Let's go back in time and re-do this flick.

Rating: 3/10 (1 January 2010)

After a (sadly) negative reaction to my first viewing (from a DVD), I've watched this flick a dozen times since -- partly in an attempt to "mind-meld" with this concept, and partly to figure it out. Here are some "plusses" and "minusses." Remember, as a Trekker, I'm considered "converted." THIS was a film I WANTED to like, and I worked really hard to do so. But there is one major flaw to this whole scheme, which I'll address at the end.
"Minus": The story: This Star Trek story fell victim to the mistaken conception that you can do almost anything in sci-fi fantasy. Points central to the action, such as the whys and whatfors of "red matter," went unexplained. And in some cases, we're left to assume things. Did Spock actually take back the red stuff? Who knows? It's difficult to follow a fast-moving story when something stops you cold.
"Plus": This version of the Enterprise actually captured the spirit of the TV ship without looking dated. Great job pulling that off!
"Minus": When the Romulan ship first appears, it looks more like a giant crawdad (front end) silhouette. I really didn't know what it was -- it did not look like a ship, but more like a monster.
It's one thing to portray long dead figures (like Lincoln) . . . quite another to portray characters already defined by actors well within the bounds of recent memories.
"Plus": Karl Urban's portrayal of Dr. McCoy was superb, at least for this Trekker. A+. Likewise, Chekov's and Scotty's actors get a "B+" and "B", respectively. These folks worked at it.
"Minus": This new "James T. Kirk" missed the mark, as did "Spock." While both bore resemblances to the original actors, neither pulled them off -- especially Kirk (Chris Pine.) Spock sounded more like a nasal nerd I grew up with back when the TV series aired, the force of his logic diluted with that whiny voice. "D" for Kirk, "C-" for Spock. (Kirk would have merited an "F", but for one scene when he shouted "Bones." I then felt the "Shatneresque" Kirk, hence, the essence of the original series.)
"Minus": Did anyone notice that Uhura seemed to mispronounce her own name in the beginning, calling herself "U-hor-a?" I actually missed the "Uhura" connection there. She's a hot chick -- but she bore little resemblance to Nichols, either physically or emotionally.
"Minus": While the movie was intentionally energetic and "fast-paced", the story moved faster than I could absorb it.
"Plus": In what may well be the greatest Star Trek "shoot-em-up" scene ever, seeing the Enterprise with its phasers blasting full bore, and its crew at their helms, really punched up the power of that vessel.
"Minus": Too many homages. I already saw "Tech Sergeant Chen" struggle to beam up his commander in "Galaxy Quest", and a smaller beast attacked by a larger critter as they pursued our heroes in "Star Wars 1". And the scene whereby Kirk shuttles past the Enterprise pales in comparison to that in "Star Trek: The Motion Picture." I want original stuff, as these scenes once were....get better writers. I don't care how "ingenius" the producers consider themselves to be, (as per the DVD commentary.)
Today's "video game" youngsters, not saddled with pre-conceived impressions as to the characters, may well enjoy this movie. But I got the impression that those of us who helped support and build that entire franchise -- from day one -- were thrown into the trash. After all, by changing everyone's "destinies" in this flick, they've wiped out the entire history of every single Star Trek adventure ever filmed, written about, or drawn. Throw away those compilations, folks. In essence, the "Trouble with Tribbles" never happened.
The Star Trek past has been reduced to fiction, which, I guess, is what Star Trek really is. Some of us really didn't want to see Star Trek that way.