Tuesday, June 11, 2013

Star Trek: Into Darkness


Earlier this week, I went and saw the latest Star Trek movie with my girlfriend and her parents. I thoroughly enjoyed it, although I didn't think it was quite as good as the prior Star Trek movie. While I wont go into any spoilers or the plot line in general, I'd like to explore a few things related to the movie. As a disclaimer, I'm not really a Trekkie, although I do really enjoy the Star Trek universe. I think the themes and situations it raises are very compelling and will likely be things humanity faces in the future.

In comparison with the earlier prequel, Star Trek, I think Into Darkness lost a little of its impact. Most of the main characters have already been introduced, and that was one reason I found the first movie so engaging. Another reason it lost points with me was due to some pretty large plot and technology holes. My suspension of disbelief is pretty strong and I'm willing to look past a large amount of errors, but this movie pushed the envelope for me.

On a more positive note, the visuals were amazing, the characters were well acted, the story intriguing, and the tone moved between funny and serious at a pleasant pace. It seems a pretty safe bet that they will continue making these modern Trek movies, and I'll continue seeing them. The pros outweigh the cons, and as long as it continues to have at least a tiny bit of "sci" in its sci-fi, I can look past some plot holes.

Love life,
ZW

2 comments:

  1. if we look from the known perspective of physics y may not look real, but do we know everything to know about physics??? just saying...

    ReplyDelete
  2. You're definitely right, we don't know everything. But, from my perspective at least, we know most, if not all, of the "basic" laws. If something violates those laws, I think it's pretty safe to say it is impossible, and probably always will be. There is definitely the chance that new discoveries and advancements will change the basic laws of physics and open up previously impossible technologies, however

    ReplyDelete