star trek into darkness review

Movie Reviews

Tv/streaming, collections, great movies, chaz's journal, contributors, star trek into darkness.

Now streaming on:

Less a classic " Star Trek " adventure than a " Star Trek "-flavored action flick, shot in the frenzied, handheld, cut-cut-cut style that’s become Hollywood’s norm, director J.J. Abrams’ latest could have been titled "The Bourne Federation."

The plot pits the Enterprise crew against an intergalactic terrorist named John Harrison ( Benedict Cumberbatch , giving his honeyed baritone a workout), who’s waging war on the Federation for mysterious personal reasons. There’s a joke, an argument, a chase, a spaceship battle, or a brutal close-quarters firefight every five minutes, but all the action is intimately tied to character. The major players, particularly Chris Pine’s James T. Kirk and Zachary Quinto ’s Mr. Spock, are as finely shaded as the incarnations played by William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy . This new voyage of the starship Enterprise is brash, confident, and often brutally violent, and features the most lived-in production design I’ve seen in a Hollywood sci-fi blockbuster since " Minority Report ." 

Why, then, is the film ultimately disappointing? I suspect it’s the pop culture echo chamber effect: Abrams and his screenwriters ( Robert Orci , Alex Kurtzman and Damon Lindelof ) are so obsessed with acknowledging and then futzing around with what we already know about Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Uhura, Scotty and company that the movie doesn’t breathe. "Star Trek Into Darkness" is peppered with nods to past films and episodes: Kirk’s impetuous decision-making and horndog sexual proclivities; Spock’s denial of his half-humanness; Dr. McCoy’s cranky witticisms; Scotty’s protestations of what he and the ship “canna” do; references to tribbles and neutral zones and the Harry Mudd incident. The central plotline refers to one of Trek’s most celebrated storylines — a callback that alternately seems to honor the original, then turn it on its head, then honor it again. The final act includes an homage to one of the most famous scenes in the entire Trek canon — but this, too, is an inversion, or appears to be, until the script springs another whiplash reversal.

The story starts with a " Raiders of the Lost Ark "-like action sequence: Kirk, Spock and the gang are embroiled in a secret mission on a red jungle planet filled with superstitious tribespeople whose lives are threatened by a volcanic eruption. The correct thing to do is leave Mr. Spock behind, because going back to rescue him would violate the Federation’s Prime Directive against messing with the natural development of primitive cultures. It’s in this opening sequence, for better or worse, that the movie establishes a vexing narrative pattern: The characters have urgently necessary arguments about the morally, ethically, and procedurally correct thing to do in a crisis, then one character (usually Kirk) makes a unilateral, straight-from-the-gut decision that worsens everything; and yet somehow at the end he’s rewarded, or at least not seriously punished.

We’re given to understand that it’s always a good thing to prize personal friendship and loyalty above the concerns of one’s crew, ship, federation or species. Sometimes the reward is quite deliberate — as in the end scene, which finds Kirk being celebrated as a hero after making what looked to me like a series of catastrophic rookie mistakes that ended dozens of lives. Other times it’s as if the cosmos itself is rewarding or at least protecting Kirk, as when he loses command of the Enterprise for his behavior on the primitive planet, then gets it back thanks to another sudden plot twist. A good alternate title for this movie would be the name of one of Steven Soderbergh ’s great books about filmmaking: "Getting Away With It: Or, the Further Adventures of the Luckiest Bastard You Ever Saw." The Federation itself seems to have plenty in common with Kirk: Both the opening mission and a subsequent intergalactic act of aggression are presented as having grave consequences if they fail, then the film just sort of writes them off with a shrug, as if to say, “Well, that’s all in the past, and as long as it doesn’t happen again, no harm, no foul.” (Has anyone in the Federation actually honored the Prime Directive?)

Yes, the film’s stumblebum plotting comes from a desire to give the audience what it wants: Kirk in command, flying by the seat of his tight pants; Spock learning it’s OK to acknowledge and act on his emotions, and that there’s more to life than following rules; etc. But surely there were more elegant ways to get us there! Abrams makes the 23rd century look like a place of actions and consequences, in which humans and other creatures might actually live, think and feel, in a world in which a fall of more than ten feet could break a leg, lava can melt flesh, and people who are dead stay dead. But he also tells stories in which various practices, rules and laws, including Starfleet tactical procedures, the Prime Directive, and gravity, have no narrative weight. Too much of "Star Trek Into Darkness" has what I call a “playground storytelling” sensibility: “Lie down, you’re dead. Never mind, you’re alive again — now fight!” This narrative flailing-about isn’t merely amateurish, it’s at odds with the gritty production design and pseudo-documentary camerawork and references to 9/11 and the War on Terror. It takes a great artist to be both serious and silly. Abrams, for all his enthusiasm, ain’t it.

For all its sloppiness and blind spots and fanboy pirouettes, though, "Star Trek Into Darkness" is still an involving film with more heart than most summer blockbusters. Abrams’ roots in TV ( Felicity , Alias , Lost ) seem to have made him attentive to the dynamics of groups, and to the repeated phrases and gestures that bond viewers to characters. Pine’s beefy frat-boy Kirk is appealing, especially when he’s being called on the carpet; Pine has several strong scenes opposite Cumberbatch’s Harrison and Bruce Greenwood ’s mentor-father figure, Capt. Pike, in which Pine is overmatched as both character and actor but uses the imbalance to enhance the scene. Sometimes you see terror in Kirk’s eyes as he blusters; his vulnerability makes you root for him even though his “I gotta be me!” philosophy destroys careers and ends lives.

Quinto’s Spock is equal to, but different than, Leonard Nimoy’s incarnation, and it’s a relief to see that Abrams has made the destruction of Vulcan in the first film a key component of the character’s psychology. As Spock explains to communications officer Uhura ( Zoe Saldana ), his main squeeze, it’s not that he can’t feel any emotion, it’s that he’s decided he’s better off not feeling it: this Spock is a Holocaust survivor who has adopted numbness as a survival strategy. Uhura, Simon Pegg ’s Scotty, John Cho ’s Sulu, Anton Yelchin ’s Chekov, and Karl Urban ’s “Bones” McCoy have their moments, too; they behave like plausibly real people even when the script is asking them to do and say things that common sense tells us is horse manure, and their presences lend the film a dignity it doesn’t earn.

* Edited 6/22/18 to remove a reference to a "forthcoming" detailed blog post on the film that the reviewer ended up not writing.

Matt Zoller Seitz

Matt Zoller Seitz is the Editor at Large of RogerEbert.com, TV critic for New York Magazine and Vulture.com, and a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize in criticism.

Now playing

Monica Castillo

Brian Tallerico

Rebel Moon - Part Two: The Scargiver

Simon abrams.

Carol Doda Topless at the Condor

Marya e. gates.

We Were the Lucky Ones

Robert daniels.

Film Credits

Star Trek Into Darkness (2013)

Rated PG-13

129 minutes

Chris Pine as James T. Kirk

Benedict Cumberbatch as John Harrison

Zachary Quinto as Spock

Simon Pegg as Scotty

Zoe Saldana as Nyota Uhura

• J.J. Abrams
• Alex Kurtzman
• Damon Lindelof
• Roberto Orci

Original Music Composer

• Michael Giacchino

Cinematography

• Daniel Mindel
• April Webster

Production Design

• Scott Chambliss
• Gene Roddenberry

Latest blog posts

The Weight of Smoke (and Blue in the Face): The Magic of Paul Auster

Retrospective: Oscar Micheaux and the Birth of Black Independent Cinema

Phil Lord and Chris Miller Made the Multiplex Safe for ‘The Fall Guy’

Initially Promising Dark Matter Sinks Under Weight of Prestige TV Bloat

Film Review: ‘Star Trek Into Darkness’

J.J. Abrams sets his filmmaking to 'stun' with a sequel in every respect equal or even superior to its splendid 2009 predecessor

By Scott Foundas

Scott Foundas

• Film Review: ‘Black Mass’ 9 years ago
• Film Review: ‘The Runner’ 9 years ago
• Film Review: ‘Straight Outta Compton’ 9 years ago

J.J. Abrams sets his filmmaking to “stun” for “ Star Trek Into Darkness,” a sequel in every respect equal or even superior to its splendid 2009 predecessor, which lovingly and cleverly rebooted Gene Roddenberry ’s long-running space opera following the black hole of 2002’s “Star Trek Nemesis.” Markedly grander in scale, although never at the expense of its richly human (and half-human) characters, “Into Darkness” may not boldly go where no “Trek” adventure has gone before, but getting there is such a well-crafted, immensely pleasurable ride that it would be positively Vulcan to nitpick. Global box office cume should easily warp past the prior pic’s $385 million for this sturdy Paramount tentpole, which opens overseas May 9 before beaming down Stateside one week later.

Abrams, whose last pic was the lyrical “E.T.”/“Close Encounters” homage “Super 8,” here tips his hat to the “Indiana Jones” series, opening with a thrilling setpiece that finds Kirk ( Chris Pine ) and Bones (the sly, loose-limbed Karl Urban ) on the run from a tribe of very angry natives on the planet Nibiru. The natives, decked out in head-to-toe clay body paint, shimmer like human ceramics as they chase the Starfleet officers through a crimson forest, the lush colors of returning d.p. Dan Mindel all but searing the screen. Meanwhile, Spock ( Zachary Quinto ) toils away nearby, attempting to insert a high-tech ice cube into the raging volcano that threatens to destroy Nibiru and its inhabitants — a dangerous mission that quickly goes awry, building to a classic “Trek” standoff between stubborn Vulcan logic and impulsive human emotion.

Popular on Variety

The Enterprise crew has scarcely recovered from that one when, back on Earth, a terror bombing lays waste to a top-secret Starfleet intelligence facility and brings to the fore a new galactic baddie: a rogue Starfleet officer named John Harrison (Benedict Cumberbatch) who claims credit for the attack and, after an equally brazen follow-up, hightails it deep into Klingon-controlled space. The hawkish Adm. Marcus ( Peter Weller ) dispatches the Enterprise in hot pursuit, with this familiar-sounding objective: Shoot first, ask questions later, and avoid starting a war with the locals. Welcome to “Star Trek Into Zero Dark Thirty.”

Only, this John Harrison is a slippery sort who, when given the chance, claims not to be the villain at all, but rather a pawn in someone else’s deadlier scheme. And for much of its running time, “ Star Trek Into Darkness ” makes a good guessing game out of whether this mysterious stranger with the glacial glare and bones seemingly made of steel is friend, foe or — like the “old Spock” of Abrams’ first “Trek” — a little bit of history repeating. It hardly matters, because whatever Cumberbatch is playing, he’s wonderful to watch, infusing the movie with the kind of exotic grandeur Eric Bana’s wan Romulan henchman (arguably the weakest link in the 2009 film) largely lacked. Also making her maiden “Trek” voyage is the lovely Alice Eve as an ambitious science officer who lies her way on to the Enterprise deck and makes goo-goo eyes with the good Captain. She is not, it turns out, the ship’s only stowaway.

Having previously established an alternate “Trek” timeline in which all the events of prior series and movies still happened, but aren’t necessarily doomed to recur, Abrams and returning writers Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman (now joined by “Lost” co-creator Damon Lindelof) here take that idea and run with it, invoking prior “Trek” lore when it suits them, freely branching off into new directions when it doesn’t. (Hell, there’s even some trouble with a tribble.) It’s a tricky business, balancing reverence with reinvention, but like the young Kirk, Abrams seems altogether more comfortable in the captain’s chair this time — not just in the large-scale action scenes, but particularly in the quieter ones, where you can sense his real investment in these characters and his confident touch with actors.

SEE ALSO: ‘Star Trek’ Premieres in London (Photos)

The film builds particularly well on the burgeoning Kirk-Spock friendship, with Pine showing reserves of vulnerability and doubt beneath his cocksure exterior, while Quinto adds gravitas to Spock’s eternal inner conflict — and his deepening romance with Lt. Uhura ( Zoe Saldana ). But make no mistake: The action, when it comes, is superbly executed, whether it’s giant vessels making mincemeat of one another, or the simpler excitements of old-fashioned hand-to-hand combat and foot chases through crowded promenades.

The best, even-numbered films in the original “Trek” film franchise were shaped by the guiding intelligence of writer-director Nicholas Meyer , who laced the Starfleet jargon with high-toned literary references and a gently self-mocking sense of humor. Abrams, too, manages to keep the mood buoyant even when the fate of the universe is hanging in the balance, more than earning his tears when he finally decides to milk them. But if Meyer’s primary references were Shakespeare, Dickens and Conan Doyle, Abrams’ are Spielberg, John Hughes and Cameron Crowe. In defiance of the self-congratulatory snark that has become de rigueur in Hollywood franchise fare, he brings a shimmering pop romanticism to “Trek’s” stalwart ideals of friendship, heroism and self-sacrifice. There’s something bold about that, indeed.

“Into Darkness” is a beautifully modulated and sustained piece of work across the board, with visual effects that seamlessly meld live-action and computer-animated elements, given further texture by old-fashioned celluloid lensing (with 65mm Imax used for key action scenes). Post-production 3D conversion by Stereo D ranks among the best of its kind. The Enterprise has rarely looked sleeker than it does on production designer Scott Chambliss ‘ sets. Adding the cherry to the top of this cinematic sundae, composer Michael Giacchino ‘s soaring score once again revives Alexander Courage’s immortal Trek theme for the closing credits.

Movie Stills:

Paramount Pictures

Reviewed at AMC Loews 34th Street, May 2, 2013. MPAA Rating: PG-13. Running time: 132 MIN.

• Production: A Paramount release presented with Skydance Productions of a Bad Robot production. Produced by J.J. Abrams, Bryan Burk, Damon Lindelof, Alex Kurtzman, Roberto Orci. Executive producers, Jeffrey Chernov, David Ellison, Dana Goldberg, Paul Schwake. Co-producers, Tommy Gormley, Tommy Harper, Ben Rosenblatt, Michelle Rejwan.
• Crew: Directed by J.J. Abrams. Screenplay, Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman, Damon Lindelof, based on “Star Trek” created by Gene Roddenberry. Camera (Deluxe color, Panavision widescreen/35mm/Imax, 3D), Dan Mindel; editors, Maryann Brandon, Mary Jo Markey; music, Michael Giacchino; production designer, Scott Chambliss; supervising art director, Ramsey Avery; art directors, Kasra Farahani, Michael E. Goldman, Andrew E.W. Murdock, Harry E. Otto, Lauren Polizzi; set decorator, Karen Manthey; costume designer, Michael Kaplan; sound (Dolby Atmos/Datasat), Peter J. Devlin; sound designer, Ben Burtt; supervising sound editors, Burtt, Matthew Wood; re-recording mixers, Will Files, James Bolt; visual effects supervisor, Roger Guyett; ILM visual effects co-supervisor, Patrick Tubach; ILM visual effects producer, Luke O’Byrne; visual effects, Industrial Light & Magic, Pixomondo, Kelvin Optical, Atomic Fiction; stunt coordinator, John Stoneham Jr.; assistant director, Tommy Gormley; second unit director, Guyett; second unit camera, Bruce McCleery; casting, April Webster, Alyssa Weisberg.
• With: John Cho, Benedict Cumberbatch, Alice Eve, Bruce Greenwood, Simon Pegg, Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Zoe Saldana, Karl Urban, Peter Weller, Anton Yelchin, Leonard Nimoy.

More From Our Brands

Kendrick lamar and drake trade diss tracks as rap war rages on, savannah vs. charleston: which southern city has the best luxury hotels, billionaire repole seeks first kentucky derby win with fierceness, be tough on dirt but gentle on your body with the best soaps for sensitive skin, wwe backlash 2024: how to stream the big event online, verify it's you, please log in.

Cookie banner

We use cookies and other tracking technologies to improve your browsing experience on our site, show personalized content and targeted ads, analyze site traffic, and understand where our audiences come from. To learn more or opt-out, read our Cookie Policy . Please also read our Privacy Notice and Terms of Use , which became effective December 20, 2019.

By choosing I Accept , you consent to our use of cookies and other tracking technologies.

• Entertainment
• Movie Review

‘Star Trek Into Darkness’ review: boldly going back to the future

J.j. abrams' latest keeps looking back when it could be forging ahead.

By Bryan Bishop on May 14, 2013 06:58 pm 114 Comments

In 2009 J.J. Abrams reimagined Star Trek , turning Gene Roddenberry’s near-utopian vision into a high-octane summer action ride. Rather than simply creating a prequel, however, Abrams opted to fork the Trek universe with a bit of time travel trickery and some heavy lifting from Leonard Nimoy. The result was a massive hit that set the stage for a new series of adventures unencumbered by more than 45 years of canon.

Now comes Star Trek Into Darkness — but instead of taking advantage of that fresh start, the movie goes in the opposite direction. Leaning on its predecessors to an even greater degree than the 2009 reboot, it’s a film that that can be taken in wildly different ways depending on what the viewer brings to the table. If you loved the 2009 film, you’ll see more of the same wall-to-wall enjoyable summer action. If you have a strong attachment to earlier Trek films, however, you may walk out of the theater very angry.

Darkness opens exactly as you’d hope — with the crew of the Enterprise in the midst of a massive action sequence trying to save a doomed planet. They manage to save the day, of course, because that’s what happens in Trek — but Chris Pine’s headstrong James T. Kirk finds himself quickly reprimanded for violating Starfleet protocol and is stripped of his command. A devastating terrorist bombing on a research facility quickly changes the calculus, however, and after a follow-up assault Kirk is back in command. His mission? Hunt down the fugitive responsible: Benedict Cumberbatch’s John Harrison.

There’s been an intentional veil of mystery around Cumberbatch’s character since the actor was first cast, the popular theory being that he’s actually Khan Noonien Singh, an original series villain who also headlined Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan . Harrison’s twists and turns aren’t something I’m going to address here either way — that’s what our spoiler discussion thread is for — but the actor delivers a quietly menacing performance that is perfectly modulated for Darkness . Fans of Sherlock know how watchable Cumberbatch can be, and his cold detachment works better here than the bombast of Eric Bana’s Nero did the first time around. We’re never quite sure if we can take him at his word, even later in the film, and it makes watching him toy with Kirk and Spock (Zachary Quinto) that much more entertaining.

Visually the film is glorious, with director of photography Dan Mindel and production designer Scott Chambliss returning for a second round. The Apple Store look of the Enterprise’s bridge contrasts with the primary colors of the costumes, and Harrison’s all-black ensemble frames him as the classic Western villain. Futuristic San Francisco is a particular standout: part familiar terrain, part utopian dream. The film was partially shot in IMAX — certain scenes go full-screen, a stylistic choice that Christopher Nolan used in The Dark Knight — and was post-converted to 3D. Together the combination makes for a fully immersive ride, drawing the viewer in rather than pushing them away. (And yes, the lens flares pop as their own 3D elements.)

The same high-production sheen transfers to the action sequences. For the most part, this is a tight summer movie spectacle executed efficiently and effortlessly. From some particularly brutal fist fights to the ship-to-ship battles, the film hits every note just right. It’s clear that Abrams is growing into an even more confident action director, and Into Darkness offers some of the best examples of visual dynamism that we’ve seen this year.

Despite all the flourish in its execution, a distinct lack of stakes undercuts the adrenaline rush of Into Darkness . The film briefly touches on terrorism and how it changes people, but it uses those themes as broad framing devices rather than as an opportunity to add real heft. Several sequences fall victim to videogame syndrome; one was so shameless I kept waiting for a power-up notification to appear on Kirk’s heads-up display.

The result is a movie where nobody ever truly feels in jeopardy — and as a consequence Into Darkness never earns the payoffs it’s reaching for. When Kirk is deprived of his command early on, it feels like a perfunctory first-act speed bump, not a true obstacle to overcome. Unlike the 2009 film, which took care to give each crew member their own story and moment to shine, Into Darkness glosses over characters in the midst of battles and explosions. It begins to feel like the film is counting on the goodwill and familiarity audiences have with Bones, Uhura, Scotty, and Sulu to fill in the gaps.

Which brings us to The Scene. Again, I’m not going to go into spoilers, but there is a pivotal sequence in Star Trek Into Darkness that had the potential to be a gutsy, powerful moment that could have truly surprised audiences. Instead, the filmmakers opted for a carbon copy of a seminal moment of Star Trek lore. And I’m not exaggerating when I say carbon copy; there are specific lines of dialogue, beats, and visual moments recreated verbatim.

Taken simply as a tongue-in-cheek nod — quite common in Abrams’ Trek universe — it’s great. But because it’s also one of the film’s most important moments, it’s hard to escape the feeling that Abrams is using the callback to lend Into Darkness a gravitas it simply doesn’t create on its own. If you know the original scene they’re aping, it feels like a sneering cheat. If you don’t, it’s just another event that happens — one the audience knows will have zero repercussions.

While it’s just one moment amongst many, The Scene exemplifies the larger problem with Into Darkness . Rather than striving for surprising reversals and story beats, it’s far too focused on being clever — and while the occasional nudge-nudge wink-wink is fun, that only goes so far. Rebooting the series gave audiences the opportunity to care about old characters in a new way, but the film fails to advance that project. It wouldn’t be so frustrating if the creative team behind the movie wasn’t capable of such incredible work. Abrams’ early television work trafficked almost entirely on character and emotional dynamics; it’s that same touch that gave Super 8 such sparkle and oomph. The fact that it’s missing here is just a wasted opportunity.

In terms of sheer spectacle, there’s no denying that Star Trek Into Darkness delivers. For all the build-up, hype, and hope leading up to the film, it’s just a shame there isn’t a whole lot more.

Star Trek Into Darkness is currently playing internationally. It opens in the US in IMAX theaters the night of May 15th. To discuss the film, spoilers and all, join our discussion in the forums !

Log in or sign up for Rotten Tomatoes

Trouble logging in?

By continuing, you agree to the Privacy Policy and the Terms and Policies , and to receive email from the Fandango Media Brands .

By creating an account, you agree to the Privacy Policy and the Terms and Policies , and to receive email from Rotten Tomatoes and to receive email from the Fandango Media Brands .

By creating an account, you agree to the Privacy Policy and the Terms and Policies , and to receive email from Rotten Tomatoes.

Email not verified

Let's keep in touch.

Sign up for the Rotten Tomatoes newsletter to get weekly updates on:

• Upcoming Movies and TV shows
• Trivia & Rotten Tomatoes Podcast
• Media News + More

By clicking "Sign Me Up," you are agreeing to receive occasional emails and communications from Fandango Media (Fandango, Vudu, and Rotten Tomatoes) and consenting to Fandango's Privacy Policy and Terms and Policies . Please allow 10 business days for your account to reflect your preferences.

OK, got it!

Movies / TV

No results found.

• What's the Tomatometer®?
• Login/signup

Movies in theaters

• Opening this week
• Top box office
• Coming soon to theaters
• Certified fresh movies

Movies at home

• Fandango at Home
• Netflix streaming
• Prime Video
• Most popular streaming movies
• What to Watch New

Certified fresh picks

• The Fall Guy Link to The Fall Guy
• I Saw the TV Glow Link to I Saw the TV Glow
• The Idea of You Link to The Idea of You

New TV Tonight

• Hacks: Season 3
• Star Wars: Tales of the Empire: Season 1
• Shardlake: Season 1
• The Tattooist of Auschwitz: Season 1
• A Man in Full: Season 1
• The Veil: Season 1
• Acapulco: Season 3
• Welcome to Wrexham: Season 3
• John Mulaney Presents: Everybody's in LA: Season 1
• My Next Guest Needs No Introduction With David Letterman: Season 4.2

Most Popular TV on RT

• Baby Reindeer: Season 1
• Fallout: Season 1
• Dead Boy Detectives: Season 1
• We Were the Lucky Ones: Season 1
• Shōgun: Season 1
• Them: Season 2
• Best TV Shows
• Most Popular TV
• TV & Streaming News

Certified fresh pick

• Hacks: Season 3 Link to Hacks: Season 3
• All-Time Lists
• Binge Guide
• Comics on TV
• Five Favorite Films
• Video Interviews
• Weekend Box Office
• Weekly Ketchup
• What to Watch
• Star Wars TV Ranked

Netflix’s 100 Best Movies Right Now (May 2024)

Asian-American Native Hawaiian Pacific Islander Heritage

What to Watch: In Theaters and On Streaming

TV Premiere Dates 2024

6 TV and Streaming Shows You Should Binge-Watch in May

• Trending on RT
• Movie Re-Release Calendar
• Best Movies of All Time
• Play Movie Trivia

Star Trek Into Darkness Reviews

It might not hold a candle to the best the franchise has to offer, though it serves as a worthy follow-up to the universe introduced in 2009, thanks to an entirely charming cast and ambitious visual effects.

Full Review | Original Score: 4/5 | Sep 20, 2023

Not the best JJ Abrams film, but one that shows him a lot less stiff and delivers interesting ideas. [Full review in Spanish]

Full Review | Dec 21, 2022

Though not what every Trekkie will want but undeniably thrilling on its own terms, Star Trek Into Darkness is a solid follow-up to 2009’s breakthrough and will leave audiences wanting more.

Full Review | Original Score: 3/4 | Sep 6, 2022

“Into Darkness” is ‘Star Trek for the masses’.

Full Review | Original Score: 4.5/5 | Aug 25, 2022

Star Trek Into Darkness contains as much action-packed fun as its predecessor but the problem lies in using Khan as a villain again.

Full Review | Original Score: 4/5 | Apr 10, 2022

Faces the same predicament almost every movie sequel encounters: how to top the first one.

Full Review | Original Score: 5/10 | Dec 4, 2020

This is mega-budget entertainment at its most fun and fantastic.

Full Review | Original Score: 3.5/4.0 | Sep 24, 2020

Star Trek Into Darkness is a hopeless, vindictive, immoral blight on the name Star Trek. If that doesn't make it the worst Star Trek movie, I don't know what does.

Full Review | Jul 19, 2020

The resulting movie is quite a bit darker than its predecessor. This dark edge tempers things, making the movie less fun all around than its predecessor, but it is still an exciting and tension-filled sci-fi action film

Full Review | Jul 14, 2020

An explosive science-fiction film with enough guts to open your eyes at Warp speed for two hours of pure entertainment. [Full review in Spanish]

Full Review | Original Score: 7/10 | Jun 25, 2020

Star Trek Into Darkness is a complacent sequel that's overly indebted to one of Trek's better offerings, but still moderately entertaining as a kinetic sci-fi action rollercoaster ride.

Full Review | Original Score: 3/5 | May 31, 2020

This belated sequel delivers more of the exciting goods, even if it settles for a slight, but noticeable downscale of impact.

Full Review | Original Score: 3.5/5 | Apr 15, 2020

Star Trek Into Darkness is an enjoyable and occasionally thrilling film.

Full Review | Original Score: 3.5/5 | Nov 27, 2019

Star Trek Into Darkness more than fulfills expectations and takes another step closer to hegemony in the Trek universe.

Full Review | Original Score: 3.2/5 | Nov 19, 2019

Abrams seems to be able to bounce a surprisingly dense and unwieldy sci-fi narrative around a bunch of well-realised and colourful characters (a feat for pulpy material).

Full Review | Original Score: 3/5 | Aug 13, 2019

It doesn't have the charm or the heart of the first, but it gives enough fuel to the franchise to warrant its existence.

Full Review | Original Score: 7/10 | Aug 7, 2019

Benedict Cumberbatch plays this film's villain as a complicated, enigmatic, and tortured soul.

Full Review | Jul 30, 2019

As if everyone involved was just going through the motions, playing Star Trek dress-up but ignoring the true essence of what they're trying to embody.

Full Review | Original Score: 2/4 | Jun 8, 2019

Gleefully scavenges familiar moments from prior iterations of the brand, but with none of the accrued emotional heft.

Full Review | Original Score: C+ | Apr 12, 2019

That Into Darkness reaches for relevance while ringing hollow should come as little surprise, but that doesn't stop it from being disappointing.

Full Review | Feb 26, 2019

• International edition
• Australia edition
• Europe edition

Star Trek Into Darkness – review

Director JJ Abrams has followed up his sensational 2009 Star Trek reboot with a sparkling 3D sequel.

The core of the earlier film is present and correct: Chris Pine as the unfeasibly handsome junior Kirk; Zachary Quinto as the fringed logician Spock; Zoe Saldana – her status subtly enhanced after her leading role in James Cameron's Avatar – as the lissom Lt Uhuru; Karl Urban as grandstanding medical officer Bones; and Britain's own Simon Pegg as engine-room supremo Scotty, gamely approximating a Scottish accent about half the time.

Abrams also maintains the glistening visuals of his earlier film; Into Darkness is slathered in so much lens flare it looks like a Kylie Minogue video. And the flashes of crackling, knowing comedy have been retained, punctuating the shuddering fight scenes and chase sequences that are the very currency of the action blockbuster.

The film picks up shortly after its predecessor left off: Kirk is firmly installed in the Enterprise chair, Spock his first officer, and a mission is in progress. Abrams orchestrates an opening scene that mixes all the above mentioned ingredients in a 100 proof cocktail, designed to get the audience instantly drunk.

Still burdened by the destruction of Vulcan, Spock is attempting to prevent a planet's incineration by a giant volcano; Kirk flouts the Starfleet prime directive by allowing the primitive inhabitants to clap eyes on the USS Enterprise as it rises from the seabed to deliver Spock from the point of death.

This conflict between military regulation and personal loyalty is allowed to run through the story: it becomes a wedge driven in the overt Kirk-Spock bromance that was such an entertaining feature of the first film. After Spock sends in an official report that exposes Kirk's fibbing, the rupture is worthy of a tycoon's divorce: Kirk, furious, is deprived of his command, while Spock is transferred elsewhere. But they can't stay mad at each other for long, and fortunately a murderous cataclysm erupts that has the happy effect of reuniting them. Sherlock himself, Benedict Cumberbatch , essays the latest in a long line of British supervillains as he arrives, seemingly out of nowhere, to lay waste to a Starfleet base in future London, and follows it up with his own sequel, devastating a military conference in San Francisco. Within seconds, it would seem, Kirk and Spock are reinstalled on the Enterprise bridge, vowing to take Cumberbatch down.

At this point it's necessary to draw a veil over the plot's subsequent revelations, though plenty of rumours have been swirling as to how this Star Trek film – the 12th, incredibly – locks together with a much earlier entry in the sequence. Suffice to say that it's not actually all that interesting: one supervillain, these days, is very much like another, whatever their superficial attributes are.

The real grit is provided, as ever, by the emotional politics, always Star Trek's strength. Abrams threw everyone a curveball by getting Spock and Uhuru together in the first film; here, their relationship is knottier, thickened, while Kirk aims his bee-sting pout in the direction of newbie Alice Eve, as a not entirely convincing science officer. (Perhaps Kirk's lack of success with the ladies will become a major theme of a third Star Trek reboot; despite his puppyish eagerness, and occasional bout of bedroom action with an alien chick or two, women never seem as keen on him as he is on them.)

There's consequently a palpable air of world-weariness about this Star Trek; it's as if Abrams and his writers concluded they couldn't replicate the cockiness and bounce of the first film, and opted instead to allow their characters to grow up a little.

Everyone is a little more battered, a little less dewy-eyed. People are unlikely to charge out of the cinema with quite the same level of glee as they did in 2009; but this is certainly an astute, exhilarating concoction.

• First look review
• Science fiction and fantasy films
• Benedict Cumberbatch
• Star Trek Into Darkness

More on this story

JJ Abrams: the man who boldly goes…

Star trek into darkness: post your questions for the cast and director.

Star Trek: the video game - playthrough

Star Trek - video game trailer

Comments (…), most viewed.

The Definitive Voice of Entertainment News

Subscribe for full access to The Hollywood Reporter

site categories

Star trek into darkness: film review.

J.J. Abrams returns to direct the crew of the Enterprise as Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto and Zoe Saldana face off against Benedict Cumberbatch.

By Todd McCarthy

Todd McCarthy

• Share this article on Facebook
• Share this article on Twitter
• Share this article on Flipboard
• Share this article on Email
• Show additional share options
• Share this article on Linkedin
• Share this article on Pinit
• Share this article on Reddit
• Share this article on Tumblr
• Share this article on Whatsapp
• Share this article on Print
• Share this article on Comment

Star Trek Into Darkness Still - H 2013

Star Trek Into Darkness , J.J. Abrams ‘s second entry in his reboot of the eternal franchise, has been engineered rather than directed, calibrated to deliver sensation on cue and stocked with just enough new character twists to keep fans rapt. At its core an intergalactic manhunt tale about a traitor to the cause, the production gives the impression of a massive machine cranked up for two hours of full output; it efficiently delivers what it’s built to do, but without style or personality. The widely admired 2009 series relaunch pulled in $385 million in worldwide box office (an unusual two-thirds of that in the American market), and this one should follow very closely in that trajectory.

Related Stories

How j.j. abrams granted my dying husband's sci-fi wish (guest column), new movies, tv on hulu in october: 'the hunger games: mockingjay - part 1,' 'the wolf of wall street,' 'the affair' and more.

Continuity is assured by the full team reboarding the U.S.S. Enterprise for this flight, from the attractive and capable cast headed by Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto and Zoe Saldana to writers Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman (now joined by producer Damon Lindelof ) and other key behind-the-scenes hands. As seen in normally dynamic 3D Imax, however, the film looks surprisingly flat, bordering on cheesy; the images are pale, thin and bleached out, makeup and facial blemishes are magnified, and the very shallow depth-of-field in many shots (not the CGI but real photography) works against the point of the format. After a steady progression in the brilliant visual quality of big-budget, effects-heavy major releases during the past couple of years, this one takes a few steps backward.

The Bottom Line An action-packed franchise entry with a mechanically made feel.

PHOTOS: ‘Star Trek Into Darkness’ Cast Beams Up to London for World Premiere 

Not that this incident-jammed yarn is dull or uneventful, far from it. For a genre film of this sort, extra attention has been paid to provide the leads with morsels of human dimensions, including crises of conscience, uncertainty, fallibility, hidden motives and character traits that determine that they sometimes just can’t help themselves; these are details that are not essential but nonetheless prove welcome as they create undercurrents that weren’t always there in Star Trek TV episodes or in the previous 11 feature films.

Right off the bat, feelings that surface between the adamantly unemotional Spock (Quinto) and the overtly admiring Uhura (Saldana) add something to an otherwise rampantly hectic opening action sequence set on a volcanic planet. For his part, Kirk (Pine) contents himself upon his return to Earth with a briefly shown three-way with two babes. But the good times end there, as Kirk is upbraided by his superior ( Bruce Greenwood ) for insubordination and lying about his last mission, his captaincy revoked, while Spock is reassigned. The fundamental difference between the two is nicely played up all the way through: Kirk will cover for his colleague and do what’s expedient at the moment, while a Vulcan, as Spock reminds, cannot lie. Both attitudes can cause trouble.

But nothing like the trauma provoked by out-and-out bad guy John Harrison ( Benedict Cumberbatch ), an insider who is immediately identified as the terrorist behind a huge explosion within a Starfleet archive, causing enormous damage to a very vertical 23 rd century London. With Harrison quickly fleeing to the planet Kronos to hide, Kirk regains his stripes and the Enterprise sets out to capture the criminal without setting off a full-scale war with the local Klingons.

PHOTOS: 30 Groundbreaking Sci-Fi Films

Even here, moral issues between Kirk and Spock come into play that are marginally more engaging than the cranked-up action sequences that are manufactured every 10 or 15 minutes, too often with a rote, push-button feeling to them. Spock objects to the entire nature of the mission, declaring it illegal and “morally wrong” to assassinate a suspect rather than returning him for trial. The flight seems further compromised by the presence of a stranger, Carol Marcus ( Alice Eve ), a blonde hottie who’s the daughter of a Starfleet admiral ( Peter Weller ), whose own motives seem more than a bit suspicious given his insistence upon transforming the Enterprise into a warship by the installation of special rocket torpedoes.

The crew manages to take Harrison, but under rather different circumstances than anticipated, and the revelation of his true identity will come as no surprise to fanboys who live to unearth this sort of information. There are deceptions and numerous chess moves made purely on hunches or, in Spock’s case, by his exceptional ability to determine the precise odds on any eventuality. Desperate suspense scenes chime in like clockwork, sometimes dully spurred by technical malfunctions, and one has Kirk and Harrison zooming through space in outfits that recall the two decades-old The Rocketeer. In the end, justice is served and the day is won, but not without another major city, San Francisco, taking it severely on the chin.

PHOTOS: ‘Star Trek Into Darkness’: 13 Photos to Get You in the Mood

The returning actors all fit their roles with absolute comfort, while the deep-voiced Cumberbatch asserts fully self-justified treachery and Weller and Eve nicely essay equivocal characters. But after impressing well enough in his previous big-screen directorial outings, Abrams works in a narrower, less imaginative mode here; there’s little sense of style, no grace notes or flights of imagination. One feels the dedication of a young musician at a recital determined not to make any mistakes, but there’s no hint of creative interpretation, personal feelings or the spreading of artistic wings. Those anticipating Abrams’ take on Star Wars as he embarks upon that franchise will no doubt have plenty of opinions about its future based on this professionally capable but creatively humdrum outing.

THR Newsletters

Sign up for THR news straight to your inbox every day

More from The Hollywood Reporter

‘the idea of you’ producer cathy schulman carries a torch for melodrama, hot docs: nishta jain’s ‘farming the revolution’ takes top jury prize  , oscar-nominated documentary filmmaker maite alberdi talks about her upcoming narrative debut, manu rios on fame, feeling exposed and spending more time in los angeles: “it’s in the works”, matteo garrone’s ‘io capitano’ wins italian film awards, ‘my old ass’ to open toronto’s inside out film festival.

Den of Geek

Star Trek Into Darkness review

JJ Abrams directs, Chris Pine and Benedict Cumberbatch star, and Star Trek Into Darkness arrives. Here's our review...

• Share on Facebook (opens in a new tab)
• Share on Twitter (opens in a new tab)
• Share on Linkedin (opens in a new tab)
• Share on email (opens in a new tab)

Please note: there are no spoilers here. At worst, we’ve talked about things that happen before the title card appears.

Given that modern day blockbusters like to burst out of the traps with something really rather special to get us sitting up and taking notice, it’s something of a surprise that  Star Trek Into Darkness ‘ weakest sequence is the one that opens it.

Here, we find the crew of the rebooted USS Enterprise on a volcanic alien planet, whose inhabitants are, to put it mildly, not the ones to go to when your computer doesn’t work. Said sequence (which still impresses) does present the movie’s first moral conflict, and by no means the last, but even with the scope of the IMAX format to soak up, it feels a softer opening than we got with JJ Abrams’ hugely successful 2009 reboot.

Furthermore, there’s some careful re-establishing work done in the first ten minutes or so.  Star Trek  characters remind us that they do  Star Trek  things, and regular traits are established (Kirk: impulsive, Spock: logical, Scotty: stressed, McCoy: the go-to-guy for metaphors in space). It’d be remiss to call it an unsure start, but it does feel as though the proverbial engines are turning over at a level where Scotty might even consider taking an hour off.

Ad – content continues below

It doesn’t take too much longer for things to dramatically spring into life, though. And as it turns out, the early scenes, whilst establishing some important touchpoints for the movie, are bristling with the kind of wit that underpins much of the movie. In fact, the first surprise about  Star Trek Into Darkness  is just how light it is. It’s fast, entertaining, funny (Spock particularly so) and content to spend a good 70% of its running time with some kind of smile on its face, before thoroughly earning its 12A rating with the remainder.

Furthermore, the screenplay also remembers that details matter. The characters, as the movie progresses, are caught in mammoth events, but it’s the fact that we’ve seen them discuss and bicker over apparent trivia that makes it all actually matter and feel in any way tangible. JJ Abrams and his team managed this a treat in the early stages of his last movie,  Super 8 . There, a spectacular train crash sequence felt all the more dangerous and real because there were believable characters at the front and center of it. That ethos firmly carries over here, and you’re in little doubt just what the stakes mean for everyone.

But then character is a real strength throughout, as it was in the last movie.  Star Trek Into Darkness  is an ensemble piece, that finds room for several characters to thrive. Zachary Quinto’s deadpan Spock is a wonderful mix of conflict, humor and perfectly pitched delivery, whilst Karl Urban threatens to steal any scene he’s let near, with his grumping a constant highlight. Simon Pegg is almost back in  Hot Fuzz  mode here too, running at speed and generating more than a few chuckles himself. It feels as though any member of the impressive key ensemble can comfortably take over the heavy lifting at any time, and they frequently do.

And then there are the trump cards. There’s a strong argument that  Star Trek Into Darkness  doesn’t  quite  manage to scale the same heights as its predecessor, but it does have one thing that movie hasn’t got: a strong villain. Eric Bana’s Nero was curtailed by limited screen time, as the 2009  Trek  busied itself with setting lots of things up. But there’s a lot more space for Benedict Cumberbatch’s John Harrison to establish himself, and he’s wonderfully magnetic to watch. That said, you know from the off he’s going to be an important character, as Michael Giacchino’s impressive score all but spells it out in big letters when he first appears. And important the character proves to be.

But if Cumberbatch is going to get most of the attention, it’s arguably Chris Pine who’s the hidden-in-plain-sight gem here. His James Tiberius Kirk bubbles with humor, rebellion and non-conformity, before revealing a steel undercoat when required. Pine nails it. He’s taking the lead in the Jack Ryan reboot, due this December, and by the credits roll on that, he’ll surely be a full-on movie star in his own right. As it his, his performance here is generous, anchoring the cast and giving them plenty to play off.

That said, credit must also go to the Venn diagrams that writers Alex Kurtzman, Roberto Orci and Damon Lindelof map between the characters. Certainly the central core are all coloured with gradations of each other throughout, giving interesting shades of grey, and potential conflict, to pretty much every one of them. Take Harrison. He’s a Shakespearean-esque foe in many senses (although, as  Trek  devotees know, you don’t really appreciate Shakespeare until you’ve read it in the original Klingon), and he and Pine prove to be impressive foils for one another. Not for nothing are many of the best moments here are when people simply stop and talk to each other.

It’s not all successful. There’s a distinct lag in the middle of the movie, and you may just tire a little of seeing lots of people running down corridors from lots of different angles. Furthermore, we weren’t utterly convinced by Alice Eve’s character, who fares the least well of the newcomers. Quite why she ends up in her underwear at one stage remains a bit of a mystery.

Get the best of Den of Geek delivered right to your inbox!

Still,  Star Trek Into Darkness  brims with positives. It certainly feels like a more unifying  Trek  than the last one. The 2009 reboot was, arguably, more about a recruitment drive to bring a new audience to the world of  Star Trek . Here, the script keenly weaves in little touches and references that longer-term  Trek  fans will appreciate, whilst also delivering on its prime objective, to put a thrilling two hour summer blockbuster on the screen.

And at its best, thrilling is just what  Star Trek Into Darkness  is. It’s little secret what project JJ Abrams is moving onto next, and the quality of the space-based action sequences here suggests that  Star Wars: Episode VII  is in extremely capable hands. But what’s of greater importance is his ability to put believable characters in otherwise unbelievable situations, and make it all hang together.  Star Trek Into Darkness  may be a slightly bumpier ride than the last one, but at its best, it does manage to exceed it.

Appreciating that  Iron Man 3  kicked summer blockbuster season 2013 off by subverting the comic book movie genre and, in places, turning it on its head, what  Star Trek Into Darkness  has done is no less impressive. It’s played its hand a lot straighter, with a three act story bustling with characters it’s fun to spent time with, unified by a director who not only knows how to shoot an action sequence, but who also continues to prove he’s a damn good storyteller. The end result? An exciting, entertaining and pretty excellent blockbuster. Let the clamour for another movie start right here…

Like us on  Facebook  and follow us on  Twitter  for all news updates related to the world of geek. And  Google+ , if that’s your thing!

Simon Brew | @SimonBrew

Editor, author, writer, broadcaster, Costner fanatic. Now runs Film Stories Magazine.

STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS Review

Star Trek Into Darkness review. Matt reviews J.J. Abrams' Star Trek Into Darkness starring Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, and Benedict Cumberbatch.

Star Trek is not iconography.  There are plenty of iconic moments, inside jokes, winks, nods, and more, but it all stems from an original story starring fleshed-out characters who answered the call of duty and the call of adventure in equal and enthusiastic measure.  Director J.J. Abrams only sees iconography, but it was enough to get him through 2009's reboot.  The story was barely patched together, still filled with holes, and wrapped in coincidences, but Abrams' talent as a director managed to bring the story and characters to life in a way that felt fresh and exciting.  Much like his take on Captain Kirk, it was slapdash, occasionally clever, frantic, and charming.  Unfortunately, a flashy smile and big set pieces can't save Abrams a second time as his follow-up, Star Trek Into Darkness , amplifies the shortcomings of his original effort, and removes the joy as the picture stumbles around looking for character arcs, themes, and a compelling, well-constructed plot.  But its greatest embarrassment is in trying to steal classic Star Trek moments without having a clue as to why those moments had meaning.

The reckless Captain James T. Kirk ( Chris Pine ) comes home to find that his irresponsible actions on a recent mission have knocked him down to First Officer, but he quickly regains his rank after a terrorist supposedly named "John Harrison" ( Benedict Cumberbatch ) attacks a meeting of high-ranking Starfleet officers.  Seeking revenge and clearly having learned nothing from his demotion, Kirk gets permission from Admiral Marcus ( Peter Weller ) to take 72 super-torpedoes, hunt down Harrison, and kill him.  Even though Spock ( Zachary Quinto ) is constantly warning the Captain about the severity of this action, and Scotty ( Simon Pegg ) won't even have anything to do with torpedoes that could seriously backfire, Kirk charges ahead only to become a pawn in a much larger game.

Later in this review, I will go into spoilers, but first I want to make something clear.  I'm sure my integrity will be called into question simply because I previously voiced my frustration with Paramount's handling of the film in regards to press screenings.  For those who don't know, in most of the country, press screenings were at 9pm Wednesday night, at which point, the film had technically already opened in IMAX 3D starting at 8pm.  They'll say I was ready to take an axe to the movie, I was sharpening my knives, or any other blade-related metaphor.  These people do not understand that I go into every movie wanting to like it, but I can't disregard studio behavior, and neither does anyone else.  We all feel a studio's intent in trailers, posters, and every other piece of a marketing campaign.  Marketing is intended to provoke a positive response, and the last-minute press screenings were bad marketing.  Nevertheless, I took my good will towards Abrams' 2009 film, and hoped that even if the screenplay was bad, he could work his magic again.

Abrams is all out of magic.  Part of the problem comes from the lack of a through-line he can build around.  Star Trek (2009) is a fairly straightforward plot that has two protagonists (Kirk and Spock), a simple villain (Nero), and the main goal of pulling together the crew of the Enterprise.  Star Trek Into Darkness , on the other hand, is painfully convoluted.  There's a promising beginning where it looks like the immature Kirk will become the confident, cool-headed Kirk of the original series, but he never comes close to that point.  There's also a lovers' spat between Spock and Uhura ( Zoe Saldana ), but that limps off halfway through the picture.  And when everyone gets embroiled in the ridiculous machinations of the antagonist's sinister plot, everything goes to hell.  There's no amount of shiny set pieces or one-liners that can salvage the clusterfuck wrought by screenwriters Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman , and Damon Lindelof .

Being generous, 2009's Star Trek story problems stem from a script that was cobbled together from years of various and disparate drafts, and turned into the semblance of a workable story.  But Orci, Kurtzman, Lindelof, and Abrams had four years to create a Star Trek that was their own, and they ended up stealing someone else's movie.  Not only did they rip off a better film, but their script is still filled with lazy cheats, building the story around the set pieces rather than vice-versa, and a general failing to understand how this world functions.  For example, after the attack in London, no one in San Francisco (the location of Starfleet HQ) reacts to the bombing, so apparently mass media and reporting don't exist in the 23rd century.

I could go into more depth about all of the script's flaws, but to discuss the movie's biggest failing, I have to head into spoiler territory.

[WARNING: SPOILERS AHEAD]

If you haven't already figured it out, "John Harrison" is actually Khan.  For those who never saw The Original Series or Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan , Khan Noonien Singh (originally played by Ricardo Montalban ) is a genetically enhanced human who, along with his genetically enhanced brethren, tried to conquer Earth in the 1990s by wiping out anyone they deemed inferior.  They were captured, placed in cryo-sleep, and shot into space where they were discovered 300 years later by the Enterprise in the episode "Space Seed".  Once he was awakened, Khan tried to take over the ship, he was stopped by Kirk, and then sent down to rule over the wasteland of Seti Alpha V.  In Wrath of Khan , he gets off the planet, lures Kirk to a battle, and Kirk manages to defeat his foe, but Spock ends up dying in order to save the Enterprise.

To be clear, Khan and Kirk aren't life-long enemies.  Khan appears in "Space Seed", Wrath of Khan , and that's it.  The reason for making him the antagonist in the second feature film is because the story is about Kirk coming to grips with his lost youth.  So Wrath of Khan brings him a deadly nemesis from his past, who then forces Kirk to learn a harsh lesson, and lose his closest friend.  The movie embodies the best of the original series (the tense, naval-style battles; outsmarting rather than outgunning the enemy; an admiration for the creative and destructive power of science), but you can enjoy it without having seen a single episode. But if you've seen The Original Series, Spock's death has serious weight.  It's the end of a decades-long friendship, and the line "I have been, and always will be, your friend," gets the tears flowing.

Star Trek Into Darkness looks at all of this, and says, "So people know these moments?  Okay, we'll twist them a bit, and call it an homage."  In actuality, it's just theft, and a poorly executed one at that.  To begin, the whole purpose of the alternate universe was to create new adventures.  That meant everything that happened in the Original Series couldn't (or at least shouldn't) happen in the new timeline.  However, since Khan was created before the timeline split, he should still look and act the same.  Abrams originally tried to get Benicio Del Toro for the role, and when the actor passed, the director apparently decided there were no more talented Hispanic actors left in Hollywood, and went with Benedict Cumberbatch.  Those talented Hispanic actors dodged a bullet because even a great actor like Cumberbatch can't do anything with his bland character (it also makes no sense why Khan would now be a white guy, but I'm not going to get hung up on that).  Khan is held hostage by the Abrams' mystery box where motives are submerged until they are drowned in our indifference.  The original Khan relished his superiority with zeal, and Montalban provided a seductive allure.  Cumberbatch is Khan insofar as a genetically enhanced madman is trying to trick his way into getting what he wants.  The joy and self-satisfaction are rarely apparent in the deadly serious character.

It's truly Khan in name only, which is fine for Abrams because all he wants is the name.  He doesn't understand that Khan was a potent villain in "Space Seed" not only because of his attitude, but also what he represented in terms of social commentary.  More importantly, as I've already pointed out, Khan has a special relationship with Kirk in Wrath of Khan , and that past adds depth to the relationship when they meet again.  In Star Trek Into Darkness , Khan is a guy that can dupe an endlessly gullible Kirk even though Kirk's friends and fellow officers are saying that the captain should ignore their prisoner.

There's a brief glimmer of hope when the movie hints that maybe the filmmakers aren't as shallow and derivative as they seem.  Perhaps they did take the idea of Khan, but have drastically transformed the character into someone who was wronged by Admiral Marcus (who awoke Khan in order to create weapons for a potential war with the Klingons) and desperately wants to save his 72 cryogenically frozen brothers and sisters for purely benevolent reasons.  He could be a model for Kirk: someone who also wants to protect his crew, but has the patience and wherewithal to make the smart plays.

Then the movie laughs, "Of course Khan is a bad guy!", and we learn this because Spock Prime ( Leonard Nimoy ) comes along to tell Spock about the Khan from the original timeline.  Khan then proceeds to take back what he thinks are torpedoes containing his comrades but are actually active torpedoes (his genius intellect can engineer an elaborate plan to get the cryo-chambers back, but he doesn't think to have the chambers beamed over instead of the torpedoes), and attacks the Enterprise before getting kind of blown up (but not really because the movie needs another set piece).  So Khan is behaving like Khan except this isn't really Khan.  It's just a genetically engineered bad guy.  If you had Spock learn about the character from a data archive instead of speaking to Spock Prime, then the bad guy could be named Gerald Q. Honeybottom and all of the conflict would remain the same.  Nothing ties these people together: not a past or a theme or an emotional state.

With a complete misunderstanding of the character, the filmmakers should have gone ahead and created a new antagonist (or at least one who wasn't as well known), which was the opportunity the alternate universe presented in the first place.  But that would require originality and effort, and no one wants to put in the hard work.  Instead, they continue to rip off Wrath of Khan without having any understanding of why that movie works.  They plagiarize Spock's famous death scene but instead decide to "kill" Kirk.  There's no weight to this death because A) These characters haven't built a decades-long friendship; B) We've only seen them together in two movies; and C) a Lazarus potion from Khan's blood was established earlier in the movie, so we know Kirk will be fine.  Abrams and his writers pat themselves on the back for reversing the roles, even though that role reversal doesn't tie into any earlier conflict.  Kirk didn't need to learn the merit of self-sacrifice, and Spock doesn't have to cope with Kirk's death since the Vulcan immediately goes to hunt down a fleeing Khan.

But where the film truly and finally came apart for me was the moment after Kirk's temporary death.  Spock looks down at his friend's body, raises his head to the sky, and screams "KHAAAAAAAN!"  At that moment, I laughed and then put my head in my hands.  J.J. Abrams now has ownership of this Star Trek franchise and he truly doesn't get that moments like these have to be earned and not stolen.  This moment in particular takes Abrams disrespect for Star Trek and moves it into open disdain.  It's not for the people who love Star Trek ; it's for the people who understand references to Wrath of Khan without ever having seen Wrath of Khan .  Abrams is parodying Star Trek in a canon Star Trek movie.  I understand it's a difficult balance in trying to appease fans and general audiences, but Abrams simply shrugs it off and goes for the easy reference even though that reference has been rendered completely meaningless within the context of his movie.

This wretched repurposing of Wrath of Khan embodies the core issue of why Star Trek Into Darkness fails: laziness and fear of originality.  In a movie with few redeeming aspects (Pegg and Pine's performances, and a couple of nice set pieces although Abrams still thinks the action should be like Star Wars ), this behavior is disrespectful to all audiences.  Even if you're not a die-hard Trek fan, the film no longer has the charm to speed past such questions as:

• If they can beam Spock out of the volcano, why didn't they just beam him into the volcano in the first place?
• Why does Kirk kick Scotty off the ship for refusing to use the torpedoes, and then decide to capture Harrison rather than use the torpedoes?
• Why does Kirk promote Chekov ( Anton Yelchin ) to run engineering instead of someone who's actually an engineer?
• How would Admiral Marcus keep a gigantic dreadnaught filled with private security officers a secret?
• Why does Khan run away from Spock when Khan is physically and intellectually superior?
• Why do they need Khan's super-blood when they have 72 other genetically enhanced people already on board the Enterprise?
• If Kirk is sent on a secret mission to retrieve Khan after Khan attacks the Starfleet officers' meeting, then does that mean Starfleet had no official response to the direct attack?

There are other issues like Sulu ( John Cho ) and Chekov having almost nothing to do in the film, and missing the opportunity to include Bones ( Karl Urban ) as a character on the same level as Kirk and Spock instead of one-liner comic relief.

[END SPOILERS]

When I saw Abrams' Star Trek back in 2009, I enjoyed it, but I also hadn't seen The Original Series, and had only seen Wrath of Khan one time many years before.  Since then, I've cultivated a serious appreciation for Star Trek .  I don't think the original series is perfect, but I admire its spirit and its values.  I also recognize Wrath of Khan as a classic movie that can appeal to fans and non-fans alike.  Abrams' sequel thinks it can achieve that same level of admiration if it simply copies the memorable moments for the 1982 film.

Star Trek Into Darkness proves the filmmakers' apathy and ignorance regarding Star Trek by being the antithesis of the series' famous proclamation, "To boldly go where no man has gone before."

Notice: All forms on this website are temporarily down for maintenance. You will not be able to complete a form to request information or a resource. We apologize for any inconvenience and will reactivate the forms as soon as possible.

• DVD & Streaming

Star Trek Into Darkness

• Action/Adventure , Drama , Sci-Fi/Fantasy

Content Caution

In Theaters

• May 16, 2013
• Chris Pine as Capt. James Kirk; Zachary Quinto as Spock; Zoe Saldana as Uhura; Karl Urban as Dr. 'Bones' McCoy; Simon Pegg as Scotty; John Cho as Sulu; Benedict Cumberbatch as John Harrison; Anton Yelchin as Chekov; Bruce Greenwood as Pike; Peter Weller as Marcus; Alice Eve as Carol

Home Release Date

• September 10, 2013
• J.J. Abrams

Distributor

• Paramount Pictures

Movie Review

Prime Directive? We don’t need no stinkin’ Prime Directive.

So sums up the attitude of one James Tiberius Kirk, captain of the USS Enterprise. Rules? Pish. Regulations? Ha! Kirk goes with his gut—and his gut can’t stomach Federation rulebooks.

After being sent to an alien world to do a little clandestine observation, Kirk realizes that a primitive culture is in jeopardy of being extinguished via burbling volcano. So what does he do? He sends Spock down to extinguish the thing with some sort of nifty freez-o-bomb. The nerve. And when Spock finds himself trapped in the heart of the volcano, Kirk blows the Enterprise’s cover and rescues his first officer (despite the Vulcan’s vigorous protests).

“The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few!” the logical fellow insists, fountains of lava spouting all around him. No matter. Kirk has the audacity to save his pointy-eared friend.

“So they saw us,” Kirk shrugs. “What’s the big deal?”

The big deal (as any Star Trek fan knows) is that the Federation is forbidden from interfering with other cultures. It’s really the first rule of starship captaincy. And Kirk’s mentor, Capt. Christopher Pike, is not at all amused.

“I gave you my ship because I saw greatness in you,” he tells Kirk. “Now I see you don’t have an ounce of humility.”

Kirk’s promptly demoted to Pike’s first officer and Spock is reassigned to another ship. But before everyone can go their separate ways, tragedy strikes. A terrorist known as John Harrison attacks the Federation where it hurts most—mowing down a number of its finest officers, including Pike. Harrison then flees to a deserted territory on a planet deep in hostile (read: Klingon) territory. “He’s gone to the one place we just can’t go,” Scotty, the Enterprise’s chief engineer, laments.

Can’t? Is that what you said, Scotty? Telling Kirk he can’t do something is like dangling a piece of raw buffalo in front of a school of struggling vegetarian piranhas—particularly when Kirk has a mentor to avenge. He volunteers his services to Starfleet’s admiral—believing himself the mongoose best suited to hunting down this awful snake.

And the Admiral, somewhat surprisingly, gives him the green light—on the condition that he park the Enterprise outside Klingon territory and shoot Harrison from afar with a nifty array of photon torpedoes. No need to start a galactic war, right?

No problem, Kirk says.

Positive Elements

But there is one problem with the admiral’s plan, Spock points out: It’s completely immoral. Federation officers don’t just go around killing people (or at least people who aren’t extras) without due process. Sure, the admiral gave a direct order—but in so doing, he violated some pretty important Federation precepts. And if a direct order violates what is right, Kirk would seem to have the moral authority to countermand said order and try to bring back Harrison alive.

There is a whole lotta countermanding going on in Star Trek Into Darkness —and mostly for the best of reasons. It’s done to save lives, to preserve peace and even to protect a galactic sense of justice. And the movie doesn’t fall into the trap of summarily suggesting that such decisions are easy. Indeed, doing the right thing is often the hardest and most costly thing to do. But the good guys here—that is, the crew of the Enterprise—reliably do what must be done, be it following Starfleet regulations or a higher sense of rightness. And they do so at often great risk to themselves.

Into Darkness shows us that in times of crisis we sometimes feel tempted to become the very things we fear. In moments of outrage and anger over violent atrocities, we seek revenge and blood, for instance. But it also reminds us that we’re meant to walk a narrower path. Kirk learns this lesson as well as anyone. But we learn something about Kirk too: That when the chips are down, he’d do almost anything to safeguard his crew—the folks he calls family. Even if it means sacrificing himself in the process.

Spiritual Elements

Star Trek creator Gene Roddenberry was a humanist who believed technology and ingenuity were the keys to salvation, not God. And, on the surface, this Star Trek installment seems to embrace his attitudes. Overt religious references are mostly absent here … except when the Enterprise mysteriously regains power at a critical moment and one of the crew members exclaims that it’s a miracle.

“There are no such things,” Spock says.

[ Spoiler Warning ] Indeed, the Enterprise didn’t get anything like a divine push. Rather, Kirk dashed into a room full of dangerous radiation to set the engine core aright—essentially a suicide mission. And Kirk does die just minutes later (only to be resurrected through the mirac—ahem, through advanced modern medical technology).

The fact that Kirk sacrificed himself for the sake of others, died, and then rose again should not strike us as a miracle, much less an obvious Christ metaphor. No sirreee.

We see evidence that that primitive civilization mentioned earlier starts fixating on the Enterprise as a sort of divine entity. Pike tells Kirk that he shouldn’t use his blind luck as “an excuse to play God.”

Sexual Content

We see Kirk in bed with two lithesome female aliens (at the same time), both of whom seem to be partly undressed. (Fabric covers their breasts, but we see bare shoulders and midriffs). He shows some interest in other females who cross his path, too, including Carol, a new science officer aboard the Enterprise. At one point she asks him not to look so she can change clothes. He does though, and sees (as do we) the woman in just her bra and panties.

Spock and Uhura, the Enterprise’s alpha couple, are having difficulties for much of this movie, but that doesn’t stop the two from smooching. Bones throws some sarcastically suggestive come-ons at Carol. Two nightclubbing aliens kiss—touching their long, long tongues.

Violent Content

It’s fair to say that the casualty count of Into Darkness is far lower than that of its predecessor, 2009’s Star Trek . Of course, we must keep in mind that in that remake director J.J. Abrams blew up an entire planet . This go-round he only has a massive starship plow through a major city, keeping fatalities down to, say, the five- or six-digit range.

Into Darkness is a tale about terrorism to some extent. Harrison procures the help of a Federation employee to blow up a building, killing 42 people. He shoots up another building full of Starfleet officers, murdering or wounding several more. His destruction of what appears to be much of futuristic San Francisco is his version of 9/11 (only many times worse). And if that isn’t enough, this genetically enhanced villain has the strength to crush a man’s skull with his hands—an assassination technique he performs on one unlucky victim (offscreen, thankfully) and tries a couple of times on Spock.

But even discounting Harrison’s fearsome scythe, the movie is plenty violent. Photon torpedoes detonate to brain-frying effect. We see prolonged phaser fights and fisticuffs, leaving folks bloody and bruised. People are sucked out of spaceships through open airlocks and gaping gashes blasted through starship hulls. Heroes are threatened by lava, Klingon blades and space debris. They hang from dizzying heights and succumb to radiation poisoning. A young woman slaps her father. A leg is broken with a sickening snap. Spock wrenches a guy’s arm. We see part of a smoldering body.

The future, clearly, is not a more gentle, peaceful time.

Crude or Profane Language

Three and a half s-words punctuate flurries of other profanities, including “a‑‑” (said five or six times), “son of a b‑‑ch” (three or four), “b‑‑tard” (five or six), “d‑‑n” (a dozen), “h‑‑‑” (another dozen), and “p‑‑‑” and “bloody” (once each). God’s name is misused close to half-a-dozen times.

Drug and Alcohol Content

Pike finds a despondent Kirk drinking at a bar. Kirk contacts Scotty in a nightclub where he and a friend are drinking, and Kirk asks him if he’s drunk.

“You seem to have a conscience, Mr. Kirk,” Harrison intones. But that conscience, we learn, can sometimes be manipulated.

Star Trek Into Darkness is appropriately named, its title referring to more than just the inky blackness of space or even the near-diabolical acts of perhaps Star Trek’ s most fearsome assailant. It seems to also refer to the ethical fog we find here—the difficulty we all sometimes have in parsing right from wrong.

Consider Harrison. He’s a bad, bad man. We’re told that he was once sentenced to death and somehow wriggled free. So to kill him now would be, in a way, simply carrying out that verdict. And yet, for many reasons, our heroes often hesitate to kill him—even though such restraint might cause them and the galaxy no end of harm. Is it “right” to let him live? Would it be “right” to kill him if it meant saving countless innocent lives?

The right decision isn’t always obvious. And even when it is, to do the right thing often exacts a cost. We’re taught that here. As mentioned earlier, the crew of the Enterprise makes some pretty good decisions, and pay dearly for each and every one. Which is why my hat’s off to ’em: It may be an old cliché to say that the end doesn’t justify the means, but that tired tradition does not render it any less true. Sure, Kirk’s a renegade—he always will be—but far more often than not in this particular tale, he’s bucking the system because the system needs bucking. Not just because he’s careless or calloused. 

Parents will latch onto the film’s themes of loyalty to family, and the sacrifices that sometimes go along with that. Others may pluck a more political message from the film—an oblique critique of the United States’ long war on terror and some of the controversial means we’ve used to fight it.

Christians thinking along spiritual lines may respond to the messages in this movie in even different ways than that, varying reactions which may be exactly what Abrams is stretching for amid the myriad explosions and fistfights. As I said, the questions at play here are not easy to answer, even with the help of the kind of divine guidance that’s so noticeably absent in this new and dark universe Kirk so rashly and readily warps his way into.

Paul Asay has been part of the Plugged In staff since 2007, watching and reviewing roughly 15 quintillion movies and television shows. He’s written for a number of other publications, too, including Time, The Washington Post and Christianity Today. The author of several books, Paul loves to find spirituality in unexpected places, including popular entertainment, and he loves all things superhero. His vices include James Bond films, Mountain Dew and terrible B-grade movies. He’s married, has two children and a neurotic dog, runs marathons on occasion and hopes to someday own his own tuxedo. Feel free to follow him on Twitter @AsayPaul.

Latest Reviews

The Fall Guy

Mars Express

Weekly reviews straight to your inbox.

Star Trek Into Darkness Review

09 May 2013

131 minutes

Star Trek Into Darkness

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Few understand the meaning behind this Star Trek (or more accurately, Charles Dickens) sentiment better than J. J. Abrams. Rebooting Gene Roddenberry’s seminal ’60s TV show following years of variable movies, Abrams’ first voyage on the USS Enterprise rescued the franchise from its increasingly niche fan base, the kind of people who endlessly debate Sisko versus Janeway (answer: Picard), and made it cool for everyone. Star Trek 2.0 (or XI) eschewed the speechifying, arthritic cast and bad hair of the previous flicks, upped the energy, vibrancy and spectacle, but still managed to respect Roddenberry’s dramatis personae, if not his spirit. Into Darkness follows exactly the same principles. Only more so.

Tearing a page out of the Raiders Of The Lost Ark Blockbuster Playbook, we start at the shattering climax of a Trek adventure we’ll never fully see. Looking down on a planet rich in garish scarlet fauna, a shaky camera picks out Kirk (Chris Pine) and Bones (Karl Urban) legging it for their lives, away from an angry pack of white-faced, yellow-hooded natives but towards a sheer drop that spells certain death. If that’s not enough, Spock (Zachary Quinto) is being parachuted into a volcano to calcify the lava and save an entire planet. It’s a ludicrously enjoyable piece of action cinema with a gloriously cheeky ending. We’ll be lucky to see a more exciting, breathless set-piece all summer.

Yet rather than pausing for breath, Star Trek Into Darkness punches it and immediately turns into a manhunt movie. A bomb goes off in a Starfleet archive in London — 23rd century England will boast a skyline of Gherkin buildings apparently — and the race is on to track down the terrorist, well-coutured renegade John Harrison (Benedict Cumberbatch). Abrams’ first Trek movie was criticised for not following the Roddenberry tenet of holding up a mirror to real-world issues. Into Darkness couldn’t be more prescient. Just weeks after the events in Boston, this keys into a hunt for a bomber, with Kirk given orders to forgo a fair trial (“I’m gonna run this bastard down”) and terminate Harrison with Star Trek’s version of extreme prejudice — undetectable photon torpedoes. There will soon be students getting 2:2s for dissertations with titles like “7 of 9/11: Bin Laden, Star Trek And America Into Darkness”.

Cumberbatch’s Harrison may be dressed for a GQ cover but he is, in essence, a one-man army — watch him waste a garrison of helmeted marauders or take a vicious beating from Kirk with barely a flinch, or brutally batter some Federation flunkies. Yet, as you might expect from an actor who can comfortably portray Sherlock Holmes and Stephen Hawking, Harrison is as cerebral as he is muscular. His overall master plan may share some of the bonkers logic of Silva’s cockamamie Skyfall schemes, but Cumberbatch’s detached quality staves off hokeyness. It is a testament to the power of his performance that, although his early appearances are greeted with the most over-the-top Evil Musical Motifs imaginable, he manages to make Harrison ambiguous and chilling throughout.

If the first film was about the coming together of the Enterprise crew, then Harrison’s threat means they have to divide to conquer. The strong ensemble — rejoice in the growing Kirk-Spock bromance, or Bones’ bad aphorisms, or a collector’s moment of Sulu steeliness without his sword — have etched likable sketches of the nascent TV icons, but you’d like time to hang with them a bit more. Similarly, you pine for a sustained Hannibal Lecter-Clarice Starling duel of wits between Kirk and Harrison, but it never quite happens. Abrams has real skill at dropping character beats in the heat of battle — Kirk and Spock get slivers of interesting arcs; the former is learning to become a captain, the latter is learning to be a friend — yet the film doesn’t give the emotions space to resonate and take hold.

As with the first movie, there are some callbacks to Trek history, both TV and film; some are smart and subtle, others feel blatant and misjudged, and might send the hardcore seeking kolinahr. Yet more than the first outing, this engages with Trek’s long-held thematic ideals, be it the importance of the Prime Directive (don’t interfere with alien cultures) or the dynamics between instinct versus logic, pacifism versus savagery. Still, Abrams never lets respect for Trekkiness poop the party. Keep your ears peeled for a fabulous joke at the behest of an iconic sound effect.

Happily, this sense of play is all over Into Darkness. It’s sexy, both literally (Kirk in a three-way with alien chicks with tails) and figuratively: cinematographer Dan Mindel gives everything a sleek sci-fi yet somehow still warm look. Abrams directs with lots of flare (forget 3D glasses, take Ray-Bans), but, more importantly, flair. His style is somewhere between the machine-tooled work of Cameron and the manic intensity of Bay, efficient but still loose and seemingly improvised.

Working with screenwriters Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman and Damon Lindelof, Abrams can flip between different tones in a heartbeat — a comedic lovers’ tiff in the midst of battle turns into an affecting meditation on fear — and will leave no stone unturned in trying to entertain: tense bomb disposal, intense inter-race negotiations, big ship-little ship cat and mousery, Simon Pegg comic relief, a chase at warp speed, disaster movie mayhem and Alice Eve in black skimpies just skims the surface of it. Not all of it works — compared to the opener, the last-reel action is enjoyable rather than jaw-dropping — but there is the sense of a true showman at work. Like Lucas, Abrams doesn’t care about science-fiction, cold fusion thingamys and transwarp doodahs. He just wants you to have as much as fun as humanly possible.

Of course, Abrams will next tackle Star Wars, and it is tempting to overanalyse Into Darkness for clues to Episode VII. Abrams clearly prefers proper sets to green-screens, doesn’t shy from men in suits and old-school in-camera trickery, fosters lovely grace-notes to stellar ILM work — look out for the new trails of space dust that follow warp speed — and gives good running down corridors. If he just takes his time and lets his patent skill with characters breathe, he’ll make The Empire Strikes Back. At one point, Kirk has to perform a space jump, fast becoming the series’ signature action lick. Midway through the perilous leap, his targeting computer fails. It’s all you can do not to shout, “Use the Force, Jim.” Given the evidence here, 2015 can’t come soon enough.

Related Articles

Movies | 04 07 2022

Movies | 12 06 2019

Movies | 24 07 2016

Movies | 20 07 2016

Movies | 14 07 2016

Movies | 08 07 2016

Movies | 08 06 2016

Movies | 24 02 2016

Common Sense Media

Movie & TV reviews for parents

• For Parents
• For Educators
• Our Work and Impact

Or browse by category:

• Get the app
• Movie Reviews
• Best Movie Lists
• Best Movies on Netflix, Disney+, and More

Common Sense Selections for Movies

50 Modern Movies All Kids Should Watch Before They're 12

• Best TV Lists
• Best TV Shows on Netflix, Disney+, and More
• Common Sense Selections for TV
• Video Reviews of TV Shows

Best Kids' Shows on Disney+

Best Kids' TV Shows on Netflix

• Book Reviews
• Best Book Lists
• Common Sense Selections for Books

8 Tips for Getting Kids Hooked on Books

50 Books All Kids Should Read Before They're 12

• Game Reviews
• Best Game Lists

Common Sense Selections for Games

• Video Reviews of Games

Nintendo Switch Games for Family Fun

• Podcast Reviews
• Best Podcast Lists

Common Sense Selections for Podcasts

Parents' Guide to Podcasts

• App Reviews
• Best App Lists

Social Networking for Teens

Gun-Free Action Game Apps

Reviews for AI Apps and Tools

• YouTube Channel Reviews
• YouTube Kids Channels by Topic

Parents' Ultimate Guide to YouTube Kids

YouTube Kids Channels for Gamers

• Preschoolers (2-4)
• Little Kids (5-7)
• Big Kids (8-9)
• Pre-Teens (10-12)
• Teens (13+)
• Screen Time
• Social Media
• Online Safety
• Identity and Community

Explaining the News to Our Kids

• Family Tech Planners
• Digital Skills
• All Articles
• Latino Culture
• Black Voices
• Asian Stories
• Native Narratives
• LGBTQ+ Pride
• Best of Diverse Representation List

Celebrating Black History Month

Movies and TV Shows with Arab Leads

Celebrate Hip-Hop's 50th Anniversary

Star trek into darkness, common sense media reviewers.

Action-packed Star Trek sequel has good story, characters.

A Lot or a Little?

What you will—and won't—find in this movie.

The characters have many discussions about followi

The characters (a diverse bunch) are better as a t

Lots of sci-fi and fantasy violence and fighting.

The main character is shown in bed with two alien

Language is infrequent but includes a couple uses

Budweiser is seen in the movie, and off-screen lic

The main character is seen drinking (hard liquor)

Parents need to know that Star Trek Into Darkness is the 12th Star Trek movie overall, and the second installment in director J.J. Abrams' big-budget series reboot. The biggest issue is sci-fi/fantasy violence, with lots of punching, fighting, and shooting, a little blood (though not much), and some…

Positive Messages

The characters have many discussions about following the rules versus doing the right thing, coming to the conclusion that there's sometimes no easy answer. Characters also exhibit trust and teamwork, working extremely well together. The importance of friendship is a key theme of the movie.

Positive Role Models

The characters (a diverse bunch) are better as a team than they are as individuals. Separately, they're cocky, argumentative, inflexible, or just plain goofy. Yet they're all trying to do the right thing ... they just have their own individual ideas about what that is.

Violence & Scariness

Lots of sci-fi and fantasy violence and fighting. The bad guy blows up an archive building and attacks a meeting of high-ranking officials in a hail of weapons fire. An important supporting character dies, with some blood. Characters get sucked out of their ships into space. A character's skull is crushed (off screen, but crunching noises are heard); another's leg is deliberately broken when someone steps on it. A great deal of fighting, punching, and spaceships shooting at one another. Massive, destructive crashes and explosions. A character gets radiation poisoning. A volcano threatens a planet.

Did you know you can flag iffy content? Adjust limits for Violence & Scariness in your kid's entertainment guide.

Sex, Romance & Nudity

The main character is shown in bed with two alien girls. No nudity is shown, and nothing happens on screen; he just climbs out of bed, and the girls are seen to be there with him. A female character changes her clothes, and she's shown in her (deliberately sexy) underwear. Some flirting and kissing.

Did you know you can flag iffy content? Adjust limits for Sex, Romance & Nudity in your kid's entertainment guide.

Language is infrequent but includes a couple uses of "s--t," plus "bitch," "ass," "hell," "damn," "oh my God," and "bastard."

Did you know you can flag iffy content? Adjust limits for Language in your kid's entertainment guide.

Products & Purchases

Budweiser is seen in the movie, and off-screen licensing/marketing deals include a Budweiser promotion and more.

Drinking, Drugs & Smoking

The main character is seen drinking (hard liquor) in a bar after getting some bad news. He gets a bit tipsy.

Did you know you can flag iffy content? Adjust limits for Drinking, Drugs & Smoking in your kid's entertainment guide.

Parents Need to Know

Parents need to know that Star Trek Into Darkness is the 12th Star Trek movie overall, and the second installment in director J.J. Abrams ' big-budget series reboot . The biggest issue is sci-fi/fantasy violence, with lots of punching, fighting, and shooting, a little blood (though not much), and some deaths (including an important supporting character). It's more exciting than it is intense. The main character ( Chris Pine ) is shown getting out of a bed he's shared with two alien girls, and there's a sexy underwear scene with a female co-star. Language is infrequent but includes a couple of uses of "s--t." The main character is seen drinking in one scene after getting some bad news. As in the first one, the Trek team comes together to do the right thing, no matter how difficult that may be. To stay in the loop on more movies like this, you can sign up for weekly Family Movie Night emails .

Where to Watch

Videos and photos.

Community Reviews

• Parents say (17)
• Kids say (55)

Based on 17 parent reviews

Star trek into darkness

What's the story.

In STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS, Captain James T. Kirk ( Chris Pine ) gets into trouble by breaking the rules in order to save Spock's ( Zachary Quinto ) life. But when a madman ( Benedict Cumberbatch ) attacks an archive facility on Earth, Kirk and the old crew -- including Bones ( Karl Urban ), Uhura ( Zoe Saldana ), Sulu ( John Cho ), Scotty ( Simon Pegg ), Chekov ( Anton Yelchin ), and newcomer Carol ( Alice Eve ) -- get a new mission: Destroy the villain. Then Spock convinces Kirk to capture him instead, which leads to all kinds of new trouble. And Kirk learns that no one can be trusted until he and the crew of the Enterprise learn the secret behind their deadly prisoner.

Is It Any Good?

Director J.J. Abrams , despite his massive popularity and success, shows some flaws with uneven pacing in this movie, pitching moods and scenes too high and letting things drag on too long. And his idea of "style" seems to be camera-shaking and lens flares (the latter of which was once considered a mistake in moviemaking and was only implemented in the 1960s for effect).

And while Pine's blue-eyed, pretty boy rebel character has little to do with the original Captain Kirk, the rest of the characters thankfully seem to tune in to their classic counterparts, and their performances and line readings can be great fun. Likewise, Star Trek Into Darkness has a good, enthralling story at its core and some strong ideas buried beneath the empty style that eventually win the day.

Talk to Your Kids About ...

Families can talk about Star Trek Into Darkness ' violence . Does it ever feel over the top? Is it exciting or gruesome? Which do you think it's intended to be? Why?

What's the difference between following the rules and doing the right thing? Is there a simple answer to this problem?

How do the characters show teamwork ? In what scenes do characters help each other? Why is teamwork an important character strength ?

Why do you think Star Trek has such enduring appeal? What makes people become such faithful fans? How does the reboot compare to the older movies and TV shows?

Movie Details

• In theaters : May 16, 2013
• On DVD or streaming : September 10, 2013
• Cast : Benedict Cumberbatch , Chris Pine , Zachary Quinto , Zoe Saldana
• Director : J.J. Abrams
• Inclusion Information : Gay actors, Female actors, Black actors, Latino actors
• Studio : Paramount Pictures
• Genre : Science Fiction
• Topics : Adventures , Space and Aliens
• Character Strengths : Teamwork
• Run time : 132 minutes
• MPAA rating : PG-13
• MPAA explanation : intense sequences of sci-fi action and violence
• Last updated : August 25, 2023

Did we miss something on diversity?

Research shows a connection between kids' healthy self-esteem and positive portrayals in media. That's why we've added a new "Diverse Representations" section to our reviews that will be rolling out on an ongoing basis. You can help us help kids by suggesting a diversity update.

Suggest an Update

Our editors recommend.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan

Star Wars: Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back

Star trek movies & more, sci-fi movies, related topics.

• Space and Aliens

Want suggestions based on your streaming services? Get personalized recommendations

Common Sense Media's unbiased ratings are created by expert reviewers and aren't influenced by the product's creators or by any of our funders, affiliates, or partners.

Star Trek Into Darkness (United States, 2013)

Spoiler Alert : This review contains spoilers. Not earthshattering plot revelations, but hints that might dampen the virgin's pristine viewing experience. Proceed with caution if this sort of thing concerns you.

In moving to the future, J.J. Abrams has pillaged the past. One could make an argument that Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan has cast a long shadow over the entire Star Trek movie franchise. Attempts to recreate the suspense of the second Trek feature were evident in Star Trek III: The Search for Spock , Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country , and Star Trek (X): Nemesis . Villains like Christopher Lloyd's Kruge, Christopher Plummer's Chang, Malcolm McDowell's Soran, and Tom Hardy's Shinzon were inevitably compared to Ricardo Montalban's iconic superman. For J.J. Abrams, whose genesis of an alternate Star Trek universe/timeline in his 2009 feature allows him great freedom to move forward without obliterating "canon," the decision to make another attempt at replicating the alchemy of the first Star Trek sequel might be considered "safe." But little about where Star Trek Into Darkness plunges is without risk.

Long running franchises like Star Trek survive because they embrace change while maintaining connections to what came before. The James Bond series has featured six starring actors and, while the continuity is a nightmare, there are a lot of little hooks that tie the films together. Doctor Who changes its lead every four or five years but never forgets its past. In rebooting Star Trek , Abrams found a way to tie his universe to the pre-existing one where five TV series and ten movies transpired. Leonard Nimoy's presence forms the bridge. The octogenarian actor, making an appearance in his eighth Star Trek movie, serves much the same purpose here as in 2009's adventure. (Ironic that the man who once tried desperately to divorce himself from his Trek alter-ego has become the one to play it the most often.) His cameo isn't mandatory; it's a Valentine to those long-term loyalists who have been with the series for nearly 50 years. In fact, with admitted uber-fan Bob Orci on the screenwriting team, the movie is loaded with little "Easter eggs" for Trekkies/Trekkers.

Star Trek Into Darkness doesn't feel like a " Star Trek film" - at least if one defines that term based on the '80s productions. It's much more action/adventure oriented. The space battles unfold with lightning quickness rather than as suspenseful, gradual events. There's some nice character interaction but the new actors haven't been together long enough to replicate the easy camaraderie evidenced among the core group of Shatner/Nimoy/Kelley. Nevertheless, Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, and Karl Urban are good enough that we never feel like we're watching imposters. Pine's Kirk has the swagger, looks, and heroism to match Shatner's. Quinto finds the balance between logic and emotion that Nimoy mastered. And Urban's McCoy offers a near-perfect echo of Kelley's sardonic wit and countrified humanism - a true homage.

The film picks up a short time after the conclusion of the 2009 entry. Kirk (Chris Pine) and his crew are trying to save a primitive society from an erupting volcano. In the process, Spock (Zachary Quinto) becomes trapped and Kirk must violate The Federation's "Prime Directive" to save him. This results in the Enterprise being given back to Admiral Christopher Pike (Bruce Greenwood) and Kirk being demoted to First Officer. However, as this is happening, a rogue Starfleet officer, Commander John Harrison (Benedict Cumberbatch), has declared war on his employers. He detonates a bomb in London then stages a sneak attack on Starfleet Headquarters in San Francisco. Admiral Marcus (Peter Weller), Pike's superior, gives Kirk back his ship with new orders: track down Harrison, who has gone into hiding on the Klingon home planet, and bring him to justice.

Star Trek Into Darkness does some admittedly unique things with Harrison's character. At first, he appears to be little more than a standard-order terrorist with an extreme grudge but, as the story unfolds, we learn that at least there's a reason underlying his actions. Cumberbatch does an excellent job portraying Harrison as more than a one-dimensional bad guy. There's a lot of depth to the portrayal - arguably more than the character deserves.

This is a fast-paced production (as befits a would-be summer blockbuster); it doesn't take many breaks for exposition. Nevertheless, it seems to have fewer obvious plot holes than the 2009 Star Trek and is at least equally engaging. The film takes an opportunity to do what the old Star Trek often did and use a futuristic scenario to comment on contemporary issues - in this case, terrorism and the policy of manufacturing a war to eliminate a perceived threat. If there's an obvious flaw, it's that the ending is an anticlimax; proceedings conclude with a whimper. After an epic journey featuring distant worlds, space battles, and surprise revelations, it all comes down to a fist fight. The movie also cheats by playing on the viewer's emotions (although Star Trek has been guilty of that from time-to-time - I'm thinking specifically of "Amok Time").

One of the most controversial aspects of Star Trek Into Darkness is likely to be the extended segment lifted almost intact (albeit with a role reversal) from one of the earlier Star Trek films. Some will see this as theft, but I prefer to view it as I'm sure it's intended: an homage and another opportunity to find familiarity in a newly reshaped universe. This stuff worked for me - especially the very loud utterance of a famous line - but some may not feel the same way.

In addition to Cumberbatch, there are two other newcomers in significant roles: Alice Eve and Peter Weller as the daughter-and-father team of Dr. Carol Marcus and her dad. Eve's role is limited but Star Trek fans know that in the other timeline she was Kirk's lover and the mother of his son. Whether that history will be repeated in this universe remains to be seen. Weller plays the upper echelon Starfleet admiral in much the same way that upper echelon Starfleet admirals have been portrayed since the TV series aired in the 1960s - which is to say, as more of an obstacle than a help.

The special effects are first rate - not always the case with Star Trek movies, although Abrams has been given a budget the likes of which directors Nicholas Meyer, Leonard Nimoy, and William Shatner would have salivated over. The 3-D is, thankfully, not an abomination. Compensations have been made for many of the usual problems with the format. On the other hand, it adds little, making the surcharge an unnecessary expense. Michael Giacchino's score is reminiscent of the work he did on the 2009 film. He waits until the end to use the Alexander Courage theme but, when he employs it, he does so with relish. From time-to-time, he also echoes (without directly copying) some of the music that Jerry Goldsmith contributed over the years.

J.J. Abrams wanted Star Trek Into Darkness to be the revived franchise's The Dark Knight . In establishing this lofty goal, he forced himself to take some bold steps, yet for all the suspense, action, and special effects razzle-dazzle, the movie doesn't ascend to the highest pinnacle of big budget entertainment. It's an immensely satisfying summer blockbuster but it's not a genre-defining masterpiece. It's hard to imagine many die-hard Star Trek fans putting Star Trek Into Darkness ahead of The Wrath of Khan on their personal "best of" lists. Nevertheless, this is sufficiently rousing and entertaining that it should please a majority of movie-goers whether they're confessed Trek fans or not. In the wake of Star Trek Into Darkness , the familiar characters look ready to continue to live long and prosper.

Comments Add Comment

• Interstellar (2014)
• Star Wars: A New Hope (1977)
• Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back (1980)
• Howard the Duck (1986)
• After Earth (2013)
• Star Wars: Return of the Jedi (1983)
• Hell or High Water (2016)
• Wonder Woman (2017)
• Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (2018)
• Horrible Bosses 2 (2014)
• Don't Worry Darling (2022)
• Just My Luck (2006)
• Robocop (1987)
• Mighty Aphrodite (1995)
• (There are no more better movies of Peter Weller)
• (There are no more worst movies of Peter Weller)
• Exotica (1969)
• Sweet Hereafter, The (1997)
• I, Robot (2004)
• Father's Day (1997)
• National Treasure: Book of Secrets (2007)
• I'm Not There (2007)

• Cast & crew
• User reviews

Star Trek Into Darkness

• After the crew of the Enterprise find an unstoppable force of terror from within their own organization, Captain Kirk leads a manhunt to a war-zone world to capture a one-man weapon of mass destruction.
• When the USS Enterprise crew is called back home, they find an unstoppable force of terror from within their own organization has detonated the fleet and everything it stands for, leaving our world in a state of crisis. With a personal score to settle, Captain Kirk leads a manhunt to a war-zone world to capture a one-man weapon of mass destruction. As our space heroes are propelled into an epic chess game of life and death, love will be challenged, friendships will be torn apart, and sacrifices must be made for the only family Kirk has left: his crew. — Paramount Pictures
• The latest mission of the USS Enterprise crew takes them into deep space to rescue an endangered species from an active volcano. However, once again Captain Kirk's reckless behavior compromises the mission and nearly gets him booted from Starfleet. Turning back to his mentor Admiral Pike, Kirk is demoted to an academy cadet and has to start over. However, when a ruthless warlord attacks Starfleet and shoots Admiral Pike in the process, Kirk takes command and takes the Enterprise deep into the neutral zone and the Klingon homeworld. Unknown to the crew, a Starfleet renegade is manipulating the Federation and the Klingons into a possible war. Kirk, Spock and the rest of the crew must stop the war before all hell breaks loose. And what awaits the crew of the USS Enterprise on their forthcoming five-year mission? — Blazer346
• The USS Enterprise is sent to Planet Nibiru to observe a pre-warp civilization. Captain James T. Kirk (Chris Pine) and Spock (Zachary Quinto) attempt to save the inhabitants from an imminent volcano eruption which would wipe out the civilization. When Spock's life is jeopardized, Kirk breaks the Prime Directive, exposing the Enterprise to the planet's civilization during Spock's rescue. A number of indigenous people begin to worship the ship as it leaves. Called back to Earth, Kirk is demoted to First Officer and Admiral Christopher Pike re-assumes command of the Enterprise. In London, Starfleet agent John Harrison (Benedict Cumberbatch) bombs a secret "Section 31" installation. In San Francisco, Pike and his first officer attend an emergency meeting of high-ranking officers at Starfleet headquarters. The meeting is attacked by a gunship piloted by Harrison, who kills Pike. Kirk destroys the gunship, but Harrison flees. With Pike dead, Admiral Alexander Marcus authorizes Kirk to hunt down Harrison, who has used trans warp beaming and fled to the Klingon home world of Kronos. Since Kronos lies deep in Klingon territory and the Federation is on the brink of war with the Klingon Empire, the Enterprise is supplied with 72 long-range prototype photon torpedoes and is ordered to fire them at Harrison's location once he is found. Thinking that the torpedoes could be dangerous to the ship, Montgomery "Scotty" Scott refuses to take them aboard and tenders his resignation (which Kirk accepts), whereupon Pavel Chekov is promoted to Chief Engineer. Admiral Marcus' daughter, scientist Carol Marcus (Alice Eve), joins the crew under a false identity. Arriving at the Klingon home world, the Enterprise's warp core malfunctions. With repairs underway, Kirk, Spock and Uhura use a previously commandeered trader ship to reach Kronos. After being detected by Klingon patrol ships, the three are forced to land. Despite Uhura's attempts to negotiate, the Klingons prepare to kill the trio. Harrison wipes out the Klingons in a show of superhuman strength and confronts the landing party, but surrenders after learning the precise number of photon torpedoes aimed at him. Returning to the Enterprise, Harrison reveals his real identity: Khan Noonien Singh, a genetically augmented superhuman, who has been in Cryo sleep for 300 years after his unsuccessful war to have his superhuman comrades rule the Earth. He advises Kirk to examine the 72 prototype torpedoes and also tells him a set of spatial coordinates. Kirk orders Leonard McCoy to examine the torpedoes, and contacts Scotty on Earth to check the coordinates. The torpedoes are found to each contain a genetically engineered human in Cryo sleep - the remaining members of Khan's colleagues. Khan explains that Admiral Marcus awakened him to use his superior intellect and savagery to develop advanced weapons for a war with the Klingons, keeping his colleagues as hostages. He also says that now Marcus wants to kill Khan to erase every trace of his association with a known war criminal. Kirk realizes that the Enterprise's warp core had been sabotaged on Admiral Marcus' orders, making the covert operation to kill Khan a one-way ticket. Scotty arrives at the coordinates and finds a secret Starfleet shipyard, which he infiltrates. The Enterprise's warp core is repaired, but the ship is soon confronted by an unregistered Federation battleship, the USS Vengeance - a massive vessel built for combat which dwarfs the Enterprise. Admiral Marcus reveals himself as the commander of the Vengeance, demanding Kirk hand over Khan. Kirk refuses, and the Enterprise warps toward Earth, to have Khan stand trial. In Earth's orbit, the Enterprise is attacked by the Vengeance. With the Enterprise severely damaged, Kirk offers to hand over Khan and the 72 bodies in Cryo sleep in exchange for the lives of his crew. Marcus refuses, beams his daughter to the Vengeance, and orders the destruction of the Enterprise-when the Vengeance suddenly suffers a complete power outage, caused by Scotty who had boarded the ship at the secret shipyard. As the Enterprise weapons are too damaged to continue the fight and knowing that Khan was the designer of the Vengeance, Kirk allies himself with Khan and boards the ship. They reunite with Scotty and take the bridge. Meanwhile, Spock contacts Spock Prime to learn of Khan's history and how to defeat him. Khan betrays Kirk and takes control of the Vengeance, killing Admiral Marcus. Khan negotiates with Spock, beaming Kirk and his boarding party back to the Enterprise in exchange for the 72 Cryo torpedoes. Khan plans to destroy the Enterprise, but Spock reveals that real - and armed - torpedoes were beamed to the Vengeance, keeping the Cryo pods on the Enterprise. The torpedoes incapacitate the Vengeance and anger Khan, who believes that his 72 colleagues have been killed. Both ships start descending towards Earth's surface. At the cost of his life, Kirk re-aligns the warp core, enabling the crew to regain control of the Enterprise. The Vengeance crashes into downtown San Francisco but does not kill Khan. Khan tries to escape in the chaos but is pursued by Spock. McCoy discovers that Khan's blood may reanimate Kirk and Uhura prevents Spock from killing Khan, capturing him instead. In the aftermath, Kirk is revived and returns to duty as Captain of the Enterprise. Khan is sealed into his Cryo pod and stored away with the rest of his crew. As the film ends, a restored Enterprise is re-christened and departs for a 5-year mission of exploration.

Contribute to this page

• IMDb Answers: Help fill gaps in our data
• Learn more about contributing

More from this title

More to explore.

Recently viewed

This Was Anton Yelchin's Favorite Episode From Star Trek: The Original Series

J.J. Abrams' 2009 "Star Trek" feature film wasn't so much an adaptation of the 1966 TV series as it was a film version of how non-Trekkies view the franchise. To explain: on the TV series, Captain Kirk (William Shatner) is typically depicted as being judicious, stern, and decisive. Because of the few times Kirk solved problems with his fists, however, he has gained a (perhaps unfair) reputation for being a reckless cowboy, an insufferable lothario, and a flippant charmer. Abrams' version of Kirk (Chris Pine) rolled with those misconceptions, making a "high-octane" version of the character. Indeed, all the characters are now broader, more passionate versions of themselves. This is in addition to each of them being secret super-geniuses, deeply expert in at least one field of science, language, medicine, or engineering.

Case in point, Chekov (Anton Yelchin) knows how to operate a transporter in such a way that he can snatch crewmates right out of the air as they plummet through a planet's atmosphere below. Everything in the 2009 "Star Trek" is shifted into overdrive, with whirling cameras, shouting, fighting, and desperate last-minute escapes. Abrams turned "Star Trek" into an action movie. 

That said, many of the new cast members did their "Star Trek" homework, watching old episodes of the original series and using their forebears as models for the latest versions of their characters. Yelchin in particular closely emulated Walter Koenig, and was even careful to imitate Koenig's unique Russian accent, even if it wasn't wholly accurate. 

In 2009, TrekMovie interviewed the late Yelchin about playing Chekov, asking the actor — perhaps naturally — what his favorite episode of the original series was. Surprisingly, Yelchin was very fond of "Who Mourns for Adonais?," the episode wherein the Enterprise crew faces off against the Greek god Apollo.

Yelchin thought that 'Who Mourns for Adonais?' was 'fascinating'

"Who Mourns for Adonais?" (September 22, 1967) begins with the Enterprise being grabbed in space by a giant green human hand. Kirk and company beam down to a nearby planet to find Apollo (Michael Forest) living there. This appears to be the actual god Apollo of Greek myth, and he demands that the Enterprise crew worship him, just like he used to be worshiped back on Earth. Kirk, Chekov, and the others surmise that Apollo is actually an ancient alien that once visited Earth thousands of years ago, and the locals assumed he was a god. Kirk explains to Apollo that humans have outgrown the need for gods, and Apollo is sad. After Apollo ascends to join the other "gods," Kirk admits that even without the benefit of divinity, modern civilization still owes a lot to ancient Greek culture. The title is a reference to an 1821 Percy Shelley elegy about John Keats.

Yelchin probably liked "Adonais" because Chekov has a lot to contribute. He was part of the episode's landing party, and he was active and contributive. In Yelchin's words: 

"Probably the one with Apollo. I think is such an intelligent episode. It is an episode where the basic point is that humanity ... looking at it in terms of the '60s when men are their own gods, and look at where they brought their universe to. It was such a fascinating, touching, weird thing to have an episode. Where men come to a planet where a god wants to be a god again." 

No such heady concepts were included in the 2009 film, as it was, as mentioned, an action picture. But It's nice to see that Yelchin found some of the original Trek concepts to be interesting. 

'Amok Time' - a.k.a. the pon farr episode

Yelchin also liked "Amok Time," saying, "I also love the episode where Spock is PMSing and where Kirk has to fight Spock."

That's an indelicate way of describing pon farr, a Vulcan phenomenon where their bodies sexually activate once every seven years. While undergoing pon farr, Vulcans become unbearably horny, but also very angry and animalistic. They are moved to mate. In "Amok Time" (September 15, 1967) , Spock (Leonard Nimoy) undergoes pon farr and returns to Vulcan to marry his betrothed T'Pring (Arlene Martel). T'Pring finds that Kirk is a more appealing mate, however, and Kirk and Spock have to fight in a Vulcan gladiatorial arena for her hand. It's a notable episode of "Star Trek" because of the amount of Vulcan lore it introduced into the franchise, but many — like Yelchin — seem attached to the episode's silly, horny violence. 

Yelchin also admitted that he did more research than some of his co-stars. He read "The Star Trek Encyclopedia" by Mike and Denise Okuda, and watched every episode of the show. Chris Pine, it seems, began watching the series, but stopped partway through the first season. "I kept going. I loved it," Yelchin said. "I even watched the episodes that Chekov wasn't in. The ones that he was in I found interesting, like when they go to a bar in 'The Troubles With Tribbles' and they have a drink, I liked that." 

Yelchin also played Chekov in "Star Trek Into Darkness" in 2013 and in "Star Trek Beyond" in 2016, released posthumously .

Why Does Spock Never Talk About His Long-Lost Sister, Michael Burnham?

Star Trek: Discovery introduced a big retcon to Spock's history by revealing an adopted sister; here is why he never mentioned Michael Burnham before.

• Spock made a tough decision to keep his adopted sister a secret to protect the galaxy in "Star Trek: Discovery."
• Spock's history of keeping personal matters private helps explain why he never mentioned Michael Burnham.
• The addition of Michael Burnham to the Star Trek timeline has interesting implications for the Kelvin timeline.

When it comes to Star Trek , there is arguably no character more associated with the franchise than Spock. The Vulcan First Officer became the breakout character of the series and remained a fixture in pop culture. He is one of the few characters to make it past the original pilot for the series and then be a major character on not just Star Trek: The Original Series but original actor Leonard Nimoy returned to play a role in all six live-action films, two episodes of Star Trek: The Next Generation and the two J.J. Abrams-directed reboots where he passed the baton on to actor Zachary Quinto. In addition, actor Ethan Peck plays a young Spock on both Star Trek: Discovery and Star Trek: Strange New Worlds , making him the character to appear in the most entries in the franchise.

As Spock's popularity grew, creators decided to expand on his backstory. One of the most controversial decisions was the revelation of Michael Burnham, played by Sonequa Martin-Green in the series Star Trek: Discovery . The series established her as the adopted sister of Spock, a human who was raised alongside Spock by his parents, Sarek and Amanda Grayson. This was a major shock to fans as it was a huge retcon to the franchise. Plus, with Star Trek: Discovery originally being a prequel series, the character was never mentioned by Spock or anyone else in the rest of the franchise.

While the obvious answer was the character was not created then, the writers of Star Trek: Discovery came up with an answer that fits within the established Star Trek timeline to explain why she was never brought up again despite her close connection to Spock. This is why Spock never mentioned his adopted sister, Michael Burnham, before.

Spock Vowed Never To Speak of Her or the Crew of the Enterprise to Save the Galaxy

Star Trek: Discovery season one firmly established that Michael Burnham was adopted by Sarek and his wife, Amanda Grayson, following the disappearance of her parents at a young age. Then, in Season 2, she introduced characters like Captain Pike and Number One, who debuted in the original pilot for Star Trek alongside Spock . This raised many more concerns about how nobody ever mentioned Spock's adopted sister. The series provides an explanation in the season two finale, “Such Sweet Sorrow, Part 2.” The Crew of the USS Discovery is able to take the rouge AI villain Control into the 31st century, which prevented itself from establishing.

The USS Discovery is reported to have been destroyed in action. To prevent another rouge AI like Control from emerging and risking Discovery's sacrifice being in vain, Spock proposed to the surviving members of the USS Enterprise and allies of Discovery to never speak of the ship or its crew again, wiping it from history essentially. This takes place in the year 2258, about eight years before the events of Star Trek: The Original Series . This was also years before Spock met many members of the crew he was closely associated with, like James Kirk, Leonard "Bones" McCoy, or Uhura, so they never met Michael Burnham or knew of her existence.

This development creates a new context for viewing Star Trek: The Original Series and all subsequent stories featuring Spock after Star Trek: Discovery . He is keeping the pain of losing his adopted sister, Michael Burnham, to himself, but he also theorizes that the crew of Discovery survived and will emerge alive in the future, which he is proven correct. While Spock does not live to see it, Michael Burnham does get to see Spock's impact on the galaxy in her absence and looks to preserve the Federation her brother defined.

Spock Is Known For Keeping Things From His Friends Before

Spock, being half-human and half-Vulcan, has been known to keep things from his closest friends until it is time to inform them of an important piece of news. This is best summed up in his younger Kelvin timeline, when in Star Trek Into Darkness he informs Captain Kirk that their new science officer is, in fact, Carol Marcus, the daughter of Admiral Marcus. When Kirk asks him when he is going to tell him, Spock replies, "When it became relevant, as it just did."

This is clear many times in Star Trek: The Original Serie s. The first was in the season two premiere, "Amok Time," where Kirk discovers that Spock is bothered to T'Pring and set to be married. Later in that season, in episode ten, “Journey to Babel,” audiences are introduced to Spock’s father, Sarek, for the first time. Kirk was surprised at the announced familial connection between them as it was clear Spock never revealed much about his family to Kirk, and the Captain only gets details from talking to Spock's mother, Amanda. These two incidents show that Spock was never one to talk about himself to Kirk, so it is not out of the realm of possibility to believe that Spock would never mention Michael Burnham in public to anyone.

Star Trek: 10 Facts About Spock You Probably Didn’t Know (Or Forgot)

This also is not the first time that Star Trek has introduced a long-lost, never-before-mentioned sibling of Spock's to the franchise and used his not being the most open with his friends as a way to explain the retcon. The main villain of Star Trek V: The Final Frontier is Sybok, who is revealed to be the half-brother of Spock, who is fully Vulcan and has a different mother. This means that Spock had two siblings: an adopted human sister and a half-brother who was fully Vulcan.

When Spock reveals to Kirk that Sybok is his brother, he is left in disbelief and thinks that Spock is lying. Kirk cites he would know if Spock had a brother, and Spock reveals that Sybok and he were raised together after Sybok's mother died. When Kirk asks why he had never mentioned it before, Spock plainly says, "I was not disposed to discuss matters of personal nature." showing that Spock only reveals information when it is absolutely important, even to those closest to him like Kirk. It certainly helps provide an explanation as to why Spock never mentioned Michael before.

Does Michael Burnham Exist in the Kelvin Timeline?

The addition of Michael Burnham to the main Star Trek timeline also creates a new wrinkle for the franchise in terms of the alternate reality created in J.J. Abrams's 2009 reboot, Star Trek . That film features a younger Spock and Kirk meeting at an earlier point in their lives, but no mention is made of Michael Burnham, despite Spock's parents being prominently featured in the first film. In fact, in the Kelvin timeline of films, it seems that the divergent event is what led to her never needing to be adopted.

The USS Kelvin is attacked and destroyed, resulting in the creation of a new timeline in 2233. In the original Star Trek timeline, Michael Burnham's parents did not go missing until 2236, which led to her being adopted and raised by Sarek. Since this is three years after the event of the Kelvin timeline's divergent origin point, it stands to reason the ripple effect in the galaxy meant that Michael Burnham's parents never went missing, and therefore, she was never adopted and raised alongside Spock. In the Kelvin timeline, Spock never had a sister, and Michael Burnham had to live and grow up with her birth parents.

Star Trek 4: Development History & Why It's Taken So Long

This might be an intentional choice by the creators as the showrunner of Star Trek: Discovery is Alex Kurtzman, who also was the co-writer of 2009's Star Trek , which created the Kelvin timeline and established the rules of how the universe works from branching off from the point of Nero's ship coming through the black hole. When writing Star Trek: Discovery , he likely picked the year that Michael Burnham's parents went missing to be set after that stardate, so it could be implied in the Kelvin timeline it altered events to where she would never need to be adopted.

It appears the creators have done a good job providing plenty of in-universe explanations for why Spock never mentioned his adopted sister in the original Star Trek series or in the Kelvin timeline movies.

Check out our interview with Michael Burnham herself, Sonequa Martin-Green, on the final season of Star Trek: Discovery below.

• The Original Series
• The Animated Series
• The Next Generation
• Deep Space Nine
• Strange New Worlds
• Lower Decks
• Star Trek Movies
• TrekCore on Twitter
• TrekCore on Facebook

After several days of subjecting the vial found in “Mirrors” to every scientific test imaginable, the Discovery crew is no closer to figuring out what it could possibly indicate; all tests show that it contains nothing but pure, distilled water. Just when they’ve exhausted all options, Captain Burnham (Sonequa Martin-Green) gets a “call” from Kovich (David Cronenberg), who’s able to provide her with a bit more information: the names and planets of origin of all five of the clue-giving scientists.

(She finds one of his infinity room keys in her pocket; I guess he just beams those onto people?)

Adding to the pile of eccentricity and mystery, Kovich gives this information to Burnham handwritten, on a yellow legal pad. Genuine, of course; none of this replicated nonsense. Why? Because he loves the feel of paper. I like that Kovich is a mystery — and I don’t think I want to know so much about him that he ceases to be one — but I do hope we get a little something more before the series is up. Without that, as time goes on I’m afraid he’ll be reduced to “That time David Cronenberg was on Star Trek for some reason” instead of remembered as a full character.

With Kovich’s intel, Burnham and the team are able to pinpoint planet Halem’no as the location of the next clue. It’s an arid, storm-tossed place where, 800 years ago, the Denobulan scientist on Kovich’s list surreptitiously built five huge rain generators. Disguised as naturally occurring towering rock formations, only one of them remains in operation, and the planet’s entire population lives in its vicinity.

Before Burnham and Tilly (Mary Wiseman) beam down to find the clue, Burnham spends some time listening in on the Halem’nites. They have a typical phonetic language used for everyday communication, but they also have something called whistlespeak — which sounds much more like multi-tonal birdsong than human whistling — and is used for communication across great distances.

Burnham gets very excited about this, not just from a linguistic and anthropological perspective, but also from a metaphorical one; the idea of people coming together from across the vastness of space or across cultural divides is understandably thrilling to her.

Unfortunately, beyond Burnham and Tilly hearing a bit of it once they beam down to the surface, no one actually uses whistlespeak to communicate in the episode! Even when the emotional power of song becomes integral to the episode’s climax, the tune is merely hummed. Communicating across distances — whether across interpersonal divides, divides of time and space, or across the cypher of clue and solution — has been a primary theme of this season of Discovery . I don’t know that I see how the introduction of the linguistic phenomenon of whistlespeak really helps that though, given that it goes virtually unused and, other than Burnham’s explanation of it to Tilly, unmentioned.

Burnham and Tilly join up with a band of pilgrims known as ‘compeers’ — an ancient word meaning ‘companions’ —  who are on their way to the rain generator, known to them as the High Summit… and the home of a temple to their gods. One of the pilgrims is sick from dust inhalation, and is cured by the local leader, Ohvahz (Alfredo Narciso), through some sort of sonic healing ritual using musical bowls.

Talk about a missed opportunity for some of that whistlespeak, right?

Burnham learns afterwards that access to the temple inside the tower is restricted to those people who have completed the Journey of the Mother Compeer, a ritual that proves worthiness to the gods and entices them to bring rain. Burnham asks to perform this ritual, and the next morning she, Tilly, and a host of other pilgrims including Ohvahz’s child Ravah (June Laporte) are lined up and ready to prove themselves.

Multiple people, including the dust-sick woman, urge Burnham to reconsider her enthusiasm for running the Journey and entering the temple. Ohvahz also tries to convince Ravah not to run, but they insist, seeing it as an opportunity to prove themselves. It’s a little ominous, but Burnham’s got to get that clue so, off she goes.

Maybe I’ve just seen Altered States too many times but when I saw that running the Journey started by ingesting a tab of mystery substance I thought the trip was going to turn out to be a psychedelic one. I’m a little disappointed to have to report that nope, it’s just a footrace. More of a leisurely jog really, but one that’s done while very, very thirsty.

Participants drop out along the route, tempted by the bowls of water placed here and there, and Burnham eventually drops out too — deliberately, tempted by something else. Noticing that some moss in a particular area is yellow instead of green, she surmises that the color change is being caused by hypothetical radiation leakage from a hypothetical broken console.

As far as hunches go it’s paper thin, but it does turn out to be correct.

While Tilly continues to run the race to access the tower the traditional way, Burnham contacts Discovery to get a walk-through on how to repair the console. Adira (Blu del Barrio) stumbles their way through for a while before telling Rayner (Callum Keith Rennie) that they think someone else ought to take over. “Yes,” I said to myself while watching, “Good thinking Adira, you’re right, they probably should get an expert on 800-year-old Denobulan technology.”

But actually the problem is just that Adira is feeling too flustered and awkward to want to continue, so Rayner declines their request. And why is Adira feeling flustered and awkward? Because Tilly isn’t the awkward one anymore, and Discovery apparently requires that one of them always be fumbling and bumbling their way through a mission at any given time.

Adira and Burnham are successful, and rewiring just that one console is all it takes to repair the rain generator. Tilly, for her part, has made it almost to the finish line alongside Ravah. They’ve each been given a bowl of water to carry across the line as one last temptation, but also one last challenge… as it’s kind of hard to run and not spill water. Ravah trips, their water spilling, and they’re out.

Instead of finishing the race on her own, Tilly returns to Ravah and pours some of her water into Ravah’s bowl. They cross together in a moment that surely was not intended to invoke the ending of perennial elementary school reading list title and book-that-traumatized-me-in-front-of-my-entire-4 th -grade-class Stone Fox , but did.

It’s a nice moment seeing them persevere together (and one with fewer sudden dog deaths than Stone Fox , so I appreciate that), but one’s that’s immediately tempered by the fact that their reward for winning is ritual sacrifice. Oops.

Burnham can’t beam into the “temple”, Tilly and Ravah can’t beam out (or leave any other way), and the rain generator is well on its way to causing the “sacrifice” conditions — which turns out to be a vacuum forming inside the chamber where Tilly and Ravah are trapped during rain generation.

Prime Directive be damned, Burnham beams into the nearby chamber where Ohvahz remains, not wanting his child to die alone. He is understandably freaked when she materializes beside him, and it takes a while to convince him that she’s real and that her explanation, which sounds like something straight out of Ancient Aliens on The History Channel, is legitimate.

Even with that done, there’s still the issue of Ohvahz’s fervent belief that the gods and the very rain itself require the sacrifice. Burnham finally gets through to him by humming a tune she hears Ravah humming to Tilly over an open comm line, and he opens the chamber. Everyone is saved and it rains, hooray.

Star Trek does love its “ritual sacrifices that power ancient machinery” storylines, and over the decades they’ve changed just how “set straight” the alien of the week is in the end, but I’m not sure they’ve ever had one that’s quite as gentle  as this one. Burnham explains the rain generators and their origin to Ohvahz, which leads to him asking some understandable questions about the nature and reality of his gods, which Burnham deftly deflects.

He then — and this is where my bewilderment sets in — casually and almost sadly wonders aloud if they really have to stop the sacrifices, because doing so would be a lot of work. I understand Ohvahz’s concern about the social upheaval of this change (not to mention that they never really needed to have happened in the first place, can you imagine when that gets out?) — but yes, guy, you definitely have to stop sacrificing people.

Oh, and this whole time? The next clue was actually in one of the other rain generators. Welp!

OBSERVATION LOUNGE

• Saru (Doug Jones) is once again absent from this week’s episode — and will be out of sight for at least two more weeks (we’ve seen up through episode 508). On social media this week, Doug Jones shared that his temporary exit from the season was a result of his commitments to the Disney sequel Hocus Pocus 2 .
• The clue registered a lifesign in “Mirrors” despite being nothing but inert water, artificially generated by one of the planet’s rain generators. Pretty lucky that Zora (Annabelle Wallis) knew about this charity project, huh?
• Tricorder contact lenses? One please!

• he console Burnham repairs is only the second instance of Denobulan computer interfaces seen in the franchise; the circle-based interface is in line with the control room of the Denobulan ship seen in “Cold Station 12.”
• Burnham showing Ohvahz his planet from orbit after breaking the Prime Directive and being mistaken for a god is reminiscent of a very similar moment between Picard and Nuria in The Next Generation ’s “Who Watches the Watchers”.
• The five scientists who worked to hide the Progenitor technology are Dr. Vellek of Romulas, Jinaal Bix (a Trill), Carmen Cho (a Terran), Marina Derex from Betazed, and Hitoroshi Kreel (this week’s charitable Denobulan).

While Burnham and Tilly are down on the surface, Culber (Wilson Cruz) has been continuing to interrogate his new feelings and experiences. We see him consulting his abuela — or at least an experimental holographic AI of her created from his brain waves, as a “grief alleviation therapeutic” — seeking advice on her spirituality in life… and also a recipe.

She declines to give him spiritual advice, suggesting that he’s jumped the gun a little by not ruling out physical causes for his symptoms, and also the recipe because it turns out she wasn’t actually that great a cook and was secretly replicating his favorite meal behind his back.

(How a program made from Culber’s own memories could know a secret she’d kept from him, I don’t know. Either AI in the 32 nd century is psychic or it still has the pesky 21 st century habit of making up whatever it thinks will satisfy a prompt, accurate or not.)

Also, come on now — I thought Star Trek had already clearly stated its position on how creepy and invasive holographic representations of real people are almost certain to be. Just this morning I saw an ad for an AI that claims to let you speak with exes or deceased loved ones, accompanied by the comment “Absolutely the fuck not.” I do not disagree, and neither, I suspect, does Leah Brahms. Or Kira Nerys, or Deanna Troi, or Chakotay, or…

Reluctant for the help — but also energized by the possibility that this might all just be physiological — Culber opens up to Stamets (Anthony Rapp) and asks for his help and support with a full neurological workup. When no anomalies are found, Culber seems almost disappointed, which Stamets picks up on. Even though it’s a small scene, this moment with Stamets is the one thing in the episode’s exploration of religion and spirituality that I connected with and really appreciated.

Stamets is not a religious or spiritual person, something that Culber is concerned will color his reaction to Culber’s “awakening.” But instead, he’s fine with it, even if he’s not invested on a personal level. His is a “You’re healthy and you’re happy, so I’m happy” philosophy, which seems to me to be the most respectful possible way to approach this type of issue, one that allows both parties to hold and live by their own respective beliefs.

It’s interesting, then, that Culber closes the episode quietly disappointed with this. And Book (David Ajala), who’s had a hard time keeping his own perspective this season, is right on when he gently calls Culber out: “It’s an odd quirk, really, this human tendency to consider something less meaningful if it’s just for yourself.” Stamets doesn’t need to share in this with Culber, he just needs to be there for him, and he is.

Next week: the Breen are back!

Star Trek: Discovery Season 5 continues on Paramount+ May 9 with “Erigah,” followed the next day on SkyShowtime in other regions.

• DSC Season 5
• Star Trek: Discovery
• Whistlespeak

Related Stories

Pinewood toronto dedicates soundstage to the star trek franchise, new star trek: discovery season 5 cast photos arrive, new star trek: discovery photos — “whistlespeak”, search news archives, new & upcoming releases, featured stories, lost-for-decades original star trek uss enterprise model returned to roddenberry family, star trek: lower decks cancelled; strange new worlds renewed for season 4, our star trek: discovery season 5 spoiler-free review.

TrekCore.com is not endorsed, sponsored or affiliated with Paramount, CBS Studios, or the Star Trek franchise. All Star Trek images, trademarks and logos are owned by CBS Studios Inc. and/or Paramount. All original TrekCore.com content and the WeeklyTrek podcast (c) 2024 Trapezoid Media, LLC. · Terms & Conditions

Screen Rant

"my anger gives me strength": star wars' next tv show will explore the true power of the dark side.

Darkness rises in the latest trailer for Star Wars: Tales of the Empire, as a Nightsister becomes a warlord and a Jedi Padawan falls from the light.

• A turn to the Dark Side is teased in a new Star Wars: Tales of the Empire trailer as a Nightsister rises and a Jedi Padawan falls.
• Morgan embraces the Dark Side, while Barriss faces challenges as an Inquisitor in the trailer.
• Six new episodes release on Disney+ on May 4, with familiar faces like Ahsoka Tano and Darth Vader.

Darkness rises in the latest trailer for Star Wars: Tales of the Empire , as a Nightsister becomes a warlord and a Jedi Padawan falls from the light. Following on from 2022's Tales of the Jedi , the six-episode anthology series will explore the untold stories of two of the Galaxy Far Far Away's most influential individuals, as fallen Padawan Bariss Offee and Nightsister survivor Morgan Elsbeth take center stage. Diane Lee Inosanto and Meredith Salenger reprise their respective roles, while Jason Isaacs, Lars Mikkelsen, Rya Kihlstedt, and Dee Bradley Baker are also set to return.

As May the 4th draws nearer, Star Wars has shared a new Tales of the Empire trailer on Twitter.

Morgan narrates the trailer and her draw to the Dark Side, as clips showed her emerging from the Seperatist-led massacre of the Nightsisters of Dathmir, as well as her rise to power in the reign of the Empire. Meanwhile, Bariss faces her trials as an Inquisitor, her induction into the dark faction, and her working alongside the Fourth Sister (Kihlstedt) in apprehending a Jedi survivor.

Tales Of The Empire Will Walk The Path Of The Dark Side

Star Wars is no stranger to showing what drives someone to the path of the Dark Side . The fall of Anakin Skywalker (Hayden Christensen) and Ben Solo (Adam Driver) across the Skywalker Saga explored how fear of losing what they held dear or burdens of power and legacy forced each young man down a dark path, while Reva's (Moses Ingram) quest for revenge and Ezra Bridger's (Taylor Gray) brief temptation showed how an individual can draw on the dark side to fulfill their emotionally driven vengeance.

All 15 Defining Moments In Anakin Skywalker's Fall To The Dark Side

However, Tales of the Empire promises to tell very different kinds of journeys across the path to the Dark Side, as it becomes a way forward for both Bariss and Morgan to emerge as survivors of fallen civilizations. Morgan's journey will see her emerge merciless and pragmatic, becoming an Imperial asset and leading to her first appearance in The Mandalorian , but Bariss' story is much more unclear. Having been absent from canon since The Clone Wars season 5, Star Wars has no answer to Bariss' story, leaving room for a more mysterious fate.

Star Wars ' " Tales of the " anthology series is a welcome addition to the series canon, following a thread of major moments in less explored character's lives to add more depth to both them and their place in the universe. While Tales of the Jedi explored how Jedi can rise and fall, Tales of the Empire promises to explore why someone may join the regime. With long-awaited answers for certain character's fates, and the backstory of one of The Mandalorian 's standout characters, Tales of the Empire promises to be a perfect release for followers of the Dark Side for May 4.

All six episodes of Star Wars: Tales of the Empire release on Disney+ on May 4.

Source: @StarWars /Twitter

Tales of the Empire (2024)

Star Wars: Tales of the Empire is an animated follow-up to 2022's Tales of the Jedi. The series focuses on Barriss Offee, a former Jedi, and Morgan Elsbeth as they navigate their separate paths through the Galactic Empire. The series will also see the return of other iconic Star Wars characters such as General Grievous, Ahsoka Tano, Grand Admiral Thrawn, and Darth Vader.