| ||||||||||||||||||||||
From director J.J. Abrams comes the next installment in the Star Trek saga, Star Trek Into Darkness. See it at Cinemark theaters now and pre-order on Blu-ray, 3D Blu-ray, DVD, and the Exclusive Starfleet Phaser Gift Set. Shop Star Trek Into Darkness and more in the Star Trek Store. Learn more |
Frequently Bought Together
What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images? |
Special Features
Editorial Reviews
Amazon.com
Product Description
Customer Reviews
Another nice thing about this movie is that it seems to understand the nature of post-Cold War politics. Nations now clash with treaties, trade agreements, and capitalist aspirations. By addressing issues such as the WTO, human traficking, and China's emerging status as an economic superpower, I got the distinct impression that the screenwriters actually read the newspaper. Ultimately, the plot doesn't quite hold up, but it's an admirable effort.
Snipes does a great job, never lightening the tone by playing to the cheap seats. By playing it straight he makes the film that much more believable. His fight scenes--including the end shootout feating slow-mo bullet-time--are both thrilling and plausible in a way that "The Matrix's" cgi-enhanced action can't manage.
Finally, the film just *looks* great. Director of Photography Pierre Gill plausibly passes off a lot of Canadian locations as Hong Kong and New York. He gives these cities a glossy sheen, a convincing grittiness, and a neon readiance, depending upon the scene.
All in all, I think if the movie had featured Tom Cruise or Keanu Reeves it would have been much better received. Too bad, since Snipes blows both of them off the screen. This one is definitely worth a look.
The main criticism I have of the film is the editing. In an attempt to make the story more intriguing, it is pasted together in a convoluted way that makes it very difficult to follow. All the factions and motivations are eventually explained, but one has to pay very close attention or see the movie a few times to catch them all. The screenplay suffers from an excess of subplots, which makes following the story that much more difficult. The biggest sin committed by the producers and director was that they did not understanding their audience. This film targets action lovers, who are a visceral lot. They want to be stimulated, not confused and intrigued. They also tend to be more conservative politically (God, Guns, Guts). So naturally, the film bombed.
Wesley Snipes delivers a strong performance in the intelligent action hero role. Snipes seems to be locked in the action genre when he is really too bright for the roles he plays. He should take a lesson from Samuel L. Jackson and look for scripts that are more dramatic. Jackson still does action films (Shaft), but he picks parts portraying complex characters and scripts with strong character development, instead of straight macho testosterone parts. Snipes would have done well in some of the roles Jackson has had. Anne Archer does a fine job as the manipulative career diplomat, pulling everyone's strings behind the scenes. Donald Sutherland is a bit flaccid in this film, but his character really didn't have a lot of bite.
Overall, this film is a strong entry into a genre dominated by mindless body count. I rated it an 8/10. Those who like their action flicks to be completely believable subtract two points. Subtract another two points for those who don't like confounding story lines. For those who abhor screen violence, don't even bother.
Look for Similar Items by Category
|
