first off... I talk too much!:
Before the long wind begins, I will say I did enjoy this film. It did indeed entertain me. The problem always comes with the noisy ruminations of its enthusiastic appreciators.I think that I could get with the prevailing assessment of the "greatness" of this film if there was a modicum of respect for the art that came before it. Like battlestar galactica, like star wars, like the recent installments of superman and batman (the slightly older newer batman - being batman begins actually - coming less than a full decade after the old incarnation) the passionate contemporary blows the loudest horn. The words "Younger" and "better", the word "sexier", the ill gotten word "hipper" are thrown around as justifications of the product's existence altogether. It's the hip sexiness that makes this new such and such a thousand times better than the old so and so. As if there were any better reason for sprucing up and old car or an old house, than the time honored pursuit of long green! New Money making marketeer barons would have us believe the fairytale that this new re-imagination trend of updating the old was the obligation of the young. It is not, as a matter of fact, to anyone listening, it is not not not! But this is the parlance they use, and no one asks..., yeah but... WHY? Why did it HAVE to happen? It didn't. The suits just thought they could make a buck off something. Yes yes, a built in audience! Excellent marketing savvy there, gentlemen, although if you proceed to change everything in order to make it "digest-able" to the A.D.D. in you and me, then aren't they effectively alienating those same supposedly built in devotees? Tis indeed a conundrum!

Hubris:
And how does this attitude of better come into the equation. This is such a throw away society that we have television shows that are dedicated to mocking the times and styles of decades past with amusingly clever video blubs and pop up commentary atop stock footage of Wham or the Beatles or President Kennedy and everyone giggles about hair styles and artsy gimmickry. However they're clearly oblivious to the fact that in time the right now will be the back then, and brand new snotties in hipster gear of tomorrow year will be mocking them just as vehemently and thinking themselves just as clever. Comparing the old Battlestar Galactica or Star trek to the new is ridiculously naïve and downright stupid. Of course with the benefit of 20 to 30 years of advancement the look of one thing from now will out shine the lack of gloss of the one thing then. No one looks at photography and says that they're modern Polaroid of their dog, or the digital download of their children in a playground are "BETTER" than old picture candids of grandma from 1947, it's the substance of the photo, not the quality of the make of the picture. I mean, That argument would be friggin' stupid, wouldn't it?!!! The special effects are a thousand times better, the look is crisper, the visuals stunning. So let that be written down, we all agree. But sorry kids, I can still separate pretty from nourishing. Just a plain pretty look and nothing much in the story department is the equivalent of empty calories. Something to think about.

About the film itself:
For something so new and improved we sure did manage to roll out the Sci Fi cliché machine front and center when we were jotting this three act extravaganza down on paper, didn't we?

MR.BRAIN: Well... first we need a villain, he should be deep and brooding and virtually wordless so we don't have any of those clichéd cartoon mustache twisting villain moments.
MR. PINKY: How can we make him menacing if n' he don't talk, though, boss?
MR.BRAIN: Easy, we'll put sinister looking tattoos all over his face and give him nasty looking serrated edged weapons he can use to slay hapless Starfleet officers!
MR. PINKY: Brilliant, sir! What do we call him?
MR.BRAIN: Darth Maul!
MR. PINKY: Uhh, sir? Seriously?
MR.BRAIN: Yeah you're right, that's been taken. Alright well Roddenberry templated the Romulans against the Romans, roll out the list of roman emperors, drop your finger on a name and let's just move on, ANYTHING BUT CAESAR! That's too obvious.
MR. PINKY: Of course, sir.
MR.BRAIN: Now we don't want Darth Maul...
MR. PINKY: Sir?!
MR.BRAIN: I mean Nero, to be one dimensional, do we? So we'll have to give him purpose, alright, I say page two paragraph six of the vile motivations handbook?
MR. PINKY: Dead wife, sir?
MR.BRAIN: Yes! It worked for Mr. Freeze, didn't it? But lets up the anti_ his whole planet's destroyed and so now he wants to destroy the federation.
MR. PINKY: So the federation destroyed his planet?
MR.BRAIN: Nahh, but we'll come up with some convoluted plot point that'll wrap that all up.
MR. PINKY: How's he try to destroy the federation, sir, Sabotage? Political intrigue?
MR.BRAIN: Are you nuts, that would take whole minutes to establish, and mostly done through dialog! Go to chapter one in the Vile Implementations handbook.
MR. PINKY: Oh sir, you don't mean....?
MR.BRAIN: Yes my friend, the vaunted planet destroying weapon!
MR. PINKY: Didn't we do that with V-Ger in the first film Kahn and the genesis device, or the hunchback whale probe, or with that weirdo nexus ribbon that required the destruction or worlds to be moved, or when that guy who killed Mozart needed a face lift and was willing to use some solar collector thingie on a planet, or that OTHER Romulan dude, Shinzon or whatever, didn't he have a super baddie weapon he planned to use against the federation? And didn't Vader have like two of those types of things?
MR.BRAIN: Your point? It works, don't it?
MR. PINKY: Alright, so we got the federation against a rogue madman with his very own planet destroying weapon and an axe to grind?
MR.BRAIN: Sounds like Gold, don't it?
MR. PINKY: But neither Romulos nor Vulcan were destroyed in Kirks time of star trek, sir, how do we fit this in?
MR.BRAIN: C'mon, use you head willya, Mirror mirror on the wall!
MR. PINKY: Ohh of course sir, an alternate universe! Meaning Nero's a time traveler! The sci Fi trifecta, you are an absolute genius of modern celluloid story crafting, sir.
MR.BRAIN: Yes, yes, you're quite right! Alright my nephew'll be getting home from high school any minute; I get him working on the script as soon as he puts the key in the door!

Get you-self an edu-ma-cation, son:
Sadly I must admit to a prejudice myself, toward these greasy new executive hipsters whom blow in, un-time-tested, with one or two hits under their belt and now suddenly their some prodigy that knows better than everyone. I mean, at first I sort of buy into it cause I saw the flick and didn't vomit so I ran out and snatched up the DVD. Then suddenly you hear it, you hear it right there on the special features. "I really wanted to make star trek more like star wars! Fast paced and not so heady." Fair enough, you wanted one classic space opera to be more like another classic space opera more so than you wanted it to be like itself. Alright, knowing you boys the way I do that almost makes some sense. But then they keep talking and you hear things from their own lips like, "we took this out because it was too Set-up-ee." And allowing the vocab felony just committed by the word `Set-up-ee', you think; alright, the hipster's panicked that his excuse for dialog is going on too long between explosions. So out comes potentially pertinent information for the sake expediency. (them film jockeys call this "pacing") You keep moving. Then you get like a twelve and a half minute featurette showing you how the crafty crafters stationed a man just within camera shot so he could shine a flashlight into the lens and give everything a glaring effect. And you go. Well alright, this is sorta like movie magic, I guess, and it...is...worthy of a....full...featurette...........Right? then they talk about the director and the praise his wisdom and how good he is at turning water to wine and making the sick well and the blind see and all that, and then he comes on the scene and claims absolute stupidity, saying he was never a fan of the original trek, he never watched the show, but he had some GREAT IDEAS when they handed the project to him! So now you're like, alright, well.... So the guy's not a fan and... WAIT, WHY THE HELL IS HE MAKING THIS DAMNED MOVIE THEN? And why does an obviously smart man whom makes A-list movies feel compelled to completely downplay his wit in order to put butts in the seats? Has this society become so cynical and paranoid and functionally illiterate that we are dismayed by even the indication of a higher intellect behind our entertainment, or running our COUNTRY?! Are we at a point where a smart man has to play dumb or keep his street credibility and be taken semi seriously on the internet machine? All be told, allowing for Abrams to come out and claim a willful lack of education for himself and also of the genre he's just reinvented, harkens to the new trend of the hapless hero whom is seemingly brilliant by divine intervention and never had to work for his wit or his talents like everyone else. This new Kirk in the movie is a snot nosed kid, subversive and compulsive and reckless, yet someone sees potential in him and urges him to sign up. He even cheats, breaks all the rules and though Spock is a commander while he's still a cadet he is suddenly elevated to captain on his first mission, rising past Spock and a host of others whom I must assume have all been in Starfleet longer and whom presumably did so without faking out the system. I know the original Kirk cheated at the Kobyashi test, but you never get the impression that this was anything more than just an adherence to his own personal ideology that he didn't believe in the no win scenario. The way this is depicted, without any example of otherwise academic achievement on Chris Pines' (his character, not him, I think the dudes a whip ;)) part, we imply that he just got there on the merits of being ballsy and cheating his way through it. Someone should really have a problem with their heroes being depicted this way, but I don't think people were compelled to pay that much attention to the light lunch of characterization they were being spoon fed with sugary visuals! Hmmmmm, wait a minute.... was this Kirk quark a little autobiographical license there by the young upstart in the director's chair? Coincidence? Nahhh!

All put together I began to think to yourself, DID REALLY I JUST FRICKEN SEE AND HEAR WHAT I THOUGHT I SAW AND HEARD? And thus the intellect crusades begin. And there I go off wondering, is it not more important to inspire those still un-jaded and inspirables to CREATING something new?!

Technicality peeves:
Oh and Warp Nacelles are not thrusters, guys. The point is that they WARP space and propel the ship faster than light. They're not Jet afterburners! FYI. There have been literally a zillion tech manuals written on the Trek science, whereas you might think that these details are ridiculous, remember you're making a star trek movie! Don't talk to me about being a geek, you're the head geek in charge now, Mister mister! Can we get a guy that knows a guy to work on getting a guy to work on that? Also, who jettisons a cadet from their ship to a Hoth just because there's a slight disagreement? Doesn't the new flag ship have a brig? Oh, what? Oh, they needed to do that so young Kirk could meet old Spock and Scotty so that act 2 could begin? I see, uhhh.... Alright.... I guess. ;) BUT I DIGRESS!

Wrap it up!:
My point is for this film and its fans; it could not have been without the original. Mr. Abrams, for all his genuine brilliance, could not have done this without firmly standing on the shoulders of Mr. Roddenberry, without taking from a wealth of pre-established minutia that allowed him the luxury of picking and choosing and then casting the aforementioned "New Spin". What I fail to understand in this great society of ours is, why does anything new that happens to also be good, have to be good at the expense of what came before? Why does this have to be BETTER? Why would we mock he original actors and what they did and what they left us? I mean, remember acting, folks. True the Shat-inator was over-exuberant from time to time...to time, but there was genuine conveyance of wit and both intellect and emotion from these highly capable people. We're mocking that against modern characteristic development? Are you serious? I think it would be easier to agree that it was a fast paced, enjoyable film that allowed new perspectives and new directions to be taken with old favorites if there wasn't automatically this seeming inescapable negative slant against the old for the exaltation of the new. The new is pretty, the new is newer, stylized and kinetically meeting the manic short attention span standards of the eyes of today. It has not been proven, it has not been weighed or time tested at the moment, it should be given a chance, but exaltation waits until exaltation is earned. As we have clearly learned with the original trek movies, and the new star wars, and even the new dune novels, NOTHING IS AN ABSOLUTE WIN.

I liked the film, I liked it a lot. I want more of this, but I want substance with it too, and I am harsh because I can see the trend trending away from weight and further and further towards fluff, toward "easy". Visuals are easy. I can think of a visual: a giant octopus wrapped tight around the empire state building, swatting battle ships out of the river while whistling the star spangled banner!: doesn't make that visual compelling or intriguing, (well kinda...) it's just a visual! It's not the film; it's the new ideological hubris I feel it represents.

And.....................breath...

- Captain Pike to surly young townie Jim Kirk: "Your father was captain of a starship for twelve minutes. He saved eight hundred lives, including your mother's - and yours. I dare you to do better."

This is neither your grandpa's Star Trek nor the Trekkies' or Trekkers' traditional Star Trek. J.J. Abram's STAR TREK is instead a reinventing of the classic characters and their universe, and if you could accept that their adventures don't at all undermine past continuity - that this instead is a wholly new and separate continuity, parallel to the old one - then this film might become your Star Trek. It doesn't replace as much as add a new layer to what's gone on before. It certainly revitalizes the franchise.

The genesis lies in the original Star Trek universe. Something there happens on a cataclysmic level which then triggers an alternate timeline. In this new reality, James T. Kirk grows up without a father to inspire him, and the malcontent boy grows into a cocky, rebellious young local townie who, the morning after a life-altering bar brawl, enrolls into Starfleet Academy. As the movie unfolds, we learn that while this Kirk may be more bitter and resentful than the original, he's still the same audacious, take-charge Iowan we'd long ago propped on a pedestal. James T. Kirk is still THE man.

This ranks among the best Star Trek films, in terms of escapism and of sheer high adventure. It's just a fun movie, and I think a smart move by the franchise's think tank. Most of the actors previously involved with past incarnations of Star Trek are become old fogies, or as near as. New blood was definitely required, and really if one weren't gonna do a Starfleet Academy series, then why not go back to the source but with a new spin? Shatner, Nimoy, and the rest are so linked with the characters they made iconic that, really, a parallel reality was the best route to take. It allows a new generation of actors to have breathing room and to establish their own marks on these same characters. Having said that, I'm very happy that we're treated to an extended cameo by a familiar face from the original universe.

J.J. Abrams makes this picture an exhilarating one, and action-packed. Maybe he's saving the more cerebral elements and the human drama for the sequels. But this STAR TREK celebrates the new cast, most of whom are terrific, several seemingly out of left field. There's really nothing to say about Zachary Quinto, other than this whole enterprise (heh) would have collapsed if he weren't around. In looks and demeanor, he does really great interpreting a young Spock. Chris Pine makes all the right choices as the new James T. Kirk. He could've effed this up royally by mimicking Shatner's mannered cadence, except that he mostly stays away from this. Pine puts in his own spin, and yet still captures the same spirit and swagger of the good captain. Once in a while, though, either with a pronounced delivery of a line or with a subtle movement, Pine does channel his inner Shatner, as a homage and just to give us a for old time's sake. This guy won me over quick.

Rating the other actors: Karl Urban is the shocking surprise here, and I think he walks away with the best performance. His Dr. McCoy is absolutely spot-on, wonderfully crabby and gruff; he perfectly evokes the mannerisms of DeForest Kelley. I didn't think he had it in him, and I'm digging his chemistry with Chris Pine. Smoking hot Zoe Saldana comes in the room and her fiercely intelligent Uhura is, if anything, even more strong-willed than Nichelle Nichol's. While I enjoyed Simon Pegg and Anton Yelchin's respective versions of Scotty and the 17-year-old Chekov, their performances are juuuust a shade over-the-top. But I just don't see John Cho as Sulu. Maybe it's because I keep waiting for Sulu to go looking for a White Castle. Anyway, the core actors show really good chemistry, and if you check out the special features, you can tell they're having a blast spending time with each other. The future looks very good for upcoming sequels.

Another cool thing is that the big crisis is met head on by a group of untested cadets, and this sets up that sense of "Wow, they really are starting over." We see the initial interactions of the celebrated Enterprise crew, but again this is a new universe and some things have changed. Just some examples: This movie posits that Kirk and Spock first met thru the infamous Kobayashi Maru incident, and theirs is an instant rivalry. We learn the roots of Dr. McCoy's nickname. And an unexpected romance blossoms.

The villains, meh. I'm not ever keen on Romulans as the Big Bad. In relation to Vulcans, Romulans are kind of like those embarrassing relatives you don't talk about, you know, the ones who live on the mountains and generally have a working TV sitting on top of a broken TV. The first appearance of their starship, all bristly and smacking of aggression, is promising and is properly menacing. But then it went downhill once I realized that it was manned by Romulans. It doesn't help that Eric Bana's role of rogue Romulan villain Nero (not cool with that name, either) comes off as underdone and seems to be there just to service the plot.

This 2-disc DVD set, the special features: On Disc 1: the filmmakers' nerdy cool commentary (Director J.J. Abrams, Exec. Producer Bryan Burk, Writers/Producers Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci, and Producer Damon Lindelof); a gag reel (worth it alone for the final outtake with Pine and Quinto affecting some weird Ikea accent); and the Making Of featurette "A New Vision."

On Disc 2: "To Boldly Go" - a segment going even deeper behind the scenes, focusing a bit more on the filmmaking process, as well as the crew's further reflections on classic Trek; in-depth featurettes on the "Casting," "Aliens," and the "Score"; nine deleted scenes, some of which do flesh out the story, and all with optional director/producers commentary: "Spock Birth," "Klingons Take Over Narada," "Young Kirk, Johnny and Uncle Frank," "Amanda and Sarek Argue After Spock Fights," "Prison Interrogation and Breakout," "Sarek Gets Amanda," "Dorm Room and Kobayashi Maru (Original Version)" - this one details just how Kirk cheated on the test, "Kirk Apologizes to the Green Girl" (funny), and "Sarek Sees Spock." Disc 2 contains the STAR TREK D-A-C free game trial for XBox 360 - just pop the disc into your XBox 360 and follow the prompts; and for a digital copy of the film, Disc 2 can also be inserted into your computer's DVD-ROM or BD-ROM drive.

Some things never change, nor should they. The core personalities are intact, and this is never more true than the qualities which make Jim Kirk so iconic. The purpose of the Kobayashi Maru challenge is to instill fear into Starfleet officers so that they can accept and prepare for the possibility of defeat. But that philosophy is simply antithesis to the defiant make-up of Kirk's character. In whatever incarnation, Kirk is all about beating the odds. He simply doesn't believe in no-win situations. And another staple of the franchise to survive: When Pike assigns Kirk, Sulu, and some no-hoper named Engineer Olsen on a high risk mission, and then you glimpse Engineer Olsen sporting that red uniform, well, you instantly know his odds for survival just dropped to a big, fat nil. And I guess, in whatever universe, Kirk will end up macking with a green-skinned hottie from Orion. And, oh yeah, as a last desperate bid for survival, the go-to move will always be that old "eject the warp core" ploy.

Now some dubious stuff: I guess the sequence with Kirk as a kid was necessary to demonstrate just how angry he was in his formative years, but, man, this kid was really unlikable. I don't quite buy that Vulcan kids will resort to baiting to test young Spock's devotion to emotionless logic. Vulcans do have emotions, yeah, but I thought they were too well trained from the outset to demonstrate such bullying behavior. And it's a bit convenient that Scotty, newly arrived on the Enterprise, would so promptly be put in charge of engineering. It's also stretching things a bit that Kirk would get marooned on an ice planet and then end up meeting... someone. But the fan boy factor is so high on this last one that it's really easy to give it a pass.

This may be the funniest Star Trek flick since STAR TREK IV: THE VOYAGE HOME. The running hypo-spray gag between Bones and Kirk is sweet. And, lastly, a friendly hint to all would be destroyers/conquerors of the universe: dudes, quit messing about with other planets. Just go and hit Earth first. You inevitably end up there, anyway, and then the Enterprise finds a way to dump on you.

Apropos of nothing, this flick reminds me quite a bit of Della Van Hise's 1985 Star Trek novel [[ASIN:0671524887 Killing Time (Star Trek, No 24)]], which also features an alternate history, with Romulans as the villains, Kirk a bitter young officer and Spock as the Enterprise's Captain. Maybe something worth checking out, to hold you over while waiting on the sequel.

In order to get big rewards in life you have to take big risks. If there is one thing that the Star Trek universe hasn't done in 20-25 years its take risks. The franchise has suffered greatly for it, continuing to follow a formulaic approach that has made the franchise stale, predictable, and for quite a while... DEAD. Not sick, not on life support, but D-E-A-D.

Those days are over.

The 11th feature presentation is quite simply the first GREAT Star Trek movie ever made. While others in the series have been enjoyable, there was no definitive movie that stood out, nothing that could be pointed to as something unique, something special, something that takes RISKS.

What you get here is the biggest risk that has ever been taken in the Star Trek universe in its 40+ years of existence.

I will not ruin this risk but if you are a fan of the movies at all you will know it when you see it. Being a long time fan of Star Trek (I am a Next Generation first and foremost) and having seen the trailer numerous times I figured out what was going to happen about 20 minutes before it did but that didn't stop the shock when I witnessed this awesome writing decision played out on the big screen. The strongest of Star Trek lovers (especially TOS people) will no doubt have a lot of outrage at this risk but it was the right move to make. The Star Trek franchise needed to be shaken up, it needed something fresh and it needed a movie to shock and awe the audience.

Man did it ever deliver.

This movie is an absolute JOY to experience. Spock was always my favorite TOS personality as he probably was for most fans, but I never felt the connection to this cast that I did to Picard, Data, Worf and the Next Gen cast so I really didn't care what changes they made (and there is another major change that involves 2 characters that you never have experienced before in TOS history) if they were for the better. In all cases these were for the better and executed with near-perfection by JJ Abrams (who might later be revered on the same level as Gene Rodenberry if this re-visioning [this is much more than a simple reboot] succeeds like I think it will).

Since I don't like getting too deep into spoilers with reviews instead of focusing on the story (try your best to stay ignorant as possible of the story so its fresher when you see the film) I will instead focus on the characters we know so well (and some we don't).

True To The Character We Know

Spock (played by Zachary Quinto) - Even though Kirk (ahhem William Shatner) was advertised as the lead of TOS, the real centerpiece was Spock. The work here by Quinto is beyond exceptional and complements the amazing work done by Leonard Nimoy the past 40 years. Quinto plays the character as well as you could imagine and the real special thing in this movie is that finally (FINALLY) the half human side of Spock is heavily examined. It is a major part of the movie and no doubt will continue to be focused on in future films. Spock is no more or less important to the crew and story as he always has been. Other actors could do lesser work (they didn't) but the movie franchise will only succeed as well as Quinto acts. The character is in the best of hands.

Bones (played by Karl Urban) - The gem of the entire movie without question. Karl Urban takes the difficult role of playing not only Bones but Bones played by DeForest Kelley and is he ever amazing. It's a complete joy to watch his character on the screen. Urban doesn't need to do anything different in future films. You can tell how hard he worked to keep the Bones character as he has always been and he hits a home run out of the park. Wonderful wonderful wonderful

Scotty (played by Simon Pegg) - We don't meet Scotty until far into the movie but Pegg does a great job doing James Doohan. Since Scotty was always kind of the "middle" character on the show where he wasn't wasted but wasn't the tops (Spock, Kirk, Bones) all Pegg had to do was do a good Scotty and hopefully the script-writers would give him more to do. This is the case here.

Revisions And Improvements Made

Kirk (played by Chris Pine) - No longer do we get the ultra womanizing, overacting of Kirk/William Shatner but we get instead a focus on the risk-taking side of Kirk and this is the Kirk that I could truly learn to love. Over and over again we see why Kirk in Star Trek canon is revered so much and his take no prisoners approach is put on the front burner all throughout this film. Pine is confident and does a fantastic job. I don't care how revered Shatner is, the writers got it right with this re-visioning of Kirk and it's thumbs up all the way.

Sulu (played by John Cho) - Not much to say here. Cho was fine but nothing amazing in his performance. Sulu fights a little bit but hopefully more focus can be made on him in the future, no problems here but nothing jumps out.

Uhura (played by Zoe Saldana) - As a communications officer her role is MUCH better in this re-visioning. She is given more intelligent input by the script-writers but the one major canon change of Uhura (which I can't go into detail in this review) I am still trying to determine how I feel about. Her mod is the 2nd biggest risk/mod taken in the movie.

Complete Rewrite

Chekov (played by Anton Yeltin) - Except for being Russian and making fun of his thick accent this is a completely new character and man was this a serious improvement. Instead of the bumbling doofus that really doesn't do anything now Chekov is a ultra-young uber-intelligent officer that plays pivotal parts in the movie. Yes this was a serious canon change but I can't imagine how any fan wouldn't approve because now you have a real character you can be emotionally attached to.

New Characters

Nero (played by Eric Bana) - Bana instantly becomes one of the main villains in Star Trek lore and in my opinion because of events in the movie he now becomes THE single villain in Star Trek history. I wish Nero could have been on the screen more but with only 2 hours and so many people to get on the screen I think the right balance was struck.

Old Friends

XXX - You will know who this is when you see them. I have no complaints other than one voice-over part where the narration seems a bit droll and uninspired but I also think this is because of the circumstance how they are speaking. This old friend was a +++ to the movie and not just a ploy to get people in the seats. A welcome addition to the movie and plot.

Intangibles

Bridge - The new bridge is the most gorgeous bridge you will ever see. Some say it looks 'too sexy' or 'too bright' but THIS is how the bridge should have always looked. Please please please don't change it for the future films. You have already achieved the perfect look.

Score - The one downside of the movie. The 3rd trailer featured some of the most gorgeous background score ever and my hopes were very high. The score that is featured in the movie is serviceable but doesn't inspire. I was disappointed with the end result. It's alright but it could have been so much more.

IMO 'Star Trek' achieves what only 1 Star Trek movie (IV - The Voyage Home) came close to doing and that is being a successful film to the general public, not just Star Trek fans in general. This is the quickest 2 hours you will spend this summer and an absolute joy. I can see several movies being made with this cast and I hope several are made. The events of this film make for a realistic approach to the original cast working anew in these new revisions. As the movie ended I wished I could move ahead 2-3 years in time to see the next chapter and the next and the next.

Everyone likes to rank the movies in order and I knew 1 hour in this was EASILY (note I don't even flinch when I say EASILY EASILY EASILY) the greatest Star Trek movie ever made. You know a movie succeeds when a character or a movie itself feels like candy for the brain (last year Heath Ledgers Joker was the ultimate 'candy') and this is some yummy candy.

If you are a Star Trek fan go see it and try to have an open mind for what you will see. Many will be fine with the changes made. For the ones that aren't would you rather have changes and new Star Trek movies or the same old same old that had ruined the franchise for so long (kudos to Rick Berman as the official murderer of ST)??? If you are just a person that loves movies you (yes YOU) can even enjoy Star Trek as this movie has been produced not just for the Trekkie but the every day Joe and Jane.

***** HIGHEST POSSIBLE RECOMMENDATION

In order to get big rewards in life you have to take big risks. If there is one thing that the Star Trek universe hasn't done in 20-25 years its take risks. The franchise has suffered greatly for it, continuing to follow a formulaic approach that has made the franchise stale, predictable, and for quite a while... DEAD. Not sick, not on life support, but D-E-A-D.

Those days are over.

The 11th feature presentation is quite simply the first GREAT Star Trek movie ever made. While others in the series have been enjoyable, there was no definitive movie that stood out, nothing that could be pointed to as something unique, something special, something that takes RISKS.

What you get here is the biggest risk that has ever been taken in the Star Trek universe in its 40+ years of existence.

I will not ruin this risk but if you are a fan of the movies at all you will know it when you see it. Being a long time fan of Star Trek (I am a Next Generation first and foremost) and having seen the trailer numerous times I figured out what was going to happen about 20 minutes before it did but that didn't stop the shock when I witnessed this awesome writing decision played out on the big screen. The strongest of Star Trek lovers (especially TOS people) will no doubt have a lot of outrage at this risk but it was the right move to make. The Star Trek franchise needed to be shaken up, it needed something fresh and it needed a movie to shock and awe the audience.

Man did it ever deliver.

This movie is an absolute JOY to experience. Spock was always my favorite TOS personality as he probably was for most fans, but I never felt the connection to this cast that I did to Picard, Data, Worf and the Next Gen cast so I really didn't care what changes they made (and there is another major change that involves 2 characters that you never have experienced before in TOS history) if they were for the better. In all cases these were for the better and executed with near-perfection by JJ Abrams (who might later be revered on the same level as Gene Rodenberry if this re-visioning [this is much more than a simple reboot] succeeds like I think it will).

Since I don't like getting too deep into spoilers with reviews instead of focusing on the story (try your best to stay ignorant as possible of the story so its fresher when you see the film) I will instead focus on the characters we know so well (and some we don't).

True To The Character We Know

Spock (played by Zachary Quinto) - Even though Kirk (ahhem William Shatner) was advertised as the lead of TOS, the real centerpiece was Spock. The work here by Quinto is beyond exceptional and complements the amazing work done by Leonard Nimoy the past 40 years. Quinto plays the character as well as you could imagine and the real special thing in this movie is that finally (FINALLY) the half human side of Spock is heavily examined. It is a major part of the movie and no doubt will continue to be focused on in future films. Spock is no more or less important to the crew and story as he always has been. Other actors could do lesser work (they didn't) but the movie franchise will only succeed as well as Quinto acts. The character is in the best of hands.

Bones (played by Karl Urban) - The gem of the entire movie without question. Karl Urban takes the difficult role of playing not only Bones but Bones played by DeForest Kelley and is he ever amazing. It's a complete joy to watch his character on the screen. Urban doesn't need to do anything different in future films. You can tell how hard he worked to keep the Bones character as he has always been and he hits a home run out of the park. Wonderful wonderful wonderful

Scotty (played by Simon Pegg) - We don't meet Scotty until far into the movie but Pegg does a great job doing James Doohan. Since Scotty was always kind of the "middle" character on the show where he wasn't wasted but wasn't the tops (Spock, Kirk, Bones) all Pegg had to do was do a good Scotty and hopefully the script-writers would give him more to do. This is the case here.

Revisions And Improvements Made

Kirk (played by Chris Pine) - No longer do we get the ultra womanizing, overacting of Kirk/William Shatner but we get instead a focus on the risk-taking side of Kirk and this is the Kirk that I could truly learn to love. Over and over again we see why Kirk in Star Trek canon is revered so much and his take no prisoners approach is put on the front burner all throughout this film. Pine is confident and does a fantastic job. I don't care how revered Shatner is, the writers got it right with this re-visioning of Kirk and it's thumbs up all the way.

Sulu (played by John Cho) - Not much to say here. Cho was fine but nothing amazing in his performance. Sulu fights a little bit but hopefully more focus can be made on him in the future, no problems here but nothing jumps out.

Uhura (played by Zoe Saldana) - As a communications officer her role is MUCH better in this re-visioning. She is given more intelligent input by the script-writers but the one major canon change of Uhura (which I can't go into detail in this review) I am still trying to determine how I feel about. Her mod is the 2nd biggest risk/mod taken in the movie.

Complete Rewrite

Chekov (played by Anton Yeltin) - Except for being Russian and making fun of his thick accent this is a completely new character and man was this a serious improvement. Instead of the bumbling doofus that really doesn't do anything now Chekov is a ultra-young uber-intelligent officer that plays pivotal parts in the movie. Yes this was a serious canon change but I can't imagine how any fan wouldn't approve because now you have a real character you can be emotionally attached to.

New Characters

Nero (played by Eric Bana) - Bana instantly becomes one of the main villains in Star Trek lore and in my opinion because of events in the movie he now becomes THE single villain in Star Trek history. I wish Nero could have been on the screen more but with only 2 hours and so many people to get on the screen I think the right balance was struck.

Old Friends

XXX - You will know who this is when you see them. I have no complaints other than one voice-over part where the narration seems a bit droll and uninspired but I also think this is because of the circumstance how they are speaking. This old friend was a +++ to the movie and not just a ploy to get people in the seats. A welcome addition to the movie and plot.

Intangibles

Bridge - The new bridge is the most gorgeous bridge you will ever see. Some say it looks 'too sexy' or 'too bright' but THIS is how the bridge should have always looked. Please please please don't change it for the future films. You have already achieved the perfect look.

Score - The one downside of the movie. The 3rd trailer featured some of the most gorgeous background score ever and my hopes were very high. The score that is featured in the movie is serviceable but doesn't inspire. I was disappointed with the end result. It's alright but it could have been so much more.

IMO 'Star Trek' achieves what only 1 Star Trek movie (IV - The Voyage Home) came close to doing and that is being a successful film to the general public, not just Star Trek fans in general. This is the quickest 2 hours you will spend this summer and an absolute joy. I can see several movies being made with this cast and I hope several are made. The events of this film make for a realistic approach to the original cast working anew in these new revisions. As the movie ended I wished I could move ahead 2-3 years in time to see the next chapter and the next and the next.

Everyone likes to rank the movies in order and I knew 1 hour in this was EASILY (note I don't even flinch when I say EASILY EASILY EASILY) the greatest Star Trek movie ever made. You know a movie succeeds when a character or a movie itself feels like candy for the brain (last year Heath Ledgers Joker was the ultimate 'candy') and this is some yummy candy.

If you are a Star Trek fan go see it and try to have an open mind for what you will see. Many will be fine with the changes made. For the ones that aren't would you rather have changes and new Star Trek movies or the same old same old that had ruined the franchise for so long (kudos to Rick Berman as the official murderer of ST)??? If you are just a person that loves movies you (yes YOU) can even enjoy Star Trek as this movie has been produced not just for the Trekkie but the every day Joe and Jane.

***** HIGHEST POSSIBLE RECOMMENDATION

The Blu-Ray:

"Star Trek (2009)" is presented in a 1080p 2.40:1 aspect ratio Blu-Ray. Video quality is terrific. A very light film grain is present which is quite accurate compared to the theatrical presentation. Black levels are inky and deep, colors are vivid but still accurate. Close-ups demonstrate a lot of detail, especially facial close-ups. Space scenes are also swimming with detail, since most every space ship in this film is in various numbers of pieces or states of damage. Noticeable edge-enhancement and digital noise reduction are non-existent.

Simply put, this is five star material all the way. Anyone who enjoys action/sci-fi eye candy for their HD setup would do well to purchase this disc. It is demo-worthy material. This may be the single best Blu-Ray I have seen - it at least ties in visual quality with the excellent Braveheart and Frost/Nixon discs.

Sound is presented in a well-balanced Dolby TrueHD mix, which is notable for not only its punch and vibrancy, but also the fact that it never drowns out dialogue. This is something that many action movies fail to accomplish, and it is most appreciated, at least by this viewer. I HATE it when I have to constantly adjust the volume on the fly in order to hear whispers of dialogue, only to have my speakers threaten to blow out when some sudden burst of noisy action occurs. "Star Trek (2009)" is wonderfully well-done in this respect. Surround channels get a lot of work, bass is booming at appropriate moments, so just like the video, audio is stellar. Also included are commentaries with Director and writers (no, they do not apologize for various inconsistencies and mistakes) and some foreign language tracks. The subtitles are a little odd - sometimes they fail to transcribe dialogue. 95% of the stuff is there, but there are clearly things missing - Kirk says "wow" upon seeing the Enterprise, and it is nowhere to be found in the subtitle track. Not a deal-breaker, just weird.

Extras are copious and presented in HD, which is great. However, this disc suffers from a recent trend in home video extras - they are split into 30 separate chunks, presumably to look better on box copy. So you are forced to navigate a menu with 30 choices, with no markers for what you've already seen, in order to see all of the features. This is too bad, because the features are really, really good. If they had been spliced into one 2-hour making of feature, one set of deleted scenes, and one gag reel, this would be just about the perfect set of extras. Instead, you are made to do "work" instead of just enjoying the "fun." The deleted scenes, by the way, are also in HD, and most would have made the movie better. They should have just finished the effects and incorporated them into the film proper.

The Movie:

In the special features, the producers and director make it very clear that their guiding question when making the film was "Can we make it cool?" Well, they've succeeded at making it "cool." Unfortunately in making this their emphasis, they have also made some severe missteps that make it difficult to swallow as a serious Trek fan.

So I'll review this movie wearing two hats. First, for "the rest of you:"

"Star Trek (2009)" offers a bold re-imagining of a venerable television science fiction franchise. To a certain extent, it sheds much of the baggage accumulated over 40 years of television and films, giving non-Trekkies an easy entree into the universe.

We are given the tale of Kirk, Spock and McCoy taking the reins of the Starship Enterprise, in a galaxy populated by both humans and other races. James T. Kirk (Chris Pine) is a brash young man who is set adrift by the attack of a Romulan villain upon the ship carrying his parents. Without the influence of his father, a Starfleet officer, Kirk has an aimless childhood, squandering his intellect and his drive on bar brawls and car thefts. Luckily, he is intercepted by the wise, gruff Captain Christopher Pike (Bruce Greenwood) and challenged to make a better life for himself and to live up to his ability by joining Starfleet.

There, he meets fellow cadets Uhura (Zoe Saldana), McCoy (Karl Urban), Chekov (Anton Yelchin), Sulu (John Cho), and an irritating instructor, the cool, logical Mr. Spock (Zachary Quinto). Their contrasting styles immediately put them at odds with each other. Spock has grown up the child of two worlds, with a human mother, and a father from Vulcan, a planet whose culture has embraced logic and the shedding of emotion, except perhaps the emotion of racism against humans.

Before their education is complete, they are presented with the threat of the same villain who had killed Kirk's dad 25 years prior - Nero (Eric Bana). Turns out Nero is from the future, and is bent on revenge for the destruction of his home world, Romulus. In a plot development somewhat like "Space Camp," for some unstated reason, every other ship is somewhere else, and there are no trained crew members available for the newly-built Enterprise. So the cadets are drafted into service right then and there.

Various plot twists and turns see Kirk marooned on an ice planet, where he meets not only Scotty (a very funny Simon Pegg) but also a much older Spock (Leonard Nimoy). This old Spock explains that the visitor from the future has changed history, and that Kirk must team up with the younger Spock, melding their disparate styles and talents into a team that can defeat the threat.

Overall, the plot moves very quickly, and might be a bit confusing to those not versed in Trek lore. But the speed, noise, and bombast are such that pausing to consider holes in story logic (and there are quite a few) is not really feasible until after the movie has finished. The effects, music, and performances are all flashy and dazzling, and it is hard not to feel aggressively entertained by the whole spectacle. Especially charming are Pine as Kirk and Quinto as Spock. Their chemistry works well. There were really no casting problems for the heroes. The villain, Nero, is somewhat less successful, as his motivations are rather obscure, especially to an audience not familiar with Romulans, time travel, and the like.

It is all done with ample brio and verve - enough panache to surmount its sometimes lazy storytelling and slipshod logic. On a scale of ten, I'd give it a solid 7, perhaps even an 8. It is much more entertaining than the average Hollywood popcorn movie, mainly on the strength of the characters and the performances.

Now, for the Trekkies:

"Star Trek (2009)" is the product of Hollywood corporate committees, shedding "baggage" in such a way that it dilutes some of the core concepts and appeal of the show which gave rise to the Trekkie faithful in the first place.

The characters from the original series are brought together in a way which feels quite far from organic, presumably because Hollywood executives were worried that a slower tale that realistically developed their relationships would fail to satisfy audiences unused to thinking and realism. Instead of being members of a logically coherent military organization, each with careers and internal lives of their own, all of our principal characters are roughly the same age and have the same amount of experience, despite the fact that by the end of the film, they all have different ranks and specialties. Especially galling at the end is the instantaneous promotion of Kirk from 25-year-old Starfleet cadet (not even a graduate, as he is in his third year of studies) directly to Captain of the fleet's newest and most advanced flagship. It would be akin to a fresh West Point graduate being given command of the invasion of Afghanistan, or an Annapolis cadet being given command of an aircraft carrier. Why would anyone who had invested a lifetime in this organization respect any order that escapes his lips? Equally puzzling are the promotions of all the other crew members at the end as well - why is Kirk a Captain, but McCoy a Commander, Uhura a Lieutenant, Chekov an Ensign? They all have the same amount of experience and "seasoning" (i.e. none).

This is the sort of world-breaking contrivance that litters the film (want some more examples? "Transwarp Beaming" immediately springs to mind...). Which is too bad, because "Star Trek (2009)" ably captures the feel of the previous shows, mixing humor, fisticuffs, and dazzling gadgetry in nearly the perfect proportions. It fails, however, to add the integral piece - a logically consistent world, one that creates and follows its own rules, one that is similar enough to our own to be comprehensible, but different and better enough that it inspires admiration and wonder, and makes you yearn to live in it. It is a bit of a tragedy, since just a few tweaks and edits could have turned a story full of world-breaking holes and missteps into pretty much the best Trek movie ever.

The quality of special effects is above that of the other films and series, and will definitely impress Trek veterans who are used to less. Many in-jokes and subtler references abound, and will no doubt elicit smiles and chuckles from those who are "in the know."

But that certain something is missing. That special thing which makes something "Trek," and not just "Generic Space Opera #12." There isn't much "Real" science fiction, for one thing - black holes and space ships could have been substituted with quicksand and stage coaches - they are not concepts that drive the plot or the characters or the world, instead they are generic perils, and devices to surmount those dangers. But heck, that could be said of some of the other films, those films that, despite their failings, we would still call "real" Trek. What is missing is the logical consistency of the world. Continuity. "Baggage." In stripping "Star Trek (2009)" down to something that will appeal to a "mass" audience, the producers of this film have denatured it into something reminiscent, but not recognizable.

In summary:

This is an entertaining film, no doubt about it. If you are not a Trekkie, you will probably love it. You should buy it. It's a terrific disc to give your home theater a workout.

If you are a Trekkie, you may have mixed feelings. I do. But you should still probably buy it. Consider it a riff on Star Trek. The greatest, biggest budget fan film ever made. It doesn't all work, the writing isn't all good, and a certain something is missing. But it's an entertaining ride that will probably make you yearn for the "real thing" all the more.

I've been a 'Trek fan' since the very first TOS aired in 1966, and have always looked forward to each film release, and new TV series... I've gotta say, this one disappointed me.... actually, lemme just say "Woe is me", regarding this film, and the future of Trek. Why? Because all of the 'consistancy' and 'continuity' of Roddenberry's 'Star Trek', from TOS, to all of the films with Kirk, then TNG and it's films; and DS9, Voyager, and even Enterprise... all of the producers/writers like Berman, Pillar, and Bragda, have maintained a steady flow, keeping the entire story of Trek, pretty constant, and maintaining Trek's own historical-storyline true. Even filling-in voids of the past... like: In the original series, why the Klingons looked more human than anything else... was thoughtfully a skillfully explained in the Enterprise series, so that it made sense, and much more believable and authentic. It was this, the writingm the 'care of details and consistancy' which set Star Trek appart.

And now, we see the original Enterprise (NCC-1701) with little resemblence, except for the saucer-shape primary hull, and the secondary hull with the two nacelles. The entire bridge looked way too advanced for it's place in the 'Trek timeline' (alternate timeline, or not)... and the Engineering deck looked like what one might see below deck of a present-day ocean liner, beneath the swimming pool(s)... huge, vast, looking probably larger on the inside, than the outside... but not seeing much of the engines. And the large water-pipes Scotty got stuck in... wound around and around, looking more like a giant child's game (some assembly required). I dunno... maybe it's just me... but then, I'm kinda 'old-school', and therefore have some expectations of quality, not just quanity. And, ya can't watch a new Trek, without seeing how they're gonna do the 'transporter' effect. IMO, "Enterprise" had the very best 'transporter effect' of them all. To me, it actually looked... 'real'... as I would expect it to look if their atoms were being disassembled, and reassembled.... Much better than any of the past films, or TV series. Although TOS, for the era, was pretty good... and, "The Motion Picture" (Trek 1) was probably the longest, as well as the worst. In this film... the 'transporter effect' looked... I dunno... unlike anything seen before... white swirls, circling arms, legs, head and body... 'round and round we go, where it'll stop, nobody knows'. Perhaps looking like it was better suited for a sci-fi cartoon, than a film. I guess it could be worse. But it certainly didn't fit-in with the established 'Trek technology' of any era... from TOS, to 'Enterprise'. And... those little details are important.

I found the little 'hootchie-coochie'-thing between Spock and Uhura quite unbelievable... and no good reason for it (again, alternate timeline or not)(wasn't it Nurse Chappel who loved Spock?!)(And Kirk and Uhura did the first interracial kiss on network TV). I felt the entire story-line to be far, far below the traditional 'Trek standards', being weak, at it's best. Here (once again), we find the Federation having to deal with a naughty, pissed-off Romulan (for the umteenth time)... Romulan's, whose ears are now completely different than their common-ancestral cousins, the Vulcans. And (of course) they speak perfect English without a UT (universal translator)... but more- they speek just like 20-year-old members of their counterparts of present-day America, from most any street corner, bar, or trendy night-clubbers. "Hello"... being their opening greeting, sounding like he was going to invite everyone over to his ship to 'jam'... and the Romulan arogance, which they are so well known for, was now where to be found. And to write-in the story that both Romulas and Vulcan are both destroyed... kinda makes me think that most of the writing (and producing for that matter), was done at a high-end crack-house/club.

I will give credit with the casting... expecially for Scotty and McCoy. IMO, both were totally believable, as the younger versions of the TOS crew... and, they (evidently) did their homework, as far as studying their character's mannerisms and speech. I think that Kirk looked a bit too young... like fresh out of high school (or, would that be a GED???)(I couldn't resist). Chekov... I dunno... he seemed way, way 'brighter'... and a little too 'bubbly'... as if the crack-pipe was hidden in the ash-tray in the dashboard of his console. Spock?.... hmmmm.... I dunno... I'm kinda 'sittin' of the fence' regarding him (Zach). I couldn't shake the feeling that one of the other 'Heroes' was gonna somehow pop-in. But I did kinda like the scene of the ship being constructed on the ground... looked kewel... (despite that Starfleet built all their ships in spacedock, either orbiting Earth, or another planet(s)... but in space rather than on the ground. Still- it gave the sense of a massive ship (perhaps way-larger than any previous NCC-1701)(maybe even too large), seeing it thata-way.

To sum it all up (as an old-school, old-timer)... I felt disappointed in this film... in addition to the above mentioned 'Trek inconsistencies'... but in the lack of good writing and storyline, in favor of way, way, WAY overdone special-effects, especially in the battle scenes. It was like... 'you couldn't see the forest for the trees'. And, like I said about the bridge... here we have this very large, spacious room, adorned with heep-big-plenty transparent displays & controls (something that even Picard's NCC-1701 D didn't have)... all white, looking a bit like a winter-wonderland, manned by ghosts and polar bears.

To me, it would be a near perfect film for those, who have a very short attention-span, and/or just wanna see action, action, action... and 'who cares about the story... or how well it fits within the established Trek ensemble. Additionally, even though this is supposed to be an 'alternate timeline thingy', or 'alternate reality whatever'... I couldn't see where they had given any forethought to leaving any openings for any other films (which after this, I doubt there would be)(Since Gene Roddenberry can't "roll over in his grave"... I'm guessing that his ashes released in space, are now headed back to Earth... Hollywood... to reassemble for revenge).

If I were you... I'd rent it first... and see if you think you can live with it being in your library... placed next to all of the others, with decades of the 'Trek-flavor', that this one, just doesn't seem to care anything about. Of course, I realize that I'm probably in the minority (having a 3-digit IQ)... with 'expectations'. It's just that I 'really did' want this film to be great, and instead, I'm having to watch reruns of 'Enterprise' (in Hi-Def) "In a mirror, Darkly" to scratch that 'Trek-itch'. (Oh!....Oh!.... reminds me... Scotty did say that he'd transported (and lost) Archer's beagle, "Porthos"... kinda done as a humor-bit). But I wonder... how friggin' old would that make Porthos?... and, wouldn't that make Porthos several decades old???? Hmmmmmm.....?

UPDATE! I-VIII-MMX

After watching and re-watching... and watching on top of that (just to make sure I had not been fair in my first review of Star Trek (2009)).... I've got some additional info, facts, and opinions that surely, 'some' of the true Star Trek fans will be interested in. I honestly don't think any of 'them' understood Star Trek... what the underlying idea of Gene Roddenberry's, was.

Actually, I do not resend anything I've said on my first review... but would like to back-up my statements with some 'facts', and the benefit of additional viewings. I watched the film setting the audio mode to listen to J.J. Abrams & the editor's commentaries, as the film ran.

It was so, so painfully obvious that no one "in the captain's chair" of this film, was ever a Star Trek fan, and most didn't even 'bother' to watch all of the series and films, noting the 'continuity issues' I've mentioned, regarding how this film, in no way, fits within the 'Star Trek Spirit' of Gene Roddenberry. And also, let me say for the record... I am NOT a hard-core, uniform wearing, fan club membership card carrying 'extremist' (pardon the phrase). I'm just someone who started watching with the very first episode in September of 1966... and have watched every single episode, cartoon, and film, since them. There are certainly those, who know much more about Trek than I... and are into Trek much more as well. However...

There's no excuse for J.J. Abrams saying on the commentary track, that "he was NEVER a Star Trek fan... and in fact... "Hated Star Trek"! And yet... he's producing/directing the latest Trek film????!!!! There were many little 'tidbits' of info which suddenly made it obvious why the film (in my opinion) a 'Trek Fake'. Good ol' J.J. couldn't recall if Mr. Spock ever 'ran' in the original series... in fact, there are way too many things about Trek that he did not know, and had no idea why they were the way they were, or what was what, for what reason. (Again... total lack of Trek-continuity).

More 'bones' to pick:
Good ol' J.J. is speaking of all of the "thousands of little peons" down in the lower 'bowels' of the ship(s)... well hell... everyone knows the crew complement or the original NCC-1701 USS Enterprise was 425-430 (+/- a couple)... and Picard's Enterprise had around 1,100-some-odd crew... just depending (and families, too). Anyway- the reason the engineering decks look more like current-day power plants, breweries, and factories, is because that's where they shot a great deal of the inside of the ships... (and it looks like it, too.)(They stuck a couple of computer screens in a Budweiser brewery, and called it 'Engineering'. "ENGINEERING"... and your hard-pressed for find controls, or panels, or anything other than plumbing and steel supports. And that peculiar water reclamation-tube that Scottie was beamed into... that just went on and on and on.... almost like some futuristic 'Mouse-Trap Game'!.... obscured!

Even the 'notion' that the time-line is changed because of the events... that doesn't explain the things BEFORE the time-line is affected... like the overall appearance of the Enterprise (which looks like it was designed by the same people who used to design kitchen appliances back in the 30's and 40's. Additionally- J.J. says he never made-up a 'story board', and would decide what they would do, and what would be in (or out) of the script 'on-the-fly', the same day they filmed the scenes.

J.J. explains that his story was actually much longer... but editing the film down to a manageable level (for the production staff, and the audience) meant that critical sections had to be left on the cutting-room floor. Yeah... that's done often enough... but in this case, key elements explaining the story are left out. Of, he tells ya about what 'they WERE going to do'... but that doesn't help the film. Oh yeah... J.J. is molding Trek to fit his impression(s) of all of the films HE grew up with... Star Wars and others, but doesn't even come close.

I'll say again... areas which are all too well known to anyone who has ever watched Star Trek... the bridge... the transporter room... engineering... none of these critical areas are anywhere close to resembling anything Star Trek... "TOS", "Enterprise", or any of the series or previous films. The theme music is used over and over and over (being a composer and sound-designer, I listen for such things)... and the only 'quiet' part of the film is when Kirk, Sulu and the other officer 'sky-dive' from orbit (failing to ignite when hitting the atmosphere)... there's a few seconds of silence.

But as I said in my original review- This film is for the young people, who have short attention-spans, and absolutely MUST have back to back action, all of the time, and don't worry about the story, or continuity. (Sorry- but I call 'em like I see 'em). I cannot believe... for the life of me that Paramount, or any of the Star Trek Franchise owners are 'proud' of this film... and if they are, and plan more just like it.... well.... "woe is me!". I've resold my copy (something I never do with my collection, no matter how many times I've watched a film.

If ya gotta see it... rent it... rent it cheap. If ya got a double-digit I.Q., you'll probably like it. I doubt I'll ever pay good money for anything he's had a hand in.

Sorry-

I don't pre-order movies very often at all though (hadn't since literally January) because I'm usually ok with waiting for price drops if I liked it enough that I'll want to watch it again sometime, so the fact that I pre-ordered this should be some indication of how blown away I was by this film. Months after seeing it there were scenes that stuck with me (much like my favorite of the year, Inglourious Basterds) and it proved further to me that this is a really fun film for repeat viewings. It puts together a well-constructed story (despite being controversial) with truly dedicated actors/actresses and grand set pieces that feel really worthwhile rather than tawdry reminders that this is a summer movie (that was actually intended originally for a winter release). If you haven't seen this movie then you really need to put renting it at the top of your list for movies to check out - definitely above pretty much anything playing in your local theater right now (at the time of this posting, at least).

Moving swiftly along: I was a little disappointed with the overall presentation of this set. First of all, the slip case for the Blu-ray box had the back side with the run time and pictures and such just tacked on with the junk that credit card companies use to send you new cards. I like the fact that the Blu-ray case itself is full-on Chris Pine's face (the one peeking through the title on the slip case), and on the other side is a close up of Zachary Quinto's face as Spock. I loved the focus in the marketing of the theatrical release on the characters as being powerful enough imagery to sell the film - it's simple and it works. What I was really more disappointed in was the overall menu system. It's not terrible, but I just expected something cooler given that it's Star Trek, especially compared to Iron Man. There's also like 3 trailers (or ads, as I like to call them) and a video game ad to start the feature film disc, but I actually just figured out today that you can hit the 'pop-up menu' button on your Blu-ray player remote to skip straight to the top menu (I don't recall ever hitting any menu button a DVD and going straight to the main menu until I watched all the ads).

Why am I whining about something so trivial? Because that's about all I can complain about here. I was floored by the ridiculous video quality here. I can't recommend it as a gold standard for introducing people to Blu-ray necessarily because it doesn't have bright colors like Planet Earth, but I think the only Blu-ray I own now that looks better than it is Wall-E. Still, the transitions between dark scenes in this movie and those with color are quite smooth with all the colors looking very true to how they should be (the more vibrant they're supposed to be the more awesome they look on your TV). There are a lot of face close ups in this movie and the clarity in even these shots made me want to get up off my couch and just applaud the folks who did this transfer. If you are disappointed with the video quality of this disc, no matter how big or high-end your TV is, there may be something wrong with you (or your TV video settings). I don't have a high-end surround system so I don't want to pass judgement on sound, but it does sound great as far as I can tell. I can't complain about anything except for that maybe it's a bit soft in some places. Clarity is stellar, even in scenes where I was afraid I would be straining my ears to understand what they're saying.

There are so many special feature videos on the second disc that I couldn't get through all of them. What' truly remarkable is that each and every video you see on these discs is in high definition. I think the movie itself certainly looks better than the special features, but we're really talking about shades of gray here because they still look like you're watching an HD channel and whatever the aspect ratio is on them fits my widescreen TV perfectly (whereas the movie has black bars on top and bottom). There's actual more content here (in minutes) than the running time of the feature film, and this is one of those movies that actually has interesting backstories for how every aspect of the production process came about so they're pretty addictive if you have an afternoon/evening to spare going through them all. The deleted scenes are also more interesting than you normally find on a home video release, including the original opening sequence of Spock's birth. The only other features on this disc are a gag reel, all 3 trailers, and 3-d models of the Enterprise and Nero's vessels with details about specific parts of them. As a cherry on top, these features actually have subtitles (which, in my experience, is pretty rare). On the main disc, there's also commentary, which I didn't listen to a whole lot of it but I have to say that it was hard to stop watching once I did turn it on because it's very much like you're peering into the minds of the writers and producers in the format of a candid, relaxed conversation that doesn't feel forced or scripted at all. I don't usually listen to these, but I think I'll have to make an exception here.

Simply put, if you have a Blu-ray player and liked Star Trek at all, you're really doing a disservice to yourself by not picking this up. The studios are trying this crazy thing now where they price Blu-rays equivalent to DVDs instead of price-gouging, so $20 for this one is more than reasonable. They really didn't put this out there to set up for a double dip, or they're doing so with great stupidity because I can't think of what else you'd realistically want from a Blu-ray set for this movie in any sort of re-release. It's going to quickly become one of favorite Blu-rays, for sure.

All the new Star Trek movies are rock n roll! Lets Go!