A total disaster of a film which was totally not Star Trek

Rating: 1/10 (7 January 2010)

After waiting in anticipation for this movie for over a year I was unspeakably disappointed at how shallow, badly written and full of plot holes the shambles was.
At the risk of turning into a rant I would just like to lay out some points that justify my statements.
Product placement, the suggestion of childish sexual relationships, and cringe-worthy jokes were all examples of how the script was intended to pander to a younger audience. The detriment that these have is to so far remove this film from any previous Star Trek in the last 40 years.
The crutch on which this whole movie rests it that it is set in an alternate universe, in which apparently JJ Abrams need not have watched a single episode of Star Trek. The characters are all fundamentally wrong, Spock is an emotional teenager, Kirk is an annoying drop-out, Urura is some kind of nymphomaniac, Chekov and Sulu have zero sense of humour and Chekov has one terrible accent. The only redeeming and genuine character is Karl Urban's Dr.McCoy who is perfectly portrayed by the New Zealander.
Finally there are dozens of terrible scientific, historical and continuity errors which not only go against Star Trek canon but even principles set out by this film itself. Black holes which have incredibly varying effects. Some which destroy planets, some which send people through time for some reason and finally those which have no effect at all. The main characters are horribly skewed and bare no resemblance to the characters we know and love.
In conclusion, this is the worst incarnation of Star Trek ever, a bad script, poorly directed, with shallow characters and badly casted. The whole shambles is a huge insult to all Star Trek fans. I am amazed that they are making a sequel to this monstrosity.
1/10 - 1 mark just for showing up