Some critics have seen 'Star Trek Into Darkness' early. What's the reaction to the new 'Star Trek' film?
'Star Trek Into Darkness' stars (from l. to r.) Chris Pine, Alice Eve, Zachary Quinto, and Zoe Saldana.
Jon Furniss/Invision/AP
EnlargeParamount is going to release director J.J. Abrams??Star Trek Into Darkness into U.S. theaters later this month. It will arrive four years after Abrams proved able to breath fresh life into the geek-favorite sci-fi franchise ? which is nearing the 50 years of existence (and relevance) benchmark ? with his critically-acclaimed and lucrative cinematic reboot.
Skip to next paragraph Screen RantScreen Rant had a humble start back in 2003 as a place to rant about some of the dumber stuff related to the movie industry. Since then, the site has grown to cover more and more TV and movie news (and not just the dumb stuff) along with sometimes controversial movie reviews. The goal at Screen Rant is to cover stories and review movies from a middle ground/average person perspective.
Recent posts
' +
google_ads[0].line2 + '
' +
google_ads[0].line3 + '
Subscribe Today to the Monitor
Does the final result justify the, by and large, highly-secretive marking buildup (maybe less secretive in recent weeks)? We?ve collected together informative excerpts from the initial wave of Star Trek Into Darkness reviews to arrive online, so you can hear it straight from the horses? mouth.
For the full reviews, click on the respective links below (NOTE: These excerpts are all?SPOILER-FREE):
The Guardian
Director?JJ Abrams?has followed up his sensational 2009?Star Trek?reboot with a sparkling 3D sequel? 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? 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.
Time Out London
?Star Trek Into Darkness? is a brisk, no-nonsense sci-fi action sequel built around a conflict between the crew of the Starship Enterprise with a slick, slippery new villain, John Harrison [who?s] played with relish and poise by Benedict Cumberbatch? The result [this time] is a stop-gap tale that?s modest, fun and briefly amusing rather than one that breaks new ground or offers hugely memorable set pieces.
The Telegraph
[The 2009 'Star Trek' reboot] represented a fresh start for the Trek canon, and was fired by a swashbuckling spirit and full-blooded sense of adventure??This sequel starts in the same confident frame of mind, but after around 45 minutes it finds a comfortable spot [and] reverts to old bad habits?.?A large portion of Star Trek?s audience may well be satisfied by a film that amounts to not much more than an incredibly pretty and sporadically funny in-joke. [But] that pioneer spirit? It?s gone.
Film Ink
And so, after all the hype, the secrecy and the manipulations of the marketing machine, the final question remains; is the film any good? Thankfully the answer, for the most part, is a resounding yes??Visually, Star Trek Into Darkness?is stunning? And yes, J.J.?s trademark lens flare runs rampant once again, which occasionally plays havoc with the film?s otherwise impressive 3D transfer? [This] is a?big film, building on the foundations of its predecessor and holding true to the nature of the franchise. Combining humour, action and drama, Abrams once again delivers an original experience that feels nostalgic without any hint of being either stagnant nor stale. It?s an impressive feat, and one worth catching on the big screen.
lucky numbers odds of winning mega millions mary mary sag aftra merger dj am bully bohemian rhapsody
No comments:
Post a Comment