Movie Review: Star Trek Into Darkness

Zachary Quinto and Chris Pine

Star Trek Into Darkness
Directed by: J.J. Abrams
Starring: Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Benedict Cumberbatch and Zoe Saldana

Back in 2009, J.J. Abrams (aka. the current Master of Geek Pop Culture) reinvigorated a once-tired franchise with a cast of relative unknowns. A risky venture, to be sure, but new audiences and long-time fans benefited greatly. Like The Dark Knight before it, Star Trek is considered a prime example of how to rebrand a flagging franchise, injecting new life into something that had grown stale over the years.

Now, four years after his first foray into deep space became a box office smash, Abrams once again returns to the Star Trek universe as producer/director.

Abrams, with the help of new head writer Damon Lindelof, continues to tweak the Star Trek canon, yet still manages to appease both the majority of diehard fans and newcomers to the series. And, while Star Trek Into Darkness lacks the excitement and freshness of its predecessor, it's still the type of rousing blockbuster you look for around this time of year.

The latest installment is set approximately one year after the events of the first film. Captain James T. Kirk (Chris Pine) is tenuously hanging onto his control of the USS Enterprise after angering his higher ups during a botched mission on a primitive planet. However, Admiral Marcus (the overly campy Peter Weller) is willing to brush off Kirk's rookie errors when a new threat reveals itself in the form of embittered former Starfleet crewman, John Harrison (Benedict Cumberbatch). Harrison's attacks are grand in scale, meant to draw attention to his true motivations -- all of which is gradually revealed as the film progresses (although, as is so often the case with blockbuster super-villains, his plan is elaborately and unnecessarily complex). With Spock (Zachary Quinto) by Kirk's side, as his usual logical and truthful self, the young captain gathers together his crew and sets out to eliminate this latest universal threat.

There's some interesting commentary on terrorism and the use of weaponry to achieve a certain outcome brimming just beneath the surface. Unfortunately, the script only lightly touches on these themes and, while Kirk and Spock occasionally spar over codes of ethics and the role of vengeance, their conversations quickly dissolve into yet another CGI-laden action sequence. But, in the end, isn't that all we really want?

Just as was the case with the first film, Into Darkness boasts an entertaining and likeable cast. All returning characters are on top of their game, including the disappointingly underused Dr. "Bones" McCoy. How Karl Urban manages to make his incarnation so memorable despite very little screentime is a credit to his comedic chops. The rest of the cast from Zoe Saldana's Uhura to John Cho's Sulu make due with significantly reduced screentime.

Benedict Cumberbatch

It's Kirk and Spock, and their complex relationship, that is the heart at the centre of Into Darkness. Quinto, in particular, has really matured into the role, ably conveying Spock's conflicting nature -- does he give in to his human side and reveal his true emotions or does he remain the stoic Vulcan that everyone (sometimes grudgingly) respects? It's ultimately his friendship with Kirk that leaves Spock grappling with how to react to the chain of events occurring around him, and audiences will appreciate his blossoming relationship with Kirk. Pine, although not as strong an actor as Quinto or even Cumberbatch (more on him in a minute), embodies the role of Kirk with a balance of gusto and arrogance. While he's still quick with a one-liner, his Kirk has evolved from the pretty, swaggering playboy he portrayed in the first film. He's more world-weary, with the weight of his new role as captain resting heavily on his shoulders.

As John Harrison, Cumberbatch uses his British baritone to full effect, slowly spitting out his evil intentions with a snarl and a gleam in his eye. A talented actor, Cumberbatch clearly relishes his new role as a villain after two seasons as the anti-social anti-hero on the wildly successful BBC series, Sherlock. Yet, despite Cumberbatch's best efforts, Harrison doesn't quite live up expectations. Perhaps its the dedicated fanbase that built up anticipation around Cumberbatch or the months of speculation as to his characters' true identity, but John Harrison isn't given enough screentime to completely solidify him as one of the greatest threats the crew of the Enterprise ever faced.

That being said, Star Trek Into Darkness boasts a dazzling array of CGI battles and chases, which should serve to satisfy most moviegoers. It's a fast, entertaining adventure. It's just a shame that the final script is somewhat of a muddled puzzle in spots. 

FINAL GRADE: B

Movie Rant: Why Andy Serkis Should Get an Oscar Nomination

Andy Serkis as Caesar

According to multiple sources, English actor Andy Serkis has signed on for the sequel to this summers monster hit, Rise of the Planet of the Apes. 

As the brilliant chimpanzee Caesar, Serkis was covered in motion capture technology and CGI -- but not, by any means, buried beyond recognition. Thanks to his powerful performance, the character of Caesar shines through all the computer graphics, resulting in one of the finest performances of the year to date.

Serkis, who got his big break as the emotionally tortured Gollum in The Lord of the Rings trilogy, has perfected the art of giving wonderfully heartfelt performances while physically obscured by technology. It will likely be years before anyone else comes close to his ability to emote through the motion capture censors.

Fox recently announced that they would be launching an Oscar campaign for Serkis (no word yet on whether or not it will be for Best Actor or Supporting Actor, although he may have a better shot in the latter category).

The potential dilemma? The Academy, and even some filmgoers, may be reluctant to nominate an actor who performed under motion capture technology.

Over the years there has been a lot of discussion about the idea of nominating someone who appears as an animated character on screen. There are some, like myself, who believe it's requires the same talent and dedication as any other type of performance, while others may deem it as something that doesn't quite feel legitimate.

The first time I can remember this "debate" coming up was in 2003 when there was talk that Ellen DeGeneres could potentially earn a Best Supporting Actress nomination for her voice work as Dory in Pixar's Finding Nemo. In the end, there was no nomination but it was, arguably, the first time an animated performance was seriously considered an Oscar contender.

With the advances in motion capture technology, the game changed. It was no longer simply "voice work" -- it had evolved into a complete and physical performance by an actor. The actor behind the technology interacts with his or her fellow cast members, performing alongside them as equals. To brush off the amount of work Serkis put into his role as Caesar would be a mistake -- the Academy already did it to him once before by snubbing him outright when he should have been considered a major contender for his performance in The Lord of the Rings.

Zoe Saldana in Avatar

With the 2009 release of Avatar it was next to impossible to listen to Oscar talk without hearing the name Zoe Saldana thrown around in the mix for the Best Actress category. I was relieved when she was passed over for  a nomination -- not only was the performance aggravatingly over-the-top, but it didn't feel right to have a film like Avatar heralded as the first to have an actor nominated for a motion capture performance. I kept thinking that, once Peter Jackson got around to directing The Hobbit, Serkis would have another shot at a nomination. I didn't anticipate the success of Rise of the Planet of the Apes or the critical accolades Serkis earned in the role.

Serkis paved the way for actors who dare to venture into the physically demanding world of motion capture performance. It takes a certain level of talent to convey subtle nuances through a CGI mask. For his groundbreaking work as Gollum in The Lord of the Rings (and the upcoming Hobbit films) and his motion capture performances in King Kong, Rise of the Planet of the Apes and the upcoming The Adventures of TinTin, Serkis has become, without a doubt, the go-to guy for this type of challenge. 

As Serkis himself said in a recent interview with Britain's The Telegraph: "I am a bit evangelical, I know, but performance-capture is still misunderstood. Ten years down the line people say, 'Oh, so you did the voice for Gollum?' Or people go, 'You did the movements for Kong?' It's frustrating because I play Gollum and I play Kong. It is acting."

The Academy Awards need to get with the times -- and, should there still be enough open nomination spots come the February telecast, there's no better time to start than now with Serkis' performance in Rise of the Planet of the Apes.

Movie Review: Avatar

AVATAR
Directed By: James Cameron
Starring: Sam Worthington, Zoe Saldana and Sigourney Weaver

I eventually caved and decided to give Cameron's much-hyped film a chance. My reluctance to see this film was due in large part to overhype and the fact that it was supposed to be the greatest CGI film ever (which is not exactly something that gets me all fired up about movies). I prefer my sci-fi and action with a great script and characters, thank you very much. FIlms along the lines of Alien, Aliens, Minority Report, T2: Judgement Day or even last years Star Trek update. Regardless, I gave in to the hype and went to see it (in 3D, naturally).

The script borrows from numerous other sources, especially Dances with Wolves and Fern Gully. Its themes of colonization, the destruction of Mother Earth and governmental power have all been done before. Jake Sully (Sam Worthington, much better here than he was in 2009's worst film, Terminator: Salvation) is a former Marine (?) who is now bound to a wheelchair for the rest of his life. He is set to replace his deceased brother on a government mission to befriend and, ultimately, betray the Na'vi on the planet of Pandora. Parker Selfridge (Giovanni Ribisi) wants complete access to a valuable type of rock which is important for something (don't ask me to remember, but it's the equivalent of America wanting Iraqi oil). Jake is given an Na'vi body which he controls with his mind while sleeping. He and Dr. Grace Augustine (Sigourney Weaver) slowly learn about the Na'vi way of life as they become integrated into the social network of these nature-loving blue aliens. And, because it wouldn't be a James Cameron film without a love story threatened to fail due to catastrophic events, Jake falls in love with Neytiri (Zoe Saldana) who is chosen by her people to teach Jake the ways of life on Pandora.

James Cameron deserves credit only where it's due and that belongs to his direction. Arguably, there isn't another director working today so dedicated to his own personal craft. Avatar was a labour of love for ten years and Cameron's dedication to the film is undeniable. Without question this would be a challenging film to helm, with a three hour running time full of CGI and motion capture censors, elaborate sets and some relentless action scenes.

The script, on the other hand, leaves much to be desired. Cameron has clearly borrowed from so many other sources that it hardly seems like it would have been a challenge to write the script in the first place. The dialogue is typical Cameron mumbo-jumbo and lame one-liners, however, some of the cast manage to make it work, mainly the always reliable Sigourney Weaver. It's no small wonder that Cameron wasn't nominated for Best Original Screenplay this year.

The cast is decent. Sigourney Weaver is definitely the standout in terms of performance and talent. I cared about Dr. Grace Augustine more than most of the other characters. Sci-fi is where she's at her best and she suits the film perfectly. Sam Worthington, as Jake Sully, is alright but I couldn't help thinking that, in the hands of a better actor, Jake could have been so much more. However, it's undeniable that Worthington had chemistry with Zoe Saldana as Neytiri. Saldana, who impressed everyone in her role as Uhura in Star Trek, is only mediocre here, prone to overacting on more than one occasion. Maybe she thought she had to try harder to emote in order to be recognized under that CGI mask? Cameron recently commented that motion capture acting will "empower" future actors. How so? Who knows what he means. I don't see what's so empowering about having your face hidden and all those subtle, emotional nuances of your performance wiped clean away with a CGI brush.

As for the CGI and other various special effects, I might be a bit of a curmudgeon but I don't get what all the fuss is about. Yes, some of the visuals are spectacular (I like how the spirit of Pandora is viewed only as little white jellyfish things that land on you), however, it's nothing I haven't already seen in other films with a strong emphasis on CGI. For example, The Lord of the Rings' Gollum is just as great, if not better, than Neytiri. Plus, Andy Serkis is a much more talented actor. When we first get to see Jake in his Avatar form he looked pretty lame and was nothing exceptional. It's only when he was in Pandora and surrounded by other CGI effects that it looked good. This isn't the future of CGI. It's very much the just the present state of CGI.

Despite the overhype and the mediocre script and performances, the film itself was still had some enjoyable moments. While the running time makes the story drag in the middle, it's pure adrenaline and entertainment, which is what a blockbuster film should be. Watching the film in 3D definitely added to the experience and, if nothing else, Cameron's love for his project is evident in every frame. Just take it for what it is: a blockbuster.

GRADE: C