THE BOOK OF LIFE Is a Fantastic Day of the Dead Celebration

THE BOOK OF LIFE Review:

- This is shaping up to be a great year for animated films. Earlier in 2014, The Lego Movie was an awesome surprise. And now, there's another fantastic non-Pixar, non-Disney, non-Dreamworks animated film that is truly something unique and different, all the while telling a classic, timeless story. THE BOOK OF LIFE is a visual feast and a great story - a fairy tale about family that reminded me a lot of the first How to Train Your Dragon, in terms of mixing imaginative fantasy with genuine emotion.

Inspired by the holiday and unique aesthetic of Mexico's Day of the Dead celebration THE BOOK OF LIFE is a film that clearly places a lot of importance on conveying the joy and traditions of the festival to a wide audience. With its simultaneously colorful and macabre imagery, the holiday combines the ghouls and ghosts of Halloween with a more personal touch - because it is a time when families honor dead relatives and celebrate the lives they lived. And so the movie is framed in such a way where the entire story is, in fact, a story-within-a-story - a narrative choice that I questioned at first, but that ultimately shows the Day of the Dead as part of a tradition meant to be shared and passed on. To that end, the film begins with a group of rambunctious kids on a field trip to a museum, where a tour guide captures their attention with a story about the Day of the Dead.

And what a story it is. In old Mexico, two deities - La Muerte, ruler of the colorful Land of the Dead, and Xibalba, ruler of the bleak in-between domain of forgotten souls, make a wager. The bet revolves around a group of three young friends - Manolo, Joaquin, and Maria. Both boys have eyes on Maria, but for the time being, Maria is content to just be part of a trio of friends. But La Muerte and Xibalba decide to place bets as to which of the two boys Maria will eventually marry - Manolo (who dreams of being a musician despite his father's wishes for him to go into the family business of bull-fighting), or Joaquin (who wishes to honor his deceased father by becoming a great soldier, just like his dad). When the story begins, the three friends are just kids. But later, we rejoin them as young adults, and we see how La Muerte and Xibalba have attempted to influence events in their favor. What's more, in the second part of the story, which picks up as Maria returns from schooling abroad, and Joaquin returns from military adventures, the friends' village faces an outside threat from invading bandits, led by the sinister Chakal. The danger posed by Chakal seems to be a situation tailor-made for headstrong Joaquin to shine. But Manolo - even though he shies away from being the matador his family wants him to be - may yet be the hero his village needs. Especially once he has to visit the Land of the Dead, and help recruit long-departed souls to aid in his village's fight.

The way the story plays out is unexpectedly heartfelt. Sure, we've seen these kinds of stories before, but what's new here is the fantastical wrinkle of Manolo being connected to his lineage not just through his father, but through an entire chain of relatives that still exist in the Land of the Dead. It's a pretty amazing way to talk about the weight of our family and history and how it affects us. Manolo comes from a long line of proud bullfighters, and there's a crushing weight of disappointment that is felt when he cannot bring himself to embrace that tradition. And yet, ultimately, Manolo is strengthened by his family's traditions - once he realizes that it's okay to also go his own way. I've got to admit: as the movie rushed towards a thrilling conclusion, in which the dead come to the aid of the living, and Manolo is literally hoisted up by multiple generations of his family ... it sort of gave me chills. The movie deals with complex themes of family and identity in a way that's both a lot of fun and seriously affecting.

Aesthetically, the movie looks absolutely amazing. I sort of fell in love with the whole Day of the Dead art style back in the day thanks to Grim Fandango, and THE BOOK OF LIFE does that work of art one better. Just as The Lego Movie brilliantly used CG animation to capture a very distinctive look and feel, so too does this film mimic the look of the traditional Day of the Dead figures in a way that hasn't really been seen before on the big screen. It's funny, because in those opening framing scenes, when the modern-day school kids visit the museum, I was feeling underwhelmed by the movie's visuals. But once the story proper starts, the film really comes alive. And once Manolo ventures to the Land of the Dead, things (ironically) *really* come alive. The way that the mythical city is visualized - full of vibrant color and teeming with (undead) life - is truly stunning. Director Jorge R. Gutierrez does a fantastic job here - I'm not familiar with previous work of his, but here, he nails it. Who I am familiar with, of course, is producer Guillermo Del Toro, and THE BOOK OF LIFE does display some signature traits of Del Toro's work - a humanistic look at the fantastic and horrific, eye-popping visual artistry, and a tangible love for cinema that seeps through every pore of the film. Indeed, THE BOOK OF LIFE is filled with all manner of fun little moments that will make movie and pop-culture geeks smile.

Similarly, the voice talent in the film is spot-on. Diego Luna is wonderful as Manolo - and impresses not just with his speaking, but with his soulful singing as well. Channing Tatum is also excellent as Joaquin - doing his best Will Arnett full-of-himself voice, while also bringing a likability and humanity to the character. Zoe Saldana, meanwhile, makes Maria much more than just a girl torn between two suitors. With Saldana's strength propelling her, Maria is quite a strong character. Of course, I also enjoyed the great Ron Pearlman as the scheming god Xibalba, as well as Kate del Castillo as La Muerta. Additionally, a ton of fun actors pop in for smaller roles, including favorites like Cheech Marin and Danny Trejo.

THE BOOK OF LIFE may not have the blockbuster name-recognition of some of the year's other big animated movies, but it's a fantastic film, on par with the best from Disney and Pixar. Not only that, but it's a crafted-with-love celebration of a culture that we don't often see in film or TV beyond cliches and stereotypes, and it brings a unique sensibility and art-style to the table. That said, there is a 100% universal story here about family and legacy, told in a fun, action-packed, visually-dazzling manner. Go see it.

My Grade: A-

GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY Is One Rocking Cosmic Comic Book Jam

 GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY Review:

- Here it is. What we've been waiting for. Now ... we get to the good stuff. I said it back when I reviewed Thor: The Dark World, but I'll repeat: Marvel is boldly going to some very weird places with its big-budget movies, and I'm lovin' it. Think about where we've come from. When this whole big-screen superhero renaissance started with movies like X-Men, the colorful comic book heroes of Marvel made it to cinemas in a whitewashed, scrubbed-up fashion. "Yellow spandex" was a punchline. Black leather was the order of the day. The characters were mostly intact, but the sci-fi grandeur and acid-trip visuals of Kirby and his ilk were all but gone. Now, slowly but surely, Marvel Studios has brought the weird and cosmic aspects of its comic book universe to its movies - and GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY is the apex of that evolution, a loud-and-proud color-burst of a movie that feels like a statement from Marvel: the Marvel universe has officially been cracked open, and there really are no more limits to what can happen in these movies.

The man who makes it all happen is director James Gunn. Just saying that is sort of weird and sort of awesome. Until recently I knew Gunn as an outside-the-system director of genre movies that were, by and large, insane. I saw an opening-weekend screening of his movie Super a few years ago, featuring a Q&A with Gunn. Super remains one of the strangest movies I've ever seen. And Gunn seemed like the kind of guy who'd perhaps be happiest doing these oddball, limits-pushing, low-budget movies filled with his usual cast of go-to actors. But here's the remarkable thing: GUARDIANS is very much a Marvel movie, but, no question, it's also a James Gunn movie through and through. The movie revels in its own weirdness, much like Super and also Slither. It features the oddball, oddly-perverse sense of humor that Gunn is known for. It's got his brother, Sean Gunn, appearing in a supporting role, as he always does in James Gunn films. It's got other Gunn regulars like Michael Rooker. Gunn's movies push boundaries and go to unexpected places, and this is no exception. This is rock n' roll filmmaking like we haven't see yet in the Marvel cinematic universe.

However, what keeps all of the cosmic craziness of the film grounded is the real humanity at its core. As out-there as things get, even the movie's strangest characters have surprising depth. At the center of it all is Chris Pratt as Peter Quill, aka Star-Lord. Quill is a classic, swashbuckling rogue in the grand tradition of Han Solo and the like - but Gunn (along with screenwriter Nicole Parlman) also give him a tragic backstory and a real warmth. Also credit the gifted Pratt for making Star-Lord into a character both empathetic and hilarious. Pratt - so good for years on Parks and Recreation - is a natural at this sort of action/comedy leading man role. The guy has the bravado for epic adventure, but also the dude-next-door affability that makes him easy to root for and care about. He nails it in this film.

I can't say enough about the rest of the film's eclectic cast. It's no major surprise that Zoe Saldana is fantastic as the traumatized adopted-against-her-will daughter of Thanos, Gamora. Saldana is now a multi-franchise sci-fi superstar, but Gamora is an interesting new twist on her usual badass persona - a woman hated and feared because of her father, out to prove that she is, in fact, nothing like him. Gamora is also the moral center of the movie's ragtag team - the only one who, from the outset, has an altruistic agenda. What is more of a surprise though is that wrestler Dave Bautista is actually really, really good here in a scene-stealing role as Drax the Destroyer, a muscled-up alien hellbent on revenge for his wife and child, killed at the hands of the power-mad Ronan. What is also a surprise is how a character that I assumed would be pretty awesome - Rocket Raccoon - is not just awesome, but also the emotional center of the movie. I would never have expected that the talking raccoon would have some of the movie's most emotionally-charged moments, but James Gunn and co. go all-in with the Bradley Cooper-voiced creature. Rocket rules, but he's much more than just comic relief. Same goes for talking tree-man Groot, elegantly voiced by Vin Diesel. Groot is funny and weird, but also the source of several moments of awe, wonder, and emotional resonance. Give both Cooper and Diesel some major, major props here for their voice work. Cooper is the lovable, fast-talking, Brooklyn-accented, chip-on-his-shoulder badass we all hoped and wanted Rocket to be. And Diesel pulls an Iron Giant with Groot, making the lumbering tree-creature somehow full of pathos.

I could go on an on about the cast. Michael Rooker is just great, in a distinctly Michael Rooker sort of way, as the blue-skinned alien outlaw Yondu. Yondu is a perfect example of how Gunn just flat-out embraces the craziest aspects of these characters and goes all-in. Yondu isn't *just* a badass blue alien who talks like a southern-fried redneck, you see. He's also got a deadly blowing-dart that he controls by whistling, which he can use to take out armies of enemies simply by whistling a tune. Holy $^&#, people ... James Gunn isn't messing around. That same wholesale embrace of comic book insanity is evident in the film's chief villain, Ronan The Accuser. Played by Lee Pace - of late the master of over-the-top genre movie grandstanding - Ronan is a straight-from-the-comics cosmic bad guy of epic proportions. There's a similarly otherworldly sheen to Karen Gillan's Nebula, another daughter of Thanos, whose metallic blue skin and cybernetic enhancements make her a truly alien creature. We caught a glimpse of Benicio Del Toro's enigmatic Collector at the end of Thor: The Dark World, and the character is yet another that is just plain nuts, in the best way possible. And of course, the mighty, mad titan Thanos lurks in the background of the film - menacingly voiced by Josh Brolin and looking straight out of a Jim Starlin-drawn comic book page - waiting to stake his claim as the Marvel Universe's most-wanted.

In fact, the comic book literalism in GUARDIANS is pretty crazy. There's a clear reverence for the architects of Marvel's weird and cosmic corners - Jack Kirby, Jim Starlin, etc. - and I don't know if I've ever seen a comic book adaptation that so faithfully reproduces the costumes and colors of its source material. As others have pointed out, the movie is not just visually jaw-dropping, but also bursting with color in a way that the dulled-out modern superhero movies have mostly avoided to date. Star-filled cosmos flooded with neon-colored splashes. Gleaming alien cities filled with colorful locales. Space-bars to rival the Mos Eisley cantina. A legion of Nova Corps agents wearing their trademark gladiator-helmets and Kirby-ringed uniforms, riding around in a battalion of starburst-shaped attack ships.

Gunn shoots the film in a classical manner that calls to mind 70's and 80's sci-fi films. The movie's action is fast and furious, but also well-staged, easy-to-follow, and impactful - littered with character moments both funny and poignant. The film's exotic alien locales are all unique and memorable and teeming with detail and motion and easter-eggs. And the movie's various depictions of the vast reaches of the cosmos are both awe-inspiring and fit for framing.

The film is also very funny. Sure, other Marvel movies have had quippy humor and self-referential gags, but GUARDIANS is the first true Marvel action/comedy. The movie's got a plethora of extended comedic scenes that go for big laughs. Comedy vet Chris Pratt anchors the humor with his great timing and delivery. And, despite its massive kid-appeal, Gunn sneaks in plenty of scandalous little moments that may go over the heads of the younger set, but that are guaranteed to get a chuckle from adults. But what's really remarkable is that the movie can switch gears and deliver epic action, romance, and space-opera - all while being very funny and light-on-its feet. In that way, it really is a throwback of sorts to the classic sci-fi cinema of the 70's and 80's. Action, humor, and moments that kids will later look back on and wonder "how did they get away with keeping *that* in there?".

The movie packs in so much that it does, inevitably, leave you wanting just a bit more. While an opening prologue nicely establishes some backstory for Quill, other characters' origins are often only briefly alluded to, left to be further fleshed-out in future sequels, tie-ins, etc. Certainly, I would have loved to have gotten some additional history around Gamora - to really get a sense for what her childhood must have been like under the thumb of Thanos, and what it was like to be raised alongside his other "children" like Nebula. There was also plenty of untold story with Rocket and Groot. Some mystery is good, but having just a bit more to chew on for the non-Star-Lord characters would have made things feel a bit more substantive. Same goes for chief villain Ronan. I know some of his background from the comics, but here he gets only minimal screentime to properly explain his sinister motivations.

Overall though, what James Gunn and his team have accomplished here is pretty remarkable. They've brought the Marvel cosmic universe to the big-screen, and they've taken characters and concepts that were long thought too weird for the mainstream and made them work - not by watering them down, but by going all-in and just fully embracing the awesome. For many months I've heard speculation that GUARDIANS would bomb, that Marvel movies worked because of a particular formula, and  that any deviation from that formula would spell box office disaster. But this is a new dawn, a world where weird is accepted and where comic book adaptations can let their freak flag fly high. It's funny, because in this film alone there are several concepts that have clear DC Comics analogues, that Marvel has now beat them to the punch in doing right on the big screen. As Marvel has done Thanos, DC could do Darkseid. As Marvel has done a pretty epic take on the Nova Corps, man, that's how DC could do Green Lantern. Seeing the visuals on Groot made me realize how cool a Swamp Thing film could be in 2014. And seeing Marvel embrace its comics' weirdest corners on the big-screen made me realize that there are no more limits. Because as a young comic book fan, sure, I loved the big heroes and the iconic stories, but most of all I loved the way that these comic book universes seemed to expand across all of space and time, filled with an endless collection of characters and concepts that ran the gamut of genres and artistic influences. With GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY, the Marvel cinematic universe now feels ever closer to the kind of place that made comics so cool to generations of readers. The kind of place where Steve Rogers can rub shoulders with The Hulk, who can pick a fight with Thanos, who can run afoul of the Kree empire, who might tangle with Spider-Man, who might just share an adventure with Howard the Duck. The beauty of these organic fictional worlds is that anything is possible. And GUARDIANS - complete with an off-the-wall end-tag that serves as a sort of exclamation point for this idea - confirms that this is now true of the movie-verse as well.

It's fitting then that the iconic object of GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY turns out to be Peter Quill's mix-tape cassette - a memento from his mother - that provides the soundtrack for his adventures, and for much of the film. The tape jumps from "Hooked on a Feeling" to "Cherry Bomb," a diverse playlist of pop  favorites that somehow adds up to Peter Quill, in miniature. So too is the film an anything-goes mix-tape of pop-art - a color-soaked genre mash-up that evokes the same anything-goes spirit of the comics it adapts. Those books were rock n' roll. This movie is rock n' roll. And it delivers one awesomely groovy space-jam.

My Grade: A-

OUT OF THE FURNACE Is Badass, Almost-Great

OUT OF THE FURNACE Review:

- I was quite impressed with director Scott Cooper's first film, Crazy Heart. Not only did that film get the deserving Jeff Bridges his first Oscar, but it also signaled the arrival of a potentially great new director in Cooper. Now, Cooper's second film, OUT OF THE FURNACE has arrived after a lengthy wait, and again, Cooper emphasizes atmosphere. OUT OF THE FURNACE is a film that positively radiates a dingy, blue-collar, steel-town vibe. It's appropriate, since the film is, on one level, a gritty crime-caper. But on another level, it's an American tale about a community that's come upon hard times, and the extremes to which they have to go to scrape by. The movie looks amazing, and it's got an all-star cast that's almost unbelievably stacked with big names. I think it's got all the ingredients for greatness, but it falls just short due to a plot that feels a little directionless at times. Still, the sheer thrill of seeing a dream-team of badasses like Christian Bale, Forest Whitaker, Willem Dafoe, Woody Harrelson, and Sam Shepard go at it (plus a spark-plug performance from Casey Affleck), makes this well worth checking out.

The film is the story of a Rust Belt community that has fallen on hard times. It's also the story of two brothers, Russell (Bale) and Rodney (Affleck), each in very different places. Russell, the older brother, works in a steel mill, a tough, dangerous, and low-paying job that is, nonetheless, an honest day's work - something that Russell takes pride in. Rodney is a recently-returned-from-active-duty veteran, and he's struggling to re-acclimate to civilian life. Instead of taking a job at the mill with his brother, he's fallen in with a small-time crime kingpin, John Petty (Dafoe), who runs a gambling ring centered around underground fighting matches. Rodney, likely suffering from some serious PTSD, seems compelled to be a part of the fights and essentially get beat up (often taking dives) for money. However, Rodney starts getting in way over his head when Petty hooks him up with a psycho drug-dealer named Harlan (Harrelson), who also runs his own fighting circuit. Meanwhile, Russell, normally the more level-headed of the brothers, ends up in jail after a drunk-driving incident. He emerges to find his brother missing - gone off to work for Harlan and never heard from again. And so, Russell, despite repeated warnings from an overly-cautious sheriff (Whitaker), goes off on a shotgun-toting mission to find and save his baby brother.

If that sounds like one hell of a badass premise for a movie ... well, it is. The issue is just that the movie sets all of this up in a somewhat meandering, roundabout manner. It takes a long time to get to the point where Affleck and Harrelson finally meet, and that means that the film's final act feels a little rushed and underwhelming - lacking that big, final, exclamation point that I was hoping for.

That said though - there really are some phenomenal moments that are part of the movie's slow-but-steady build-up to it's endgame. The combination of gritty, well-drawn characters and all-star actors is a potent one. In fact, the film's opening scene - showing just how mean and nasty Harrelson's Harlan is - is a jaw-dropper. Harrelson has played his share of scary mother$%^#'ers, but this is right up there as one of his meanest, scariest, most unhinged roles to date. Similarly jaw-dropping are the first few big scenes for Casey Affleck's Rodney. Affleck gives us a hell of a performance in this one - he really drives home the fact that this guy - who is still outwardly a quiet, unassuming kid - now has a monster inside of him, and has demons that he can't fully control. Bale is quietly badass and intense, and there's also an interesting (though sort of left-field) love triangle with him, Zoe Saldana, and Whitaker (she leaves Bale for Whitaker after he's arrested). Whitaker, who seems to oddly be doing a riff on Bale's Batman voice as the gruff sheriff, is also quite good, while Saldana doesn't get a ton to do. Dafoe is strange, because he walks the line here of doing full-on "insane Willem Dafoe" in this film, which is always entertaining, but doesn't fully match the tone that Cooper is going for. But hey, if one character in the film was just going to be weird as hell, it might as well be the slick small-town crime boss who runs an illegal fight-club gambling operation. Oh, I've also got to mention Sam Shepard as Bale and Affleck's super-badass old uncle. As you might expect, he pretty much rules it for every moment he's on screen (and what a year he's had, between this and Mud).

Cooper makes all of the drama and grit extremely operatic and absorbing. There's a hard-boiled, grimy tone to the film that reminded me of a feature-length episode of Justified - and that's not at all a bad thing. Still, despite how much works here, there does seem to be a slight contrast between the film's sprawling, semi-epic plotline and it's tone. It feels like there's a more streamlined, more ultimately satisfying version of this movie somewhere beneath, that ends up being weighted down by a lot of extra padding. Cooper ends up stuffing a sprawling family drama on top of a gritty revenge flick, and the result is a movie that doesn't quite nail either as effectively as it might have.

OUT OF THE FURNACE remains, however, a dark, violent, immensely entertaining film, that looks great and has one of the best and most badass casts of any movie this year. Bale, Affleck, and Harrelson in particular bring their A-games, and Cooper shows that he is still very much a director to watch.

My Grade: B+

STAR TREK: INTO DARKNESS Goes Boldly Forward

STAR TREK: INTO DARKNESS Review:

- No, this isn't the old Star Trek. This isn't the philosophical original Star Trek, nor is it the intellectual Next Generation. This is the new-school Trek, and what it is is the pop iconography of Star Trek distilled down into a two hour popcorn blockbuster. If that idea inherently annoys you, then hey, you may be predisposed to dislike Into Darkness. It's even more Star Wars-ish than the first film - huge battles and set-piece action scenes, plenty of comedy and lighthearted quips, and a pulp-pop sci-fi energy that is made more for the masses and less so for the diehard Trekkie that refuses to think that Trek can be every bit as action-packed and fast-paced as its sci-fi brethren.

Look, I'm not a hardcore Trekkie, but I have a huge soft spot for select moments of the Original Series, and even more so for The Next Generation (and I'm still brainstorming roundabout ways for Patrick Stewart to cameo in the new movies). And hey, I agree that Star Trek in its absolute ideal form is about being smarter than other sci-fi franchises. Trek should ideally explore moral and philosophical concepts with depth and reverence, treat its futuristic science seriously, and make you think as much (if not more so) as it makes you feel.

The problem is ... it's near-impossible to put all of that into a two-hour movie, especially when the franchise only produces a new movie once every four or so years. And ironically enough, the most highly-regarded Trek movies - Wrath of Khan, First Contact - are the ones that go the big blockbuster route, and that take the show's iconic characters and put them in epic, huge-stakes conflicts worthy of the big-screen.

And so that's why I'm pretty pleased with INTO DARKNESS. Yes, the script is imperfect. Yes, some of the movie is, as Spock would say, illogical. And yes, the movie goes for brawn over brains. But man, this is one of the most fun, entertaining, and rip-roaring blockbusters in quite some time. The movie's energy and action is second to none, and it propels forward at a dizzying and dazzling pace. Most importantly though, the excellent cast really shines. JJ Abrams and Damon Lindeloff have always been "character first, plot second" guys - and while I haven't always agreed with that approach (final season of Lost, anyone?), it really is appreciated here. Because despite the odds and the legacy that they have to live up to, Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Zoe Saldana, Simon Pegg, Karl Urban, and the rest of this new cast have become damn near definitive. Blasphemy? I don't know - and the transition is eased by having the great Leonard Nimoy aboard to lend an extra dose of gravitas as Spock Prime. But the cast is universally fantastic here. This movie franchise doesn't have dozens of episodes to establish relationships, so it's got to move quickly. But amidst the chaos and frenzy, there are some wonderful dynamics at play here. We've only known these versions of the characters for a short time - plus, it's been a while since the last film - but Abrams and co place the spotlight firmly on the core cast and their relationships, and very quickly we're invested and rooting for 'em.

So yes, this is different. Some fans are going to roll their eyes and wonder if they're watching The CW's new take on Trek. But again, it's the quality of the actors that elevates the material and makes you genuinely invested in them. Chris Pine shines as Kirk. I think as the franchise proceeds, he needs to start to bring a little more maturity and weight to the role ... but for now, he is charismatic and capable as the still-headstrong captain of the Enterprise. The real star of the movie, however, is Zachary Quinto's Spock. Quinto has now perfected Spock's stoicism, with an undercurrent of wry humor and the capability for genuine pathos as well (credit his half-human side). Plus, he's super badass when it's his turn to save the day. Ultimately, the theme of the movie is about Spock learning how to be not just a slave to logic, but a good friend, companion, and teammate. Maybe that sounds cheesy on paper, and maybe it is slightly cheesy in practice in the film. But again, this is a much more heart-driven Star Trek than we've seen before, and it works quite well in this context.

Aside from Pine and Quinto, the supporting cast is just so darn lovable, it hurts. In terms of returning players, Simon Pegg's Scotty is the real scene-stealer in this one. He's got a pivotal role as compared to the first film, and he's both funny and, in a way, Kirk's conscious. Karl Urban as Bones has less screentime, but man, he's good - delivering the good doctor's lines with a sardonic deadpan that cracked me up. And Zoe Saldana really holds it down as Uhura. While part of her role in the movie is defined by her relationship with Spock, she proves quite capable as a multitalented crew-member and also gets to kick some serious ass. Anton Yelchin's Chekov and John Cho's Sulu get fairly minimal screentime here, but both have a couple of nice moments. And I'll also give a shout-out to Bruce Greenwood as Kirk's predecessor Pike. He has some excellent moments with Kirk in the film, and Greenwood's presence lends a lot to the proceedings and plays a key role in the overall plot.

As for newcomers ... let's talk Benedict Cumberbatch. I know, the guy has a legion of fans already, but I went into Trek mostly unfamiliar with his work. As the villainous terrorist John Harrison (or is he?!), Cumberbatch is basically pretty awesome - as menacing and steely as you could want in a villain. I will say though, the big surprise for me was how big a role Peter Weller (Robocop!) ended up having in the film, playing the head honcho of Starfleet. Weller is one of my all-time favorites, so to see him get to play a major role in a big movie like this was a lot of fun. How is he not in more action and sci-fi films? Also enjoyed Alice Eve as new crew member Carol. It was high time that the modern version of the Enterprise had more than one major female crew member, and Eve quickly asserts herself as a capable-though-possibly-drama-starting member of the team. And man, she does "horrified blood-curdling scream" as good as anyone.

Now, about the plot. I liked it, though I do think the script leaves a lot of room to be picked apart. I will say this: some of the plot nitpicks I've already read online are pretty lame, in my opinion. The movie doesn't have time to address every little nagging question of the "why would he do X when he could have easily just done Y" variety, but most of these kinds of questions can be explained with a little something called imagination. To me, there were not really moments where I thought "glaring plothole!" Mostly, I thought things like, "hmm, okay, I guess Bones couldn't have just done X because, well, if you think about it ...". Point being, I really don't think there are plotholes big or important enough to in any way ruin the movie. Mostly, I think these kinds of complaints are people looking for any excuse to pick apart the movie.

And hey, sidenote: the worst complaints to me are the ones having to do with the rebooted timeline of these films not exactly paralleling the timeline of the original Trek universe. It's a rebooted universe! Anything is possible! But more importantly, I think fans just need to accept that that was basically a plot device / contrivance to allow JJ Abrams and co. to tip the hat to the old franchise, and to allow for a passing of the torch via Nimoy's version of Spock. It clearly was not intended as something to be analysed in the fashion of "so if everything was the same up until Point X, then clearly these elements of the new universe should be completely unchanged from the old one!" It was just a way to have old Spock in the new movies. Chill out. Basically, yes it's fun to think about (nerd-alert!), but not an essential part of these new movies.

That being said, there are some shortcuts taken in the script that I found hard to swallow. Not enough to justify unbridled nerd-rage towards Abrams, Kurtzman, Orci, and Lindeloff - but there nonetheless. One general problem is that the movie hurdles forward so quickly that it necessitates that the characters change their stance on issues on a dime. "Let's go for Plan A!" "No, Plan B!" "No, I was wrong, and I now see the error of my ways from five minutes ago! Plan A was right all along!" Occasionally frustrating, but sort of forgivable given how much the movie is cramming into a few hours. But to me, the biggest weakness of the film is the way in which Cumberbatch's character is handled. Like I said, Cumberbatch himself is awesome in terms of his performance. But the character's arc and backstory feels incredibly rushed and not necessarily presented in an organic-seeming way. Too much of this character's potential awesome-factor is reliant on people having a big "aha!" moment when his true backstory is revealed. And having that moment is fine, but we need more. I needed Cumberbatch himself to make us understand exactly why he is one evil dude not to be messed with, and to make us understand what his plans are and why he needed to be stopped. The movie takes some major shortcuts in this area, and it feels off. I like the call-backs to earlier Trek lore, but if this rebooted franchise wants to stand on its own, it can't rely on us having prior knowledge or recognition of key moments from the old movies. Shout-outs are fun (and this new Trek has a lot of fun ones that I won't spoil here), but skipping over the main villain's origins and motivation and plans, just because we're meant to assume them based on old stories? That is problematic.

But ... it's problematic more so if you look at Cumberbatch as being the movie's uber Big Bad. In a way, he's not, and that makes his somewhat thin character a little more acceptable. Why do I say that? Because ultimately, the film is less about him and more about Starfleet. I'm not going to spoil, except to say that this is a movie about modern warfare on an intergalactic level. Earth is America, the volatile and warlike Klingons are like the outer space version of Muslim extremists, and Starfleet is the force that has to decide if its mission is exploratory or militaristic. Cumberbatch? He's sort of the unfortunate guy who got caught in the middle of all this, got used, abused, and exploited in the name of military advancement, and is now pretty pissed off about it. The parallels with modern politics are not exact, but the thematic connection is 100% there and not exactly subtle (in fact, it may be a bit too on-the-nose). But again, even though I felt the movie took shortcuts with Cumberbatch, it is less important when you accept that he's actually more of a pawn in the movie's uber-plot than the one truly pulling the strings.

There's a lot going on in this film, but JJ Abrams juggles it pretty well, and compensates for some of the script's looseness with a nonstop barrage of incredible set piece action scenes. Star Trek Into Darkness looks amazing, and I don't doubt that Abrams can now go ahead and direct a Star Wars film every bit as epic and iconic as fans could hope for. Abrams continues to sort of pay homage to Spielberg in the way he creates huge-scale visuals matched with choreography that has real rhythm - mixing character, humor, and action to create swashbuckling scenes of epic scale and scope. And man, in IMAX 3D, the film looks stunning - a majority of the film appears to have been shot in IMAX, and there's an immersive, you-are-there feeling that rivals most rides at Disneyland.

Ultimately, Into Darkness succeeds because it is, quite simply, jam-packed with awesome moments. The "oh $#%&" factor is high. Even if the script has some problems, the overall pacing of the film makes for a fairly intoxicating experience - the energy never lets up, and the movie is never dull. Each major sequence of the film feels expertly crafted and staged, and I constantly felt wowed by what I was seeing onscreen - from the opening's breathtaking primordial, volcanic jungle to a later scene in which Pine and Cumberbatch rocket through space with only the help of perilously-close-to-malfunctioning space suits. Abrams wisely does something that I don't think any incarnation of Star Trek has previously done very well - and that is ground all of the interstellar stuff with a sense of what life is like on earth during this era. Into Darkness' juxtaposition of a sleek future-earth (London and San Francisco specifically), teeming with alien life and exotic tech - with the uncharted wilderness of space, and its Klingon homeworlds and floating fortresses - is unique in the Star Trek franchise. Abrams attacks the world of Trek with a Spielbergian sense of awe and wonder and infinite possibility that, honestly, the franchise has rarely ever possessed in years prior.

To reiterate, I can't say enough about the staging and pacing of the film - it moves with a breathless and almost musical energy that is reminiscent of the great action/adventure classics. Haters like to compare these new Trek films to the likes of dreck like Michael Bay's Transformers (and yes, I realize the two franchises share some writers). But visually, from a directorial standpoint, let's give JJ his due. He's doing things here that are in another league than anything Bay could hope to accomplish with his chaotic and ugly visual style. This is Grade-A stuff. And by the way, speaking of music, the movie's score is fantastic, mixing the newer theme with the old-school theme song in a way that is incredibly cool.

Yes, there are logic gaps in Into Darkness that would give Spock some serious pause. But the movie is so fun, so exciting, so visually explosive, and so filled with great characters and moments that it's hard - for me at least - to get too hung up. The movie is flawed, sure, but it also felt like the kind of epic popcorn flick that is the perfect way to kick off the Summer movie season. Save the primal screams of anger for Kirk and Spock - this Trek, while paying homage to the past, nonetheless goes boldly where no Trek has gone before.

My Grade: A-