Star Trek Into Darkness (Re)Review: Abrams Strikes Again

The Nostalgia Critic thought Into Darkness was a good movie ruined by a terrible ending. Oh boy, set phasers to obsessive fanboy reply…

Next week a new Nostalgia Critic editorial will appear to the general public. I know this because I’m one of the clever and handsome people… who happen to have a free year long subscription to Vessel, the early access service. Sucks for you, eh?

All joking aside, the video is about movies being ruined by the ending, and while I surprisingly agree with most that was being said, my one pet peeve, Star Trek, is not among the films that were bad just because of the ending.
(For those interested and with an account:

A bad ending to a good film is merely getting cut with a kitchen knife or stepping on a lego brick. Sitting through Into Darkness, however, was a serious of paper cuts followed up by stepping on a lego brick. Memetic humor aside, this means that you are already so num from the previous stupidity that you don’t really care about one more insult, one more dumb element.

I never said a definitive piece on Into Darkness. We once did an hour long angry rant podcast that came close to it, but in hindsight that seems more and more like I was getting swept up in the hate on the movie. It doesn’t deserve it that bad. The acting was good, the effects were good, the score was amazing, in many ways everything worked about the movie except for the writing and the the direction.

Like I stipulated in my Star Wars article from a couple of weeks back, JJ Abrams hides the flaws in his movies by speeding you by it, Into Darkness is very similar and you can tell, because not much happens. Benedict Cumberkhan attacks, Enterprise goes to revenge, capture, twist, fight, fight, fight, don’t give into revenge even though that is what Khan did and it got his crew to safety and he lived. That would have been fine had there been more to flesh out these few elements, but they served merely as set-ups for the action scenes. It’s a big problem in most action films now, and even the superior Star Trek Beyond, one of the best Trek movies ever surprisingly enough, was not exempt from it: scenes that should not include an action beat have one to keep the audience invested, distracted even, from a mundane scene. Into Darkness makes the cardinal mistake though, of interrupting interesting drama scenes with action beats or twisting them in such a way that action becomes inevitable.

By now everyone should hopefully have noticed that Into Darkness was a thinly veiled rip-off of Deep Space Nine’s “Homefront” and “Paradise Lost” two-parter, with Peter Weller playing the role of Admiral Leyton. And yet that story worked and Into Darkness didn’t, because it wasn’t a character piece, it was an action piece that happened to have some characters in there with badly written motivations that were supposed to trick you into thinking there was depth. Admiral Robocop’s plan was dumb: if you want to engineer a crisis to get your military budget raised so you can prepare for a war with the Klingons you don’t go and tell Kirk to fire torpedoes at the Klingon homeworld. Admiral Leyton is one of the best villains in all of Trek because he did everything bloodless and made sure to not harm anyone and the moment that happened he surrendered himself voluntarily. Admiral Buckaroo Banzai is just another kill crazy Admiral.

That’s not even mentioning small stuff that starts to gnaw at you throughout the film: a cold fusion device that was used to freeze a vulcano even though its a method of generating energy, Kirk shooting his horse-thingy even though that’s where he had parked it, hiding a starship under water even though that would inevitably lead to discovery and breaking of the prime directive, all the admirals meeting without security, for some reason injecting a Tribble with human blood… not even mentioning the fact that the character arcs from the last movie are re-used, which is probably one of the greatest missteps: there is no reason to watch this film because it only repeats the last one and is inconsequential to the next one, which starts where 09 ended. This is one of those mid 90s Disney sequels like Lion King 1.5.

For a movie so meticulously set up last time to make everything new and exciting the film just went nowhere and stayed with all the Trek cliches and reused plot lines, which is arguably its biggest problem.

So yes, an ending can ruin an otherwise decent movie, but in the case of Into Darkness there wasn’t much left to ruin because of the number of things already wrong with it.

Remember in your rebuttals: Twitter hashtags #stillnotoverit #trekfanboy #ohmygodcanyoupleasestoptalkingaboutit