JJ Abrams Creates Own Star Trek...To Loyalist Dismay!

Rating: 3/10 (12 May 2009)

First of all, this may contain or elude to spoilers...
That being said, I want to be open minded. I acknowledge that Star Trek has become bogged down as often being "message" heavy. And maybe perhaps Trek does need a reboot, or at the very least an injection of more action and less talk.
So, I'll give props to where props should be given. Star Trek by JJ Abrams is a beautiful looking movie. The effects were by no means skimped on and to those whom that sort of stuff matters, you will not be disappointed. I also appreciated the cast as they were the right people for the role with the exception of the individual whom played Checkov (to young for the role). And lastly, the storyline with the exception of a few minutes held itself together and kept moving. I observed no cell phones lighting up with people attempting to check the time until the movie would end. It was very much a hold on and lets go kind of storyline.
However there's also a lot wrong with this movie. As a Star Trek purist I should have heeded Abrams advice and stayed home. JJ Abrams takes wide license with this movie and that's saying it nicely. While it's interesting to see the beginnings of each character as their origins has never been "officially" delved into, we're also to believe the following...
JJ and crew have at best taken a wide license with interpretation or at worst didn't bother to actually watch an episode of old Trek for the purpose of research.
Engineering abroad the Enterprise and the USS Kelvin look more like a vessel from Battlestar Galactica or a contemporary freighter. Open, dank, dirty, pipes and conduits exposed and everywhere. And the Enterprise herself? What were you thinking JJ? What have you done? That's just has to be the worst interpretation (okay, just horrible) of the starship Enterprise I've ever seen. Some things you just don't mess with. Trek is known for its crisp and clean look, inside its starships and out.
And whom builds their starships actually "on" Earth? Starships are massive vessels and are built in space for obvious reasons. Not the middle of Iowa (which is convenient for young Kirk I guess). But there's a reason that the US Navy for example doesn't build carriers in Iowa but rather along the East Coast. Use some common sense JJ!
The interior corridors and the bridge where a significant amount of the movie takes place look like something out of a video game. I mean I understand that in reality, time changes things. For those whom watched Star Trek: Enterprise, set one-hundred years or so before TOS, did you really expect something that looked like it was from the 70's? Well in the movie I certainly wasn't expecting the bridge of the Enterprise to look like something you'd see on Playstation or XBox.
A Romulan mining ship that can time travel? Really? Since when? And just what kind of future arms a mining ship with enough fire power to take out a flotilla of Star Fleet vessels that it itself dwarfs?
JJ, you destroyed Vulcan! That's just not right man! How could you? Star Trek has enough unexplained areas for you to play with, but somethings you just should leave alone. If you accept this movie as part of the Star Trek lore then it fundamentally changes everything. It means that the Vulcan everyone knows and refers to is actually the "new" Vulcan and Spocks mother is killed in the process of said planets destruction (despite appearing in a few TOS episodes and movies). It's as if someone were to reboot say...Star Wars and decide Vader didn't need to die at the end of the last movie or something as equally paramount. Why bother destroying Princess Leia's homeworld with the Death Star. It looks menacing enough. Did you even bother to watch any of the episodes in order to see what you should've left alone???
I'm really am crossed about this movie. I want to both like it as it really reinvigorates Trek. It instills it with new energy that some of you will agree that it needed. But also I'm disappointed with this movie for the reckless abandon that was used in writing it without caring about the damage being done. Trek fans are already arguing over which series cast they like better, or the interpretation of this or that... Now we're going to argue over which movie reality we like better to!
KB