Skip to main content

Star Trek: Into Darkness *Minimum Spoilers* Review

 

I've just returned from seeing the sequel to J.J. Abram's Star Trek. Going into the film I already had surmised who the villain would be. However, I shall endeavor in this review to leave spoilers to a minimum.
Many purists have made their protestations regarding Abrams move into an alternate timeline/reality. These Trekkie Truists have deemed Abram an Ahab and the new voyages of the U.S.S. Enterprise as an abomination. With respect to those that have strong feelings about The Star Trek Universe, the new direction Abrams is taking is for a new generation. This new saga isn't meant to be compared with the The Original Series and Movies. Like Star Trek: The Next Generation, Voyager, Deep Space Nine, and Enterprise, Abram's is taking Star Trek boldly where it has never gone before. The pacing and feel of these films aren't suppose to be same as Gene Rodenberry's masterpieces. Abrams is a new Captain and his Enterprise is there going to be managed differently.

Now for Star Trek: Into Darkness. Sequels tend to be ambitious and either surpass expectations or seriously disappoint. Into Darkness is the former. The character development like in the last installment is brilliant! Kirk and Spock's friendship really blossoms and there is more raw emotion than the last film. The story is more developed, revolving around a believable villain this time. I wasn't quite convinced by Eric Bana's Nero, he was very one dimensional. The new villain, John Harrison, has a compelling reason for his actions besides just mere revenge (see Major Spoilers Review for more details).

One problem I had with the Abrams' last Trek was that there was the major plot holes. When Nero returns to the past, he could conceivably take the Red Matter to Romulus and have them keep it for the Super Nova that destroyed Romulus in his future. This would then erase his wife and child's death. Secondly, the fact that events are altered by Nero's acts in the past (Killing Kirk's father) and destroying Vulcan have significantly changed the future. The Science Vessel that Spock had commissioned and created by The Science Academy on Vulcan wouldn't exist and thus the Red Matter wouldn't exist and Nero wouldn't be ravaging Star Fleet and obliterating planets (dizzy yet?). Future Spock played by the talented Leonard Nimoy would cease to exist because the Alternate Time-Line Spock wouldn't become him. On the other hand Old or Original Spock could create the Red Matter sooner and save Romulus and thus make this entire Abrams Alternate Timeline cease to exist. So many black holes in the plot that you can get lost. But I digress, lets get back to Into Darkness.

One of the elements of this film that I preferred over the previous installment was the time spent planet side. I appreciated less time spent in space or on board a star ship. Seeing the night life of San Francisco, seeing Star Fleet London, and other locations was a delight.

If your looking for entertainment look no further than the latest voyage of U.S.S. Enterprise. Star Trek: Into Darkness has the perfect blend of story and special effects. Be prepared for space adventure that goes at warp speed and doesn't stop tell the very end. Prepare to Go boldy where no man has gone before... again.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Israel’s Conquest of Canaan: The Nephilim and Giants

  Christianity Today asserts that the conquest of Canaan can be a “stumbling block” for believers. This probably is because of a foolish idea of comparing it to a modern conquest happening in our world. The truth is that God had Israel conquer Canaan because it was ruled by evil giants, “We saw the Nephilim there (the descendants of Anak come from the Nephilim). We seemed like grasshoppers in our own eyes, and we looked the same to them.” (Numbers 13:33). These are Anakim or Nephilim, the children of angels and human women, “When man began to multiply on the face of the land and daughters were born to them, the sons of God (angels) saw that the daughters of man were attractive. And they took as their wives any they chose. Then the LORD said, “My Spirit shall not abide in man forever, for he is flesh: his days shall be 120 years.” The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. The...
Post a Comment
Read more

Dispensationalism

John Nelson Darby (1800-1882) was a man who did two things, he took 70th week of the Book of Daniel and stretched out to the End Times, and he was the father of  Dispensationalism , a belief system that God dispenses different peoples with separate blessings and covenants. According to Darb'ys doctrine of Dispensationalism, God dispenses different covenants. There are total of seven dispensations that divide the history of man: I. Dispensation of Innocence (prior to the Fall, "Do not east of the Fruit of Good and Eve, Eden), II. Dispensation of Conscience ( You must assuage guilt and sin with blood sacrifices.) III. Dispensation of Human Government (Multiply and Subdue the world, example the Tower of Babel Gen 11:1-9, and Genesis 1:28). IV. Dispensation of the Promise (Dwell in Canaan, Jerusalem) V. Dispensation of the Law ("Obey the Law of Moses and the Prophets"). VI. Dispensation of Grace (The Church, Jesus Christ has come...
Post a Comment
Read more

Jesus’ Name in Aramaic

There has been a trend to render Jesus’ name Hebrew, יֵשׁוּעַ , Yeshua. The problem is neither Christ nor his apostles, nor the Jews in 30-33 A.D. spoke Hebrew, they spoke Aramaic. A ramaic is the oldest language on earth and was the language Jesus spoke. In fact, the oldest Old Testament is the Septuagint a Greco translation around 132 B.C.E. (165 Years Before Christ)that was translated from Aramaic. The Masoretic Text, The Hebrew Old Testament most Bibles use, dates from 7th to 10th Century A.D. (Medieval Times).  This translation does not cross reference with the words of Christ in the New Testament which are Aramaic and Koine Greek.  If the Aramaic was what Jesus spoke, then by what name would have been called? Jesus’ name in Aramaic is Isho or Eesho, spelled ܝܫܘܥ . That is the name of our Lord in Aramaic! He would have heard his name in this dialect, “Hail Isho or Eesho!” as well as the Greek, Ἰ ησο ῦ ς , Iesous.  Aramaic is disappearing, only a few peop...
Post a Comment
Read more