(Before I continue, I should point out that I'm not a Trekkie by any means. These two films are the only ventures I’ve made into the Star Trek universe, and everything else I know is from hearsay and pop culture conversation. So I can’t comment on how this movie references (or rehashes) material from the show or previous movies. I know some Trekkies aren’t happy with how the material was handled in this movie, but the first movie set up a parallel timeline that gives these movies the freedom to rehash and rework the mythology. I think this was a creative and frankly brilliant way to free the filmmakers from past stories, allowing them to focus on the essence of these characters and tell their own stories. As for me, I have no preconceived notion about what these movies should or should not be. I really can only take these movies at face value.)
In his second outing with the crew of the USS Enterprise, J.J. Abrams proves once again that he is a master storyteller. With Star Trek: Into Darkness, he has created an exhilarating plot and engaging story tied together with an ensemble of strong but flawed characters who overcome personal obstacles to save the day (and the planet... and possibly the universe).
The movie opens in the midst of the action, a high-pressure mission that has the whole crew racing against time to save an uncontacted race of beings from destruction by an erupting volcano. As plans go awry, the lead characters stay true to their nature: Spock holds to regulations and protocol while Kirk breaks the rules to save the life of his first officer. The scene sets up the character development that will follow, with Kirk learning about responsibility and Spock learning to let his emotions guide his actions.
If you think this sounds familiar to the story of the first film, you'd be right. In fact, as enjoyable as this movie was, it wasn't quite as strong as the first one. We already saw an impetuous Kirk learn responsibility and a logical Spock learn to let go of reason, and it was new and fresh the first time around. (Actually, I'm not sure that Kirk had any growth as a character; the opening scene had him acting boldly to save one of his crew, which is the same sort of thing he does at the end. Spock, on the other hand, definitely learns to let go and run with his emotions.)
Moreover, some key plot points seemed forced or arbitrary. Early on, Scotty resigns his post over an illogical argument over the fuel in the cargo, as if the chemical composition of the cargo will somehow have an impact on the operations of the ship’s reactor (the weight, maybe, but type of fuel?). This frees Scotty for some action later on, but it didn’t make sense and therefore felt forced. Later in the film, Spock makes a call (communication?) that provides an opportunity for a nice cameo, but it also feels like Spock is cheating; rather than figure things out and learn on his own, he turns to a shortcut for the answers. And Benedict Cumberbatch’s evil villain puts something he’s trying to protect inside a weapon he built. What? Why would you put your most prized possession inside an explosive device? Of course his performance is so compelling I didn’t think much of it at first, but later in the film I was able to reflect on this inconsistency. Between the recycled character arcs and the illogical twists in the plot, I didn’t leave with the same feeling of awe that I had from the first film.
Nevertheless, this is still a fun, engaging ride. The ensemble of actors is a wealth of talent and chemistry, particularly newcomer Cumberbatch, who plays a deliciously devious Starfleet employee hell bent on destroying Starfleet. (His voice and enunciation alone had me mesmerized.) And in true ensemble fashion, all the supporting characters get an upgrade and something more exciting to do: Chekhov gets a promotion, Uhura gets some action in the field, Scotty gets his own mission, Bones is called into action more than once, and Sulu even gets to sit in the captain’s chair. Most importantly, Abrams knows how to set the right pace and keep the stakes high while throwing in the right amount of camaraderie and quippy humor. Star Trek: Into Darkness may not be as fresh as its predecessor, but it is a knock-out adventure that's sure to leave you wanting another voyage on the USS Enterprise.
Monday, May 27, 2013
Saturday, May 11, 2013
Review: Iron Man 3
In Iron Man 3, we pick up the story of Tony Stark after his sacrificial act of bravery at the conclusion of The Avengers. He's shaken, unable to sleep, prone to anxiety attacks, and dependent on his suits like a child clings to his blankie for security. He spends his waking hours building different suits and, after a flashback that sets up the plot of this film, we get to see him with a new upgrade that he can control remotely. It's some cool stuff, if far-fetched, but hey, this is a comic book movie after all.
The plot is driven by a new villain named The Mandarin. While in the comics The Mandarin was a Chinese radical who discovered alien rings that gave him superpowers, here he is portrayed as a terrorist with unknown or mixed ethnic origins - a hodgepodge of warring cultures rolled into a bin Laden-esque figure. He's didactic, violent, ruthless, and out to prove a point. After an explosion injures someone in Tony's circle of friends, he is called action and swears revenge on The Mandarin.
Robert Downey, Jr. is masterful as always, balancing Stark's wit and bravado with his underlying pain and anxiety. Director Shane Black, who wrote the Lethal Weapon films and directed the hip, noirish crime comedy Kiss Kiss Bang Bang (a brilliant film also featuring Robert Downey, Jr. - and Val Kilmer in the role of a lifetime), brings his dark, edgy sensibility to this film, giving it a unique feel while keeping the humor and fun we've come to love and expect from Iron Man movies. Add to the mix Gwenyth Paltrow, Don Cheadle, Guy Pearce (Memento), and the ever-amazing Ben Kingsley, and you've got a great movie with great performances.
The story is focused on Tony's growth and his identity. What is Tony Stark without Iron Man? Does the suit serve him or does he serve the suit? These questions are made obvious to the viewer as the suit starts acting on its own, programmed by Stark but operated by Jarvis, the artificial intelligence that powers Stark's computer and tech. And so our hero's arc is about discovering his own unique strengths so he can overcome his insomnia and anxiety and ultimately defeat the bad guys.
Though the story has some leaps of logic (unbelievable technology and impossible biology), it is lively, well-paced, and has some great surprises and twists. Without giving away any surprises, I'll just say that things aren't exactly predictable, which is part of the fun and part of how Black avoids falling into tropes and cliches.
At the same time, Tony's arc (character arc, not the device in his chest) fits the tried-and-true formula, with a clear call to action at the beginning, a period of struggle in the first half of the second act, a midpoint where he discovers the secret to overcoming his internal battles, and a turning point before the third act that reflects his growth as a character. (Side note: The call-to-action plot point was consistent with the Tony Stark we know and love - bold, brash, arrogant - but somehow seemed inconsistent with the Tony that we see at the start of this film - anxious, insecure, scared.) This character arc grounds the story and gives it real heart and emotional substance to go with all the action and set pieces.
Overall this film is pretty awesome. The acting is fantastic, the plot is energetic and surprising, and the fight sequences are incredible. As I noted, there are some gaps in the logic and some truly fantastical stuff, that requires some serious suspension of disbelief. And, to be honest, there are so many twists in the plot that the story is sometimes inconsistent and incoherent (another topic for another time when I won't spoil the plot with my analysis). Nevertheless, while not as tight and cogent as the first film (still my favorite), Iron Man 3 is a huge improvement on the second film, and definitely worth seeing on the big screen (try it in 3D!).
Now to hope that Robert Downey, Jr. signs on for a fourth Iron Man movie...
Though the story has some leaps of logic (unbelievable technology and impossible biology), it is lively, well-paced, and has some great surprises and twists. Without giving away any surprises, I'll just say that things aren't exactly predictable, which is part of the fun and part of how Black avoids falling into tropes and cliches.
At the same time, Tony's arc (character arc, not the device in his chest) fits the tried-and-true formula, with a clear call to action at the beginning, a period of struggle in the first half of the second act, a midpoint where he discovers the secret to overcoming his internal battles, and a turning point before the third act that reflects his growth as a character. (Side note: The call-to-action plot point was consistent with the Tony Stark we know and love - bold, brash, arrogant - but somehow seemed inconsistent with the Tony that we see at the start of this film - anxious, insecure, scared.) This character arc grounds the story and gives it real heart and emotional substance to go with all the action and set pieces.
Overall this film is pretty awesome. The acting is fantastic, the plot is energetic and surprising, and the fight sequences are incredible. As I noted, there are some gaps in the logic and some truly fantastical stuff, that requires some serious suspension of disbelief. And, to be honest, there are so many twists in the plot that the story is sometimes inconsistent and incoherent (another topic for another time when I won't spoil the plot with my analysis). Nevertheless, while not as tight and cogent as the first film (still my favorite), Iron Man 3 is a huge improvement on the second film, and definitely worth seeing on the big screen (try it in 3D!).
Now to hope that Robert Downey, Jr. signs on for a fourth Iron Man movie...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)