See it in

To Trek, or not to Trek.

By michelledarnell74
Written July 27, 2016
Let me begin by saying I have watched all of the Star Trek movies (old and new) so I had high expectations for this one. There were some issues with storyline and some of the plot made no sense, but overall, I would recommend this movie to most people. I like the actors, I liked the special effects, and I enjoyed the idea of the movie immensely. I'd give it a solid 3 out of 4 stars.
9 out of 12 found this helpful. Did you?

Gotta go.

By donnercc
Written July 25, 2016
The second Star Trek had nearly non-stop action. I was glued to my seat. 3D quality was better than others I've seen. I found myself dodging things coming at me. LOL Definitely a must see movie. Fandango said I'd get a free download for the 2009 version in my email but I've gotten nothing from them since I saw it Friday. Maybe they're just running late. I hope it comes through.
9 out of 14 found this helpful. Did you?

Star Trek 2: The Wrath Of You-Know-Who!

By Mick Flix
Written February 28, 2015
The action is abundant, characters get to develop and the humorous dynamics between them really start to click here. Cool to see Peter "RoboCop" Weller on board as an admiral. The main villain is well-played by Benedict Cumberbatch, and all spoilers aside, you know who that character is by now. I liked this movie a lot, probably a bit more than JJ Abrams' first Trek, although I was a little irked by the blatant rip-offs from the 80's Trek 2 (dialogue, a climactic scene involving heroic sacrifice, and one really hilarious "Shatnerism" that I thought would work as a joke, but never imagined would actually happen in this film!) But hey, these new Treks are tons of fun and I dare say better than the last few Next Generation features. Looking forward to those new Abrams-helmed Star Wars movies. Geek it up!
8 out of 15 found this helpful. Did you?

A "Go" but pretty close to "So-So"

By fandango110
Written May 05, 2016
I can't decide if I'm just getting used to movies with lots of special effects or if the movie was "okay". The plot was fine, but there weren't too many moments of snappy interaction which was something I expected. Gosh the more I write the more it's "So-So". We saw this in 3-D and while it was okay, there wasn't anything that knocked your socks off. Actually several cheap 3-D effects were annoying, things coming at you that served no purpose but to be "in 3-D". Sound was okay but not dramatic, music was okay but not dramatic, fights were okay but not dramatic. Gosh. Go, it's Star Trek. But don't give yourself huge expectations and it was be "good".
8 out of 9 found this helpful. Did you?

Star Trek Into Darkness *****

By bugman3764
Written May 01, 2016
This is a very good Star Trek movie. If you are familiar with the original series (and I am old enough to have seen it first run) and the original actors in the first 6 movies, you should find the retelling very clever in what they used and how they go about it. While some backstory may be missing, it is not worth cutting what they have and it runs at about a perfect length. I saw it in 3D and while non-intrusive it didn't really enhance the experience and I plan on going back to a regular theater to see it again. I can't imagine it being much better and hope it makes enough to keep the series going in theaters with these actors. A+. Slight spoiler alert. It happened so fast but I am sure I heard the name Mudd as a passing reference during the movie. Has no bearing to the plot really but thought it was a very good shout out to the old series. Correct me if I am wrong.
8 out of 8 found this helpful. Did you?