Star Trek on Rottentomatoes: 195 Reviews, 96% positive. Only 9 negative.

[Political Heretic]

195 to 9.

This is, a movie for people who are not living in their mothers basement heaving gut-busting sobs over the loss of the "Canon."

And its one of the best sci-fi movies to come around in years (since Serenity)

This is the critic quote I like: "Possibly the best modernization of the series I could have imagined... Abrams manages to walk a thin line between pandering to the fans and reaching a new, modern audience."


EDIT - I saw the movie, just to clarify that I have an informed opinion.

[Deja Q]

1. Well, good for the "new, modern audience".

Bunch of brainless wankers anyway...

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090506/REVIEWS/905069997

But stop me before I get started. I mention these details only to demonstrate that the movie raises its yo-yo finger to the science, while embracing the fiction.

The special effects are slam-bam. Spatial relationships between spaceships are unclear because the Romulan ship and the Enterprise have such widely unmatched scales. Battles consist primarily of jump-suited crew members running down corridors in advance of smoke, sparks and flames. Lots of verbal commands seem implausibly slow. Consider, at light warp speeds, how imprecise it would be to say “At my command ... 3 ... 2 ... 1 ...” Between “2” and “1,” you could jump a million galaxies.

I thought about these things during “Star Trek” because I could not help myself. I understand the Star Trek science has never been intended as plausible. I understand this is not science fiction but an Ark movie using a starship. I understand that the character types are as familiar as your favorite slippers. But the franchise has become much of a muchness. The new movie essentially intends to reboot the franchise with younger characters and carry on as before. The movie deals with narrative housekeeping. Perhaps the next one will engage these characters in a more challenging and devious story, one more about testing their personalities than re-establishing them. In the meantime, you want space opera, you got it.

I don't live in anybody's basement either. If it doesn't match Roddenberry's dream, it should be called something else. I'll see the original material. I am mature enough to appreciate older movies and shows, without needing to be spoonfed by new special effects and a skimming down of intricate plotlines.

[wickerwoman]

3. I think it's a fair critique

to say this one is more about reintroducing the characters than about any kind of plot. Obviously they plan a lot more of them and maybe the next one will have a more interesting villain.

But... this updated version has a lot of my favorite actors (Karl Urban, Simon Pegg, Mark Harmon) doing a great job making the parts their own. There's a couple good laughs, some good special effects. Mostly you get the sense that the series is in good hands. I was pretty sure it was going to suck rocks, so I was happy with the B/B+ movie that I got.

I'll go see the next one anyway.

[Deja Q]

4. I will give it a chance, but I'm not enthused...

The way most shows have been revamped to fit modern audiences, I'm surprised this new Trek actually leaves planet Earth (watching enough drek like Sci-fi's "Flash Gordon" and the revamp of "Doctor Who", it's maudlin soap opera with 'reality show' influence and hardly anything remotely approaching genuine sci-fi...)

Prejudiced perhaps I am. But not without a thoughtful reason.

[Political Heretic]

8. It was supposed to be about that. I'm glad it was about that.

Yes, this was without question a reintroduce the characters and the new universe plot/movie. Having said that, it is one of the most interesting introduce the characters/establish the baseline movies I've seen. The sci-fi plot is designed entirely to advance the character stories and introductions and I think those are excellent.

It's exactly what the first movie should be.

[Political Heretic]

7. The extremely minority view points sounds like someone watched a completely different movie than me

A lot of us really don't give a fuck what its "called." The movie would still be one of the best sci-fi movies to come out in years by any other name.

Skimming down of intricate plot lines? Yeah maybe we should review the plots of Star Trek 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and talk about "intricate."

[Trocadero]

2. I just saw it. ZQ almost steals the movie from Chris Pine

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

6. it really is spock's movie

then kirk second

look forward to more mccoy next time around, ad urban was wonderful and even kind of looks like deforest kelly

[WildEyedLiberal]

5. I don't think it's fair to pit "Trekkies" vs a "new modern audience"

I'm a huge ST fan who thought the franchise needed some serious revitalization. Yeah, I'd love to have seen another TNG movie, but after the disgraceful messes that were Insurrection and Nemesis, the fact is that Trek needed to be commercially viable again before anyone considers doing anything else with the franchise. I am satisfied with the "alternate universe" plot because it enables Abrams to tell whatever stories he wants without giving all the fans who do respect the "canon" a huge middle finger.

Maybe eventually we'll see stories in the TNG era again, but if that ever happens, it'll be thanks to this movie renewing interest in Trek in general. For that alone I am grateful to Abrams.