Generally fun, but a big dumb movie.

Rating: 3/10 (9 May 2009)

This movie was well cast, but unfortunately not the reboot of the franchise one might have hoped for. It does succeed as an adventure film, keeping the audience entertained, but there isn't much else. Many people have been singing its praises, however, the movie is genuinely unremarkable. As a Star Trek film it fails, with a weak story line that doesn't make much sense within the canon that still needs to be considered. As a Sci Fi film it fails with a plot that falls apart on simple science, let alone major sci fi concepts.
The revenge plot doesn't make a lot of sense from the outset. Our villain Nero is basically upset because Spock and the Federation failed to save Romulus in the late 24th century (100+ years in the future). It seems that a supernova threatened the galaxy, and despite Ambassador Spock's promise, he failed to save Romulus. The problem is, supernovas don't threaten galaxies. They don't expand in an infinite blast wave that wipes out countless star systems. In short, the concept behind the destruction of the planet was ridiculous.
From a Trek standpoint, there is then the question of how the Romulans were presented in this future. You would think that they were a helpless refugee race utterly dependent on the benevolent support of Spock and the Federation to save them. You would never guess that they were a huge Empire with a military rivaling Starfleet. In short, it would be a little like the Russians blaming the US because they were unable to stop the meteor that was going to land on Moscow. It becomes clear that the writing staff didn't bother getting any kind of picture of the state of the Trek universe before their time travel tampering set big changes in motion.
Visually, they obviously had to make many changes to the sets and special effects to update it from the sixties. Unfortunately they made a few too many changes purely in the name of being different. On the lighter side were warp speed effects that tossed twenty-five seasons and four movies of established shots (along with a lack of knowledge of how fast ships had been a century before Kirk). More serious were the engineering sets. Taking the idea of an industrial look to the extreme, one could easily mistake main engineering for a waterworks or a brewery. Aside from the lack of anything that actually looked like an engine (Star Trek style or otherwise), it just didn't make much structural sense.
The movie itself could have been much better. Though some might argue that they didn't need to know much about Trek because it's a reboot, it doesn't take that much to make sure your story holds up, without beating your audience over the head with minutia. Unfortunately the examples which hold the story to canon (gee they mention Cardassians) really don't come across as anything more than an attempt to cover the fact that the writers and director didn't learn much about the core material.
Paramount has shown once again that they are clueless as to why the franchise is dieing. First and foremost you need a coherent (preferably smart) storyline to compliment the characters. Beyond that an attempt to keep track of continuity is useful. Further one should at least try to understand basic science when making a fantastical science fiction film.