Finally! A remake/reboot/re-imagining/re-whatever gets it right!

Rating: 8/10 (13 May 2009)

Star Trek is fantastic. It works on multiple levels. First, the characterizations are very faithful to the personality traits we've associated with Kirk, Spock, Bones, Scotty, and the rest of the crew for the last 40 years. And yet, at the same time, the actors breathe new life and vitality into the roles. There's a fair amount of action, and lots of humor - fast-paced, clever humor, not just throwaway lines.
While watching this movie, I was enjoying it so much I started to wonder - would it be as entertaining if this was the first time we met these characters, or is part of the charm seeing such a believable "origins story"? I really couldn't decide, the movie did such a seamless job of updating - yet staying true to - the Star Trek story.
OK, so yeah, the plot is a little confusing, because of the time travel aspect. But it wasn't nearly as bad as the Lost In Space remake in that regard. And yes, the "loner out for revenge"-type villain may not provide many opportunities for grand philosophizing, but somehow the movie still seemed like it had a lot of depth. And for some reason, I actually thought this was one of Eric Bana's better roles.
I knew this movie would be good when most of the bad reviews on IMDb seemed to be from Trekkers who are upset about damage to the space-time continuum, or problems with parallel universes, or the look of the control panels, or other stuff that would normally be reserved for a line of dialogue from Comic Book Guy on The Simpsons.
Here's just one example of something the movie did right... I always hated that part from Star Trek II where Kirk was all smug about how he changed the Kobayashi Maru scenario so he could win. It seemed like such a stupid thing to be proud of - but I have to admit it was a quintessential Kirk (and Shatner) moment.
And when this movie began to elaborate on that event with young Kirk hamming it up during the fake crisis, I thought "Oh man, I don't like where this is going" - I began to sense shades of Superman Returns, with scene after classic scene being simultaneously rehashed and stripped of its soul. But no sooner did I have this thought then - BAM! - it turns out to be a setup for a very dramatic confrontation between Kirk and Spock that sets up their dynamic for the rest of the movie - not to mention the last 40 years.
Somehow, J.J. Abrams really did achieve time travel with this movie. He propelled Star Trek into the future by fully honoring its past. Bryan Singer (Superman Returns), Tim Burton (Willy Wonka), Michael Bay (Friday the 13th), Peter Jackson (King Kong), and all those other directors who have been destroying the classics for the last decade or so should take note.
Christopher Reeve IS Superman and always will be. Gene Wilder IS Willy Wonka and always will be. Whoever that first guy in King Kong was always will be and Jack Black WON'T. But it really feels like we have a new Kirk, McCoy, Scotty, Uhura, Chekov, and Sulu. There is no question that Zachary Quinto IS the new Spock.
I'm not sure if this flick will warrant as many multiple views as Iron Man (that suit and Robert Downey, Jr. are just too cool), but I have this nagging feeling that Star Trek is actually the better movie.