Star Trek Into Darkness Yify
Posted : admin On 09.01.2020Ratinglanguagereleaseotheruploaderdownload6Arabic4Brazilian Portuguese1Bulgarian1Chinese0Chinese-1Chinese-1Chinese-1Chinese-1Chinese-1Chinese-1Chinese0Croatian0Danish4Dutch39English2English0English0English0English0English0English0English0Farsi/Persian0Finnish1French0French0German4Greek1Hebrew0Hungarian0Hungarian2Indonesian0Indonesian0Italian0Japanese0Japanese0Korean1Macedonian0Macedonian2Malay1Norwegian1Polish3Portuguese1Portuguese1Romanian0Russian4Serbian0Slovenian3Spanish1Spanish-2Spanish0Swedish0Turkish0Turkish0Turkish0Turkish1Vietnamese. Star Trek Into Darkness should be renamed Star Trek In Name Only.
What has always distinguished Star Trek from other sci-fi is the thoughtful and nuanced way that philosophical and sociological commentary was woven into the stories. Star Trek is not just a lot of sci-fi nonsense but a meaningful exploration of what it means to be human.
In the past, Star Trek has been intelligent and character driven. Now it is all fancy CGI and snappy one-liners. Abram's Star Trek is an action-for-action's sake Kirk and Spock buddy flick.
The 'surprises' Abrams plants aren't surprises if you're familiar with the Star Trek universe. His preference for violence and political intrigue makes Abrams' vision more Star Wars than Star Trek.The fill-in-the-blanks plot is a repetitive onslaught of video-game like CGI sequences separated by brief breaks used to set up the next CGI spectacle. The first half begins with a scene taken from Raiders of the Lost Ark and quickly moves to The Return of the King's Mount Doom. Cumberbatch's attack on Starfleet HQ is a scene stolen from Godfather 3. When Cumberbatch is captured, he and Pine briefly become caricatures of Hannibal Lecter and Agent Starling from Silence of the Lambs. The second half attempts to remake The Wrath of Khan but is backwards and upside down. Instead it is practically a beat-for-beat repeat of the identically plotted Star Trek Nemesis.The cast was the best thing about the last movie but not this time.
The other familiar crew members each get a brief moment in the spotlight but for the most part they fixate on comedic asides. The romance between Uhura and Spock is unnecessary and actually diminishes Uhura's character. Alice Eve is little more than eye candy. Peter Weller's Admiral Marcus is a disappointment. Karl Urban was eerily good as McCoy last time but stays in the background this time, a third wheel on the Kirk/Spock bicycle. Pine's beefy frat-boy Kirk is an exaggeration of Shatner's Kirk.
When he is angry he sounds like a bratty child. Cuberbatch's performance is the best thing this time and overshadows everyone else.I left the theater thinking that my free passes were over-priced. Where do I start?I'm a huge fan of the original movies and I admit, I enjoyed the 2009 film. Because the well got dry and it seemed there wasn't anywhere left to go with the franchise. So, seeing as Abrams alluded to everyone that by taking the franchise back to where it all began and altering the time line, it was his intention to re-tell stories from the original 'series' and breathe new life into them. Naturally, I thought he was talking about the original 'TV series' from the 60's. Fine by me, because the original TV series was cool, but it's pretty much outdated.This latest movie has shown me that it's obvious he just wants to do the 'films' of the 80's and 90's all over again, but in his own image, which is.
An abundance of lens flares and people who are only good at looking pretty on screen. And that, in my opinion, is not what Star Trek is about. He even stated in an interview with Jon Stewart recently on The Daily Show, that he never was a fan of Star Trek as a child because he didn't get 'the philosophy' of Star Trek. This movie is proof that he still doesn't get it. If he wants to make flashy sci-fi movies with no depth or substance, fine, there are plenty of scripts out there for him to make this kind of bland movie that attracts dimwitted people. So please Mr.
Abrams, leave Star Trek alone, you are only making it worse.Abrams might be trying to get 'non-Trekkers' to enjoy the franchise, but in order to do so, he is replacing everything that made Star Trek what it was in the first place. I'd love for more people to get into Star Trek, but not at the expense of my enjoyment of it. This movie has nothing more to offer than Transformers did, snazzy special effects and a story line riddled with plot holes and love/hate relationships between the characters that seem forced and unauthentic.Which brings me to my next point.
Star Trek Into Darkness Free Online
Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof. Where did these men learn to write? They use the technology of Star Trek only to advance the plot or create tension when needed. For instance, a transporter that the enemy uses can transport him light years to another planet, but the transporters on the Enterprise have a hard job locking onto a person on the planet they are orbiting, a hand-held communicator that can call someone in a bar on Earth from the Klingon home world light years away, infiltrating a top secret military base with a shuttle craft without being spotted by sensors, and the list goes on.The last part of the movie they just got so lazy that they re-created the whole death scene at the end of Wrath of Khan, but mirrored it by reversing the roles.
And if that's not enough, the writers blatantly do a copy/paste of most of the dialogue like 'If we go in there we'll die, the radiation will kill us' and 'The decontamination process is not complete, you'll flood the whole compartment.' Since it has now become (dilithium) crystal clear that J.J.
Chris Pine
The Star Trek universe, resplendent in Gene Roddenberry's vision of a future wherein mankind has finally 'got its act together,' while its social and economic problems are generally a thing of the past. Not in JJ Abrams' universe however, in which a corrupt Starfleet Admiral and a freshly revived genetically engineered 'John Harrison', an alias for a more familiar Star Trek adversary, take it upon themselves to create havoc with savage acts of treason and terrorism respectively.With seeming discount made to Roddenberry's unique take of Star Trek, evolving around the prevalent Hollywood ethos of filling seats at the local multiplex, Abrams' crafts, what I would term, a popcorn movie with plot-holes aplenty.