A pretty good article on how a critically lauded, box office hit can have its reputation change so dramatically over the course of a year.
After the initial blush, how do you
see STID a year later? Do you still love it or has contemplation tempered your assessment of the film?
I think Matt Singer at The Dissolve pretty much covers it.
Star Trek Into Darkness is so fast-paced, it actually outruns its own logic problems, another reason why it received such an unusual combination of initial positive reviews and subsequent negative buzz. Almost everyone who saw the movie enjoyed the experience. They only started to see the plot holes after thinking about it, watching it again, or reading the criticism that slowly started to cohere around the film.
I have the opposite response... I actally like it MORE now than a year ago...the whole Khan part and TWOK rip-offs.really put a damper on my enjoyment...
But now REALLY appreciate the TRULY alien world in the beginning of the movie.
And though Bruce Greenwood was in for only like 7 minutes...he showed between this and '09 why his loss would be MEANINGFUL to Kirk. (Should I start a separate Greenwood-Pike appreciation thread?)
ANd we see Pike's influence the way Kirk treats Sulu in giving him temporary command.
And in my second run noticed that the bar where Scotty went...there was one person in the background who was dressed like Caitlin Dar (from ST V), and another with sunglasses like Geordi's VISOR....any I missed there?