🎦 Star Trek Into Darkness full movie HD download (J.J. Abrams) - Thriller, Action, Adventure, Sci-Fi. 🎬
Star Trek Into Darkness
Year:
2013
Country:
USA
Genre:
Thriller, Action, Adventure, Sci-Fi
IMDB rating:
7.9
Director:
J.J. Abrams
John Cho as Hikaru Sulu
Amanda Foreman as Ensign Brackett
Noel Clarke as Thomas Harewood
Jon Lee Brody as Enterprise Crew Security
Elly Kaye as Star Fleet Officer
Felicity Wren as Starfleet Officer
Benedict Cumberbatch as Khan (rumored)
Anton Yelchin as Pavel Chekov
Chris Pine as James T. Kirk
Leonard Nimoy as Spock Prime
Bruce Greenwood as Christopher Pike
Karl Urban as Bones
Zoe Saldana as Nyota Uhura
Simon Pegg as Scotty
Storyline: When the crew of the Enterprise is called back home, they find an unstoppable force of terror from within their own organization has detonated the fleet and everything it stands for, leaving our world in a state of crisis. With a personal score to settle, Captain Kirk leads a manhunt to a war-zone world to capture a one-man weapon of mass destruction. As our heroes are propelled into an epic chess game of life and death, love will be challenged, friendships will be torn apart, and sacrifices must be made for the only family Kirk has left: his crew.
Type Resolution File Size Codec Bitrate Format
1080p 1920x800 px 11722 Mb h264 1536 Kbps mkv Download
HQ DVD-rip 720x304 px 1382 Mb mpeg4 1458 Kbps avi Download
DVD-rip 640x272 px 943 Mb mpeg4 995 Kbps avi Download
Reviews
Let JJ Abrams and the lousy writers go ruin Star Wars
Viacom/Paramount have got to pull the JJ Abrams team (writers Damon Lindelof, Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman) from the next one ... anyone could do a better job

First and foremost the Abrams team did not make Star Trek either with their 2009 film or this one, and if they get to do the next one after the under-performance of Into Dreckness it won't be until 2017 that it sees a release since Abrams, et al, are off to do what they do to the Star Wars franchise for Lucas and Disney

*Spoilers*

Into Darkness is a typical action-adventure Mission Impossible kind of thing (it's what Abrams does), but this one is even more hackneyed and grasping than their first effort. They don't respect the source material and couldn't come up with any ideas so the reverted to the Plot Scrambler again and trot out an amalgam of forger female characters and a stupid new secret society found only in the novels and comic books and long after the audience has figured it out reveal that Brit actor-of-the-moment Benedict Cumberbatch is indeed KKHHHAAAAAAAAAAANNN

The stupid brewery is still there as if Abrams wanted to thumb his nose at those who called him out on how dumb it was the first time ... and that idiotic little rock-monster sidekick is still around

Viacom/Paramount ... quietly let the deal the for the 3rd installment by Abrams and his team go kaput and hire Dean Parisot to do the next one since he's arguably done the best one already anyway (GalaxyQuest)
2013-05-13
nothing sad but the writing itself.
i'm wondering when i'm going to wise up and stop torturing myself with movies like this because they make me want to scream.

i'm a pretty big star wars and trek fan which doesn't make me any nicer toward reboots, but i'm willing to ignore my fandom in the face of great writing. in this case, we are not even close.

to add something to the pot here, the crying was the worst for me. if i have to distantly watch someone cry, it is a huge writing failure to me. unless the character who is crying is some insane person who has major issues, i should be able to cry along or at least come close. some of the tears actually looked like fx to me. for a movie that attempted to have so much emotion, this was very poor indeed. i got home and out of boredom resumed my virgin watching terms of endearment, and was crying right where the viewer was intended to cry. if you have a soul, it's really not hard to write people. WBF-WNS (written by folks with no souls) should really be a new movie rating or disclaimer or something.

a note on expectations. i see a few positive reviews in here that amount to "i lowered my expectations to the very bottom, and the movie totally delivered." i see this phenomenon popping up all over the place in the recent decade, especially with reboots or adaptations. frankly i have a problem with this line of thinking. i think people who are handed large sums of money should be held fastly to the task of not wasting my time and energy. i expect to be moved when i sit through a movie, not thrown. i expect to grow in some way, rather than shrivel. and if you say i ask too much, then i ask you: what would you create with a million dollars?
2013-05-25
Worst Star Trek Ever
Star Trek Into Darkness wants to do just that fall off the edge of the world into darkness and never see the light of day again. It is absolute rubbish, full of continuity errors, ripped off scenes from other classic star trek films, total confusion over character origins and timelines. In short Paramount should refund the money of every person who went to see it. If that is the way the new breed of Star Trek films is being handled, then all I can say to Paramount is to cease their involvement with the Star Trek name and go back to making westerns about the 7th Cavalry. If you have not been to see this movie don't save your money for a night at Blockbuster Video Rentals and watch the classic Star Trek movies. On a scale of 1 to 10 I would give this latest offering minus 10 minimum.
2013-05-12
Boldly go where no man has gone before my arse.
(THIS CONTAINS SPOILERS PEOPLE, YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED)

I'll start with the good: Cumberbatch is excellent and knows how to make a good villain, but only when we do realize who he is I can't help but think it's an imitation of the previous version. Peter Weller makes an excellent admiral and really does bring presence to the screen.

The action and visual effects are all excellent, but this is to be expected of a film this large and Abrams does a solid job giving every crew member their moment to shine, bar one character whose names should have been Mrs. Plot Point.

(SPOILERS)

My main problem with this film is the fact that for those fans out there, there will come a moment where you put two and two together and sigh in contempt - which I heard about another 70 people do at the same time as me.

The whole third act kind of felt like a slap to the face to Trek fans, I'm no die hard Trekkie but I enjoy the films, and every throw back to Khan felt forced and melodramatic. The fact that Quinto's Spock can call Nimoy's Spock out of the blue is cheap and out of place, and the whole radiation chamber scene while "clever" for reversing the roles is boring and predictable. But if you haven't seen Wrath of Khan then this will be quite a shock, for a few minutes at the least.

Overall, I wish that the Kilngons had been given a larger role as they were quite awesome, and I have the feeling they will be the main antagonist in the third film in 20-whenever-it-gets-made. The many bad things in this film outweighed the few good bits.
2013-05-14
Brutally bad.
No lie, this was one of the worst movies I've seen in awhile.

Thin, dull plot that's already a rehash from a prior film. Paper thin characters. Zero intellectual or emotional depth. There was nothing challenging about this story, nothing thought provoking or even intriguing. Basically, bad guy wants to blow some *beep* up and after a bunch of explosions and hand-to-hand fights and crappy one liners, he's stopped by our heroes. The end. This kind of formula occasionally produces an awesome movie or two, but those movies are usually fresh and intelligently made in some way that makes them stand out.

This movie was not intelligently made, not at all.

Seriously, the writing here seemed like a seventh-grader's rendition of how adults are supposed to act: the Uhura / Spock 'fight' was like a scene you'd overhear in a middle school hallway or something. It was laughable. The few moments that should have been stirring sucked because they were just straight rips from Wrath of Khan.

On screen, it seemed like explosions, gunfire, and lens flare dominated probably 80% of the shots, and the effects looked like something from a B-grade Xbox game. There was so much CG "action" that it all ended up being pretty boring. I never felt any sense of danger. Worst of all was that constantly swelling score with the same series of notes over and over and over again. You know what I'm talking about. I mean, damn, it was cool the first couple of times, but when the 18th minor protagonist triumph was accompanied by this same bombastic progression, I was curled up in a fetal position. Please, just make it stop.

Beyond all of these issues, Star Trek was never supposed to be about endless violence and effects and one liners. It seems like Abrams has turned the series into a moderately more upscale version of Transformers, and it's too bad. There was so much more that could have been done.

So yeah, this movie sucked. A lot. I can't believe the rating it has on here. I'm starting to wonder if most of the voters work for the studios or if they've received lobotomies or something...
2013-05-24
I can boldly embrace both
As someone who has grown up with the franchise, watched every show and every movie (I've watched the entire DS9 series at least twice!), suffered through characters/actors who I didn't care for (Tasha Yar, seriously?), I realize we all have opinions about what makes Gene Roddenberry's vision so lasting.

That being said? I LOVED this movie. I even capitalized it I loved it so much. The play between the characters, the more human version of Spock, the absolutely delightful "Scotty" (although his sidekick is one of those throwaway characters I dislike) as well as a much better crafted plot this time made for a completely enjoyable movie. The action is intense, the friendship deepened between the characters, the twists and turns are a bit predictable at times, but that is reminiscent of the franchise as a whole. I am already excited for the next movie. I tremendously respected and appreciated the ties in this movie to the elements that make Star Trek great - strong story line, deep connection to the characters and a philosophical element. In some of the older Star Trek episodes the moral/philosophical element can be oppressively heavy handed. No so in the new Trek movie. The ideas of friendship, family and humanity are woven through this movie with subtly and I will outright admit I more than teared up during the climactic scene in the engine room. EVEN though I had already figured out what was going to happen, I have already come to care about, respect and enjoy the new actors in their iconic roles.

So yes, ten out of ten. And let the haters, hate. Those who can not embrace change can go sit and watch old Star Trek reruns and bemoan the 'good old days' and spout off all the reasons why 'Star Trek ain't what it used to be'!!!!

I, on the other hand, will boldly go and embrace the new with a continued reverence for the old. This movie makes it possible to love both.
2013-05-19
Bad reboot II
Well, it's not saying much but this a slight improvement on the first reboot. At least the characters develop a sliver of recognisability. The problem, of course, is that we know that the crew will not die, otherwise there couldn't have been an original series, which rather neuters the tension. All thats left is a lot of noisy CGI effects (what happened to those nice quiet phasers). The movie seems to come to a natural conclusion but then carries on for another thirty minutes of headache inducing action as if somebody suddenly realised that they hadn't used all of the CGI budget. As for the title, it's pretty meaningless but I suppose that they couldn't call it Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan II (or is that minus one)
2013-05-09
This is not STAR TREK !
Jar Jar Abrams keeps destroying Gene Roddenberrys dream of a better world. This film got NOTHING from Star Trek but the names of the Characters and some stolen plot parts.

This film is kinda illogical that it's hard to describe. Plot holes are as big as Borg cubes can fly through it.

Spock is no longer a vulcan, he acts more like a romulan or even Klingon. Klingons look like Zombies and have no honor at all... everything that TNG and DSN build up has been destroyed here.

Kirk dies and will be revived with Kahns magical blood? WTF?? Are you serious?

Jar Jar Abrams keeps on raping Star Trek. This film is a slap in the face of every Star Trek fan and everybody who helped to bring Gene's dream on Screen.

Shame on you Abrams, shame.
2013-08-06
JJ Abrams killed Star Trek
JJ Abrams killed Star Trek. There, I said it. This wasn't a Star Trek movie, this was a Star Wars movie. JJ Abrams, who is also making the next Star Wars movie, apparently had the plots for the two movies mixed up. Whereas Star Trek is about human development, about humanity, exploring, complicated issues that are mainly resolved by thinking and arguing, Star Wars has always just been some shootouts in space. Don't get me wrong: I like action movies every now and then, especially in a Sci-Fi setting. I watch Star Wars as well.

But like I said: this is not supposed to be Star Wars. This is Star Trek. After the first 'new' Trek movie I wanted to give the creators the benefit of the doubt, but I was wrong. I could have known: the setup in the previous movie was like in every superhero movie these days: introduction of characters, background stories, introduction of some bad guy, a few fights, person/country/planet/universe saved. Second movie: worse bad guy(s), bigger fights, more explosions, BIGGER EXPLOSIONS, something saved again.

This was a formula movie. Another one. Movie theaters are flooded with them. The Hangover III, Fast and Furious V, Iron Man III, Scary Movie V, and that's just what's playing in theaters here in Holland *right now*.

Please please... somebody save Star Trek. Gene Roddenberry would have HATED this movie. It's everything Star Trek is nót about.

Boy do I miss Picard and Sisko.
2013-06-08
Eh
I want to qualify my review by saying that I'm an old-school Trek fan. I also want to say that I didn't like the 2009 Abrams "Star Trek" movie very much, although I didn't absolutely hate it.

They managed to make the franchise even dumber and more ADD than the 2009 Trek movie.

Lots of action, pretty actors and actresses, and cool special effects. Those were the only real redeeming qualities of this movie.

Story and character motivation were severely lacking. A brief cameo appearance by an old-school Trek character is used to further the plot in the least subtle way; the character bonks the audience over the head with information about the antagonist, rather than the script leading us to the information.

Benedict Cumberbatch was severely underutilized as an actor. There was only one marginally good scene between Kirk and Cumberbatch's character in which he explains his motivations. Otherwise, the character was one-dimensional and was going through the action-packed motions from that point on with requisite snarling.

Overall, I hope J.J. Abrams gives up the Star Trek franchise when he makes the new Star Wars movie. He's taken all of the thinking out of Star Trek. While old Trek was never hardcore sci-fi, and sometimes was kinda cheesy, at least it had elements of politics, religion, and social issues.
2013-05-20
📹 Star Trek Into Darkness full movie HD download 2013 - John Cho, Nolan North, Amanda Foreman, Alice Eve, Noel Clarke, Peter Weller, Heather Langenkamp, Nazneen Contractor, Jon Lee Brody, Elly Kaye, Felicity Wren, Benedict Cumberbatch, Anton Yelchin, Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Leonard Nimoy, Bruce Greenwood, Karl Urban, Zoe Saldana, Simon Pegg, Jay Scully - USA. 📀
×