This is not worthy of the name

Rating: 1/10 (23 October 2009)

This film has so many problems that its hard to know where to begin. This could be quite long so please bear with me.
As a sci-fi fan I can accept if not particularly like time travel and alternative reality stories. These are certainly nothing new to the Enterprise. However in order to be a part of a chronicle one thing must not be changed and that's the basic concepts and themes that defines it as being what it is.
For those who aren't avid fans of the genre lets expand a little on 2 distinct and often confused categories (Space Opera and Science Fiction):
Star Wars is high fantasy set in space, like classical high fantasy, it is about larger than life characters achieving improbable feats, and science or even realistic pseudoscience had no real place in it. It worked because of the high drama and the heroic battle between good and evil. The fact that it was in a futuristic setting was almost incidental to its theme. Here big explosions and implausible action scenes were natural and proper. In true heroic fantasy tradition you aspire to be the heroes of the saga. This is the quintessential Space Opera.
Star Trek on the other hand has always been much more about the science, the exploration of space and ideas; the rational and moralistic decisions that the crew had to make. This was what made Star Trek what it was. Moreover it was about hope of humankind overcoming its propensity towards irrational and violent solutions in favour of enlightened and peaceful ones. Star Trek is Science Fiction, set in Space, it differs fundamentally to Space Opera because in Science Fiction, the science, or at least rational thinking is an integral part of the story. In Science Fiction you aspire to be part of the world, not necessarily be any of the characters.
These 2 distinctions are very important in discussing this. This is Space Opera in virtually every sense. Changing that caused many of the problems, because to do so, the original had to be completely destroyed or distorted. I'm not just talking about the original future. I'm talking about the past, present and future. To create the storyline they wanted they had to completely destroy Roddenberry's vision. The reason being that the hero's of the original Federation were rational thinkers, not classical heroes.
Thus gone is the Federation who seek to make peaceful first contact with Aliens, who use violence only as a last resort. In its place is a militant group of idiots, who give control of the Enterprise to a bunch of Cadets because they are the heroes. One of which is promoted to captain, because it's his destiny. In the original federation, this would be impossible, because its leaders respected experience and wisdom, rather than bravado and simple heroism, in TOS, Kirk for instance could be heroic, but it wasn't this which made him a worthy captain, it was his experience and intelligence, combined with his strong will.
Gone are any things which promote thought, or discussion. Gone is the science. In its place are the bad jokes, the clichéd lines and mind pummelling action scene sequences where plot takes a backseat. In are the improbable events that Space Opera thrives upon, because it's about the hero winning the day in the most heroic way, rather than the expedient way.
In itself this wasn't completely fatal, if you weren't a fan, but the problems don't stop there. The plot line makes no kind of sense whatsoever and the haphazardly arranged scenes don't fit together into a cohesive whole. Furthermore they lack any kind of rationality even within themselves. Why do the Romulans step out with mêlée weapons? The only point is to have Sulu fighting a sword duel with a unlikely but fantastical backdrop. Furthermore, it fails in its requirement to make you aspire to be any of the characters in it.
Technical: The effects are good, but the camera work is overly frantic and confusing. You come out feeling like you've got motion sickness. The sounds are too loud and not well thought out; brash and crass rather than subtle and aesthetically pleasing.
The set design is awful and lacks a relationship back to the original and this if nothing else is criminal. Seeing as the Enterprise is the iconic prop of the series. To give them their due, the externals were great, but the bridge arrangement, is also iconic for Star Trek, the new bridge is just too different and don't mention engineering.
The acting is OK but few bared more than a passing relationship to their namesakes. I could deal with the changes to Kirk (ignoring plot holes), after all he's had a different upbringing. But the others had no right to be so different. Their time lines were unlikely to have changed drastically because Kirk's dad died. So we now have Uhura the Slut, an emotionally unstable Spock and an incompetent Scotty. This isn't the actors faults this is the plot line's fault.
The end result is a film which pummels you all over, numbs you with effects and that's it. There is no substance and the plot doesn't hold together. Not that it matters seeing as you're not given the chance to think about it or follow it, before the next scene kicks in, more often than not coupled with expensive effects. The film is designed to cater for the lowest common denominator, preventing the need for and indeed preventing any thought.
In conclusion: This is a mediocre film by itself and would have got a 4 or perhaps a 5 if I was feeling generous. The fact however that they dared to title it Star Trek whilst fundamentally changing everything without providing a decent replacement, means that a score of 1 is generous. This wasn't just 'not your Daddie's Star Trek' it wasn't Star Trek at all.