of course, the choice to plot a course into enemy territory furthered Admiral Marcus' agenda, but it still seems an oversight. Also, I think the film may've addressed this, but is within an explosive device the smartest place for Khan to have hidden his family? And, even if the Eugenics Wars was two hundred years ago, shouldn't at least one member of Starfleet have studied enough history to recognize the leader of the Augments? Or was plastic surgery part of Khan's transformation into John Harrison, that he might work alongside Section 31 without revealing the depths to which Admiral Marcus had plumbed for inspiration?

Still, most other scenes can be neatly explained. Marcus sharing the secret of Section 31 with Kirk seemed a faux pas, but I suspect Marcus never expected Kirk to come back from his next mission, taking the truth of the clandestine group's existence to his grave. The explosion of the 72 torpedoes first seemed heartless and cruel, especially given McCoy's involvement — what happened to "First do no harm"? When Kirk learned that the Augments had been extracted, his response took the words right out of my mouth: "I'll be damned." And the use of Khan's blood to save Kirk (which has its own implications for the future of Star Trek — is there anything Augment blood can't cure?) was foreshadowed not only by the tribble's resurrection, but also by the cure for the diseased girl, which was likely a dose of the same elixir. And sure, we knew Kirk wouldn't die, not so early in Pine's career in the role. But if only the admirable Pike had been afforded so heroic a death, or at least the peaceful one we can assume he was granted in the original timeline, rather than gunned down in cold blood — even if the latter was necessary to provide Kirk the drive to go after Harrison.

Whatever level you view this film on, it has special significance for its core audience. For someone who has seen all 726 episodes and 12 movies and read dozens of novels of Star Trek, I cannot take what J.J. Abrams has done here lightly. It is a powerful combination of fan service and creative license — a message of "I will use what you like, but you may not like how I use it." I almost cannot render judgment without seeing what comes next. Will Abrams continue to rely on the familiar, remixing it in unexpected ways? Or will he contribute something wholly original to the Trek universe? In a sense, he has already gone boldly, with his direction and pacing of this action-packed sequel. What more lies far beyond the stars for the Enterprise and her fans to discover?

6 Responses to “Star Trek Into Darkness' origins and impact”

  1. Steven Weyhrich adds:

    Nicely done review!

  2. Dain adds:

    While I enjoyed the movie as a summer blockbuster type movie. I read an interesting article that made me think about a few things.

    The article claims that J.J. Abrams and company set back the Star Trek Universe's advances in society race and gender equality several hundred years. Specifically, only crusty old grumpy white guys are invited to the "Very Important People" party at the beginning of the movie. They even cast the whitest British guy they could find to play the part of once Sikh(?) Indian villain.

    Personally, I don't let Hollywood offend me because I know they're just trying to fill seats, but even I kind of cringed at the Dr. Carol Marcus underwear shot. Just seemed way out of place in a Star Trek movie. I have nothing against gratuitous underwear shots mind you just seemed as out of place and as badly placed as Spock's scream at the end (too far in a kind of George Lucas kind of way, IMHO)

    That being said, I do enjoy the newer movies, but I do miss some of the quieter contemplation of the old movies and shows.

    Fortunately, I think J.J.'s style will be even better suited to the Star Wars Universe.

    Thanks for the review, it was an enjoyable read.

  3. Zac adds:

    Wow. This was awesome. I just watched the movie a few days ago, but I could never have described it like this.

    You helped me appreciate the movie on levels I didn't realize were there. I am a huge fan of the Next Generation but have a lot more Star Trek to watch (I've been looking forward to it).

    The one thing that did get me was all the action. I personally get turned off when a movie has to make me poop my pants every 5 seconds. Sure, it's fun, but part of what I liked about the first one was the slower pace.

    When I reminded the people I was with that there was a missile diffused on another planet in the middle of the movie, everyone had forgotten it. That was so intense! I think at the point people forget many small climaxes in a movie, You could chill just a bit…

    You did explain this with the whole "hard decisions" thing but still, I wish the film gave us just a little more to think about.

    I'm probably being too hard on the movie. It is a summer blockbuster after all.

    I wish they would make a new show that moved much slower and acted more like a "Next Generation" but maybe I'm just greedy considering how much Star Trek there already is in the universe….

    I did love the people in the first scenes. They were really well done. It made me happy to see something like that represented.

    Anyway, again, great review. I hope you are doing well man! I have to check your blog out more.

  4. Thomas Compter adds:

    I enjoyed your review. Looking forward to seeing the movie.

  5. Steven Weyhrich adds:

    Now that I've actually seen the movie, let me make some of my own comments.

    With regard to Khan trans-warp beaming himself to Qo'noS (I still want to write "Kronos") – it seems that he was in that sense playing right into what Admiral Marcus wanted, to initiate a conflict with the Klingons. Perhaps if he had fled to, say, one of the moons of Jupiter, the act of capturing him would not have allowed him to have an opportunity to seize the militarized ship that Marcus was flying, and seizing that was something he very much wanted to do. (Were Marcus' actions were a part of Section 31's plans? That was not clear to me.)

    I agree that there seemed to be no point to having Carol Marcus changing clothes in the shuttle or whatever it was she and Kirk were in. Also, having Nimoy in to do a guest shot could have as easily been left on the cutting room floor, and it would not have really affected the end result of the movie.

    I was also interested in the role reversal with Kirk fixing the warp core problem and becoming fatally irradiated by the exposure. However, Spock putting his head back and yelling what he did almost made me laugh – it was almost a parody of the Kirk's yell in the older movie, and did not have (for me) the dramatic effect that was likely intended.

    As far as the movie in total is concerned, I thought it well done and worth another viewing. As for the choice of Khan as the villain and some of the other things borrowed from past Trek: It reminds me of some of the rebooting of comic book franchises that have been done in the recent past. Spider-Mac encounters some of the same villains as he did when he first appeared in the 1960s, but in new ways and with different outcomes than happened in the original stories. In that same sense, this reboot of Star Trek shows that in this universe, some of the same problems are encountered, but in a different fashion than happened in the past.

  6. Gene D. adds:

    I enjoyed both Star Trek: Into Darkness and your review, which I mostly agreed with. I was also prepared for a rehash of Wrath of Khan and was pleasantly surprised by the levels of characterization and action.

    Let's hope that J.J. Abrams can inject new life into the Star Wars franchise and that Star Trek continues to live long and prosper!