"Star Trek Into Darkness" has one huge thing going for it: It follows the massively successful 2009 film "Star Trek." But it's got several more going against it, such as the fact that it's a sequel, a sequel in a franchise whose installments have typically been considered uneven and, perhaps oddly, a sequel that follows the massively successful 2009 film "Star Trek."
But mammoth expectations from moviegoers aside, "Into Darkness" has so far received mostly positive reviews, although most suggest that the film should be looked at primarily as summer spectacle. On the other hand, longtime "Trek" fans — not to mention folks expecting something a little smarter or more substantial — have been quick to point out the film's shortcomings. Take a look at a cross-section of reviews for the film as you're deciding how excited to be about "Star Trek Into Darkness": cautiously optimistic or mind-numbingly thrilled to have another "Trek" movie to watch?
Who's Going To Like 'Star Trek Into Darkness'?
" 'Star Trek Into Darkness' is a movie that tries so very hard to appeal to everyone (and should satisfy most) during a summer season that knows how to bring the noise and the funk and the big-budget special effects. It wows and it pows, and while the gang is still having some issues balancing fan service with the growth of something new and fresh, the sequel is exciting, thrilling, funny, emotional and everything you'd want from a summer blockbuster." — Erik Davis, Movies.com
But Is It Enough To Love It As A Thrill Ride?
"Although the film is directed with the fervor and intensity of a tie-in theme park ride, the script, sadly, has precisely the same narrative aspirations. Offering a nonsensical mess of conspiracy theory, "Into Darkness" ends up becoming something stuck midway between a muddled Truther metaphor and a nearly beat-for-beat remake of the identically plotted 'Star Trek: Nemesis,' widely regarded as the franchise's worst entry." — Silas Lesnick, ComingSoon.net
What Movies Might Help Shine Light On 'Darkness'?
"Yes, it's brazenly dependent on our collective (and justified) fond memories of the best of the first-round 'Star Trek' movies, 'Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan.' We won't say how, exactly, but it is. But the new film works. It's rousing. The human element, and the Vulcan element, to say nothing of various other species, are present, accounted for and taken seriously enough to matter." — Michael Phillips, Chicago Tribune
[article id="1707278"]Find Out What 'Star Trek Into Darkness' Was Almost Named![/article]
How Well Do They Handle The Franchise's Legacy?
" 'Star Trek Into Darkness' continues Abrams' gambit of retelling the 'Star Trek' saga, only slightly backward and upside down, and some of his tampering with canon will no doubt solicit yowls from the usual corners of the internet. (Admittedly, I felt a little cheated by writers Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman and Damon Lindelof indulging in a cake-and-eat-it ending, but it's not a deal-breaker.)" — Alonso Duralde, The Wrap
How Much Should You Think About 'Trek' After (Or Even During) The Film?
"JJ Abrams' reboot of 'Star Trek' was a strange, almost miraculous film. When you think about the movie at all — give any of it a thought — the whole thing falls apart. But the film itself holds up as you watch it; you have to actually revisit it in your mind for the collapse to happen. 'Star Trek Into Darkness' doesn't bother waiting; the film falls apart as it goes, raining debris as it implodes like a building being demolished." — Devin Faraci, Badass Digest
Check out everything we've got on "Star Trek Into Darkness."