Popular reviews

• 

  Review by Branson Reese 21

  Wish I had just said this sucked. Oh well. Please don't screenshot my reviews and post them on twitter. I'm using this site to put down my thoughts, not trying to ignite a discourse.

• 

  Review by Bill Chambers ½ 19

  This review may contain spoilers. I can handle the truth.

  I hate this movie for all its cutesy quoting of Wrath of Khan while trying and spectacularly failing to sublet its gravitas. I hate it for casting the whitest actor on Earth as a man named Khan Noonien Singh. I hate it for the way that every shot in the back half is a three-ring circus of lens flares, cluttered sets, and CGI embellishments. I hate it for turning Spock into Sheldon from "The Big Bang Theory". I hate it for its abuse of Leonard Nimoy's fealty to the franchise and to J.J. Abrams, reducing Old Spock to a fortune-teller Young Spock now keeps on speed dial. I hate this movie, this hacky, weightless, soulless "Muppet Babies" theme-episode of a movie.

• 

  Review by mulaney ★★★½ 3

  i'll be honest, if this movie was only the window hand scene with kirk & spock on loop i would give it five stars without batting an eye

• 

  Review by Matt Singer ★★ 4

  There are some lovely character moments here, lots of fun references to the history of the series, and some of the coolest shots of the Enterprise ever. Unfortunately, in order to enjoy them, you have to wade through the half of the movie featuring Benedict Cumberbatch as John Harrison/Character Redacted, which is just beyond dumb. His plan is dumb, his mystery benefactor’s plan is dumb, the way Kirk and Spock stop him is dumb, and the repetition of scenes from Wrath of Khan is really dumb.

  J.J. Abrams and the material are at cross-purposes. Abrams is all about his mystery box schtick, while a Khan redux makes very little sense when it becomes nothing but plot twists. Someone should have told Abrams playing coy in his usual fashion did not suit this story at all. Despite his subject, he never realized the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Or the one.

• 

  Review by Lucy ★★★½ 4

  benadryl cumbersome can suck my foot for trying to ruin this series with his crap acting

• 

  Review by Nakul ★★★½ 2

  (this review of star trek into darkness comes from someone who has never actually seen any original star trek movie/series and who knows very little about star trek universe)
  

  So, no idea why fans hate this movie but i enjoyed it more than Star Trek (2009). Not without its flaws, but JJ Abrams puts together an enjoyable summer blockbuster, that successful interweaves exciting action set-pieces with fun humour & character moments. I was more invested in the characters this time around and loved the interplay between them. Also, Benedict Cumberbatch was way better than Eric Bana.
  The movie is sometimes dumb & full of plot holes but JJ Abrams keeps the pace so fast (it's his trick), that it gives you no…

• 

  Review by Jamelle Bouie ★½ 4

  Nothing but a mish-mash of post-THE DARK KNIGHT blockbuster cliches and Abrams‘ “mystery box” bullshit. This movie sucks ass.

• 

  Review by Jay ★★ 1

  nothing says star trek like spock brutally beating benedict cumberbatchs face whilst flying above a burning city

• 

  Review by DirkH ★★ 32

  Film #18 of 'It's June Jim, but not as we know it.'

  I have seen a couple of reviews by people starting with declaring that they are not Star Trek fans. I'd like to start by saying that I am one. A big one. A huge Trekkie.

  J.J. Abrahams isn't. This film has nothing to do with Star Trek.

  I've seen a couple of interviews with Abrahams proclaiming he was never a Star Trek guy, saying that it was too philosophical for him. With the first Star Trek film he wanted to make a science fiction film situated in the Star Trek universe, but make it a film accessible for both fans of the show and those who didn't know…

• 

  Review by Jake Cole ★½

  I've only just gotten into TNG and sporadically watched TOS, so I'm not a die-hard at all, but this is so far from what Star Trek is it is truly repulsive. "I thought we were explorers," Scotty protests right around the time I thought the same thing, but the idealism of Gene Roddenberry is unfashionable, so instead we get slick cynicism and an utter lack of consequences. To begin the film with a casual violation of the Prime Directive that invites a punishment that lasts all of three minutes is an insult; what is the point of Pike trying to teach Kirk about respect if Abrams and his trifecta of the worst screenwriters in Hollywood intend to let him off…

• 

  Review by David Sims ★★ 2

  rewatched for this article (www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2014/12/its-time-for-star-trek-to-return-to-the-small-screen/383794/)

  it's amazing how Abrams' first Star Trek has lots of fun and a bunch of cool action sequences and manages to give every member of the ensemble a nice little hero moment

  and this movie has no fun and a ton of boring, muddled action sequences and gives nobody anything to do except grimace and sweat

• 

  Review by 20oldboy03 ★★★★ 8

  Um meine Bewertung und vielmehr den Platz in meinem Ranking von „Star Trek (2009)“ mit Platz Eins und „Star Trek Into Darkness“ auf einem ehrenvollen zweiten Platz zu erklären – stehe ich wohl sehr alleine mit meiner Meinung und Wertung – folgt nun eine Einordnung besagter Filme mit Schwerpunkt „Into Darkness“.

  
  Die ersten zwei Filme der neuen Star Trek-Auflage wirken (zu) bombastisch, viel zu sehr „Star Wars“ mit ihren Raumschlachten, großen Schießereien und der allgemeinen Action(lastigkeit) als die klassische Star Trek-Filme die mehr auf das zwischenmenschliche Spiel der Crew (Star Trek 1 bis 6/7) und der Weiterentwicklung der zweiten Etappe (Star Trek 7 bis 10). Grund für die Tonalität der Ur-Filme liegt, logischerweise, an der Serie „Raumschiff Enterprise“ die die…