Into Darkness

I’d heard mixed reviews of the latest Star Trek outing. Some thought it was too action packed and strayed from the intellectual heritage of classic Trek. Some thought it was too laden with references to classic Trek episodes. It felt to me like the split was more about tradition than the merits of the movie.
Personally, I thought Abrahms' first Trek outing was an exciting action movie. Sure it used the time paradox cop out to hit the reset buttong, but that is not the worst sin. I don’t put it in the same class as the classic Trek movies - for me this includes TNG movies. It was more of an action movie than a Trek movie.
It isn’t surprising that my feelings about Into Darkness follow similar lines. It was a great action movie. Much like the parallel movie in the classic series, it ups the action from the first movie. The action and pace are amped up to eleven. It is a thrill a minute ride with barely anytime to catch your breath between big set peices. Unlike its parallel, it skimps on what makes classic Trek more than simple action. There is very little focus on ideas and character development. The pace is just too fast for that. The plot allows for deep issues about the industrial security complex and the balance between security and peace. It just glosses pass them.
One thing that Abrahm’s Trek does away with is the over acting. Pine is every bit Captian Kirk, but without the ham. Cumberbatch plays Kahn in much the same manner. He is evil, but not over the top. I’m torn about this. I think the new Kirk is more realistic and human. However, Shatner’s Kirk made for great speeches. Montalbán’s Kahn matched Kirk ham for ham. It was pure b-movie fun.
On its own merits, Into Darkness is a bonkers action movie. As part of the Trek cannon, it depends on your allegiance to classic Trek.