Good Travel

Rating: 10/10 (10 May 2013)

Why did I see the Star Trek' 2009 in the first place is – I really liked the way Carl Urban moved his jaw in "Dredd" and got interested in his filmography. And he was good in the part of mean doctor Bones and I got to love the movie as well, not actually being the fan of the series or of any previous films. I loved it for its characters, its heart, its humor and intense action. Authors, do some more!
And they did, though a bit differently this time. The following simile came to my mind: the 2009 film is a flower-chocolates period of a romantic relationship, when there's love, lightness and energy, but the future is yet unclear. Whereas "Star Trek Into Darkness" is the family-life alright, with habits and fights (see Spock and Uhura), but with solidity and profoundness. I think this is right, because one cannot jump around and just be funny for long, there must be seriousness and growth, etc.
Thus we have the film about Kirk's growing up, while traveling from attack to negotiation, from being reckless to being responsible, from empty foolhardiness to personal heroism. And he did surpass his heroic Dad, got reborn and his dream came true. Hooray! J.J. Abrams having successfully expanded Star Trek fan base the last time, now is humoring, I think, the hardcore fans of the series, hence the multiple moral dilemmas, the uneasy decisions and heavy pathos of the ending.
There could be a little less action and the mentioned pathos and there could be a little more of the arrogant, tragically controversial figure of Khan (absolutely lovely in his ugliness Benedict C.), otherwise the film is perfect! Do some more, J.J., and may the Force be with you on Star Wars!