A few good points, but mostly ruined by SHAKYCAM, no plot, no meaning, a one-dimensional caricature villain, trashy smut, and being VASTLY INFERIOR to both TOS and DS9.

Rating: 1/10 (24 May 2009)

Star Trek pretends to be the first film of its kind, but really it is the eleventh Star Trek film.
Star Trek is much better than all of the TNG (The Next Generation) films, and the TNG television series, put together. Star Trek has put more character development in its two hours than TNG had in its seven years on television and an additional four TNG films. However, that is not saying much, because that series and those films are all terrible, so improving on them ISN'T an accomplishment.
Star Trek is likewise much better than the shows Voyager, and Enterprise (the horrible non-Trek show that wanted to be a Trek show, and got canceled very quickly for being a piece of crap). However, that too, is not saying much.
When compared to the original Star Trek of the 1960's (TOS), or Deep Space Nine (DS9), Abrams' Star Trek falls flat on its face and bleeds its green blood all over the rocks.
Star Trek tries to remake TOS and on some levels it succeeds. Star Trek has restored the conflict and humor between the crew members, and adventure; vital concepts that made TOS special, but were subsequently murdered in TNG because by that time Roddenberry was a senile man close to death and therefore got the crazy idea in his demented, aged mind that having a show with no humor, no adventure, and no conflict would be good. Since he was calling the shots, his demented mind dictated for much smarter men in his employ to degrade themselves to his (insane, senile) vision and thus we got approximately twenty years of garbage Trek (TNG, Voyager, and Enterprise if you want to even call that abomination Trek, which it isn't).
However, there was also a shining beacon of brilliant Trek in that twenty years: DS9. After Season 1 of DS9, the makers of that show realized that you CANNOT write good drama with no humor, no adventure and no conflict. Therefore, they (rightfully!) flipped the bird to senile Gene's insane vision and instead restored TOS' amazing vision to Trek. Like TOS, DS9 had conflict; adventure; humor; compelling non-generic characters; tons of master actors and brilliant, epic stories.
Although Star Trek has likewise restored the conflict, adventure and humor of TOS, it left out one of the core aspects of TOS and DS9: intelligent, thought-provoking, meaningful stories. Star Trek has a generic plot (full of holes, at that), a generic one-dimensional caricature of a villain, and is overall, very dumb. No intelligence is required of the audience to understand Star Trek, nor is there any meaning to it. That is, it is dumbed-down for lowest common denominator (LCD) appeal. Whilst that is great for ticket sales because everyone, no matter how dumb, will buy a ticket, since seeing this movie will make them feel smart, it is very detrimental towards making a great film.
Additionally, Star Trek's great special effects by ILM are totally ruined by Abrams' amateur director SHAKYCAM usage. It is mind boggling that directors who are not wise enough to AVOID SHAKYCAM are allowed to direct huge mainstream movies like this. They should be forced to go back to film school for another ten years first, or however long it takes them to realize that only idiots think shakycam is a good thing, much less use it in their films. The shakycam makes Star Trek annoying and frustrating to watch. You can't see most of what's going on...instead all you see is the camera shaking like the director is a spastic test lab monkey with a few too many experimental injections running through his system.
TOS was groundbreaking by being one of the first television shows ever to feature, in Uhura, a strong Black woman as a main character. However, Star Trek completely bastardizes this point by turning Uhura into U-WHORE-A in this movie. U-WHORE-A spends all her time being pretty and lusting in her duties to be a sex slave to Spock and others. No reason is given for why U-WHORE-A has become a whore, nor for why Spock is using her as his sex slave. Not only does this bastardize the character of Uhura, but also that of Spock. Spock would never lust after a human woman in TOS, much less use her as his sex slave. Clearly, Abrams was just trying to sex it up for the sake of once again appealing to LCD viewers. As a result, there are many very excruciating minutes of screen time wasted on this trashy smut. Uhura is NOT supposed to be the inspiration for Quark's series of holosuite program entitled "Vulcan Love Slave", but Abrams has trashed her character into being that.
Abrams adds insult to injury by having the script canonize the non-Trek Enterprise show (which didn't have any Star Trek label on it when it originally aired), whilst simultaneously implicitly erasing the entirety of every other Trek show. Erasing garbage like TNG and Voyager is fine. But erasing TOS and DS9, which are both bona-fide masterpieces that are VASTLY superior to this Abrams movie, is an inexcusable slap in the face to the decades of hard work of much better men than J.J. "SHAKYCAM" Abrams and his 90210-in-space script-writing kiddies. If you are gonna erase something, then the replacement should be better, NOT 10 000x worse, as the Abrams movie is when compared to either TOS or DS9.
If you like mindless, smutty entertainment built upon the awful foundation of SHAKYCAM, then Abrams' Star Trek is for you. However, if you want to see Star Trek at its full potential: masterpiece works of art, you must check out Star Trek: TOS (the 1960's television series with Shatner) and Star Trek: Deep Space Nine (the 1990's television series, and only other good Star Trek show).