Star Trek

User Score
7.9

Generally favorable reviews- based on 1363 Ratings

User score distribution:

Where To Watch

Stream On
Stream On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling

User Reviews

  1. JohnO.
    May 8, 2009
    10
    The movie was excellent!! I just walked in the house from seeing the movie and I am going to have trouble sleeping, because of the excitement. Everyone did an fantastic job of pulling off the characters. There was no need for a super mind-twisting plot (for some reason, the few naysayers must have a "Memento" type plot twist). Lots of action, funny moments, and a bit of "that sucks for The movie was excellent!! I just walked in the house from seeing the movie and I am going to have trouble sleeping, because of the excitement. Everyone did an fantastic job of pulling off the characters. There was no need for a super mind-twisting plot (for some reason, the few naysayers must have a "Memento" type plot twist). Lots of action, funny moments, and a bit of "that sucks for him" moments. If you don't know about Star Trek, you don't need to. A great job of introducing the characters and what Starfeet is about. The only downfall of the movie: is that it had to end!!! You are either going to love it or like it. ;) Treat yourself and go watch this movie! Expand
  2. MichaelR.
    May 8, 2009
    10
    "OUT OF THIS WORLD" The starting of a new story line for more Star Trek movies.
  3. JeanK.
    May 8, 2009
    10
    It answers the questions you didn't know you had! WOW what a ride!
  4. EricO.
    May 9, 2009
    10
    Just absolutely fantastic! Rarely has a movie that I have anticipated SO much lived up to the anticipation and expectation. What a way to reboot Star Trek. Thank you Mr. Abrams.
  5. DennisR
    May 20, 2009
    1
    Poor excuse for a Star Trek movie, ok as a generic action/adventure flick, should be regulated to a b movie status.
  6. PatrickT.
    May 8, 2009
    10
    Absolutely thrilling! Star Trek left me in awe as I left the theater; I was completely blown away by the epic scale of this incredible masterpiece.
  7. BrunoT.
    May 8, 2009
    7
    This is as good of a resurrection as one could reasonably expect, but it does border on overly cheesy at times. Still, it has superb moments, in particular the first 20-30 minutes is particularly riveting and a near perfect way to reopen this franchise. Some of the action and time travel plot points are unoriginal (every Star Trek villain will forever pale next to Khan), and the entire This is as good of a resurrection as one could reasonably expect, but it does border on overly cheesy at times. Still, it has superb moments, in particular the first 20-30 minutes is particularly riveting and a near perfect way to reopen this franchise. Some of the action and time travel plot points are unoriginal (every Star Trek villain will forever pale next to Khan), and the entire Spock-on-Ice-Planet-Hoth sequence is overly contrived, but it's overall solid. Expand
  8. AndrewP.
    May 8, 2009
    2
    Terible, terible film. It was unsure if it was parody, homage or reboot and it is very clear that Abrams was a Star Wars not a Star Trek fan. It takes an iconic brand and converts it into a generic sci-fi/action film. The plot is terrible and doesn't hold up to even minor scrutiny and turning Kirk into the main character from Top Gun was unforgivable. Too many action scenes that are Terible, terible film. It was unsure if it was parody, homage or reboot and it is very clear that Abrams was a Star Wars not a Star Trek fan. It takes an iconic brand and converts it into a generic sci-fi/action film. The plot is terrible and doesn't hold up to even minor scrutiny and turning Kirk into the main character from Top Gun was unforgivable. Too many action scenes that are only punctuated by some forced dialogue and endless exposition. Expand
  9. Bob
    May 8, 2009
    8
    Fine direction, great effects, and a story executed well enough that you almost don't notice it's mostly a rehash of a premise already seen in both the original series and previous films in the series. Several of the actors, especially the two leading men, are amazing in their ability to embody the physicality and even subtle mannerisms of previous actors while making the roles Fine direction, great effects, and a story executed well enough that you almost don't notice it's mostly a rehash of a premise already seen in both the original series and previous films in the series. Several of the actors, especially the two leading men, are amazing in their ability to embody the physicality and even subtle mannerisms of previous actors while making the roles feel their own. The film is hampered, however, by some plotting that relies heavily on nearly impossible coincidences, including a rescue from a monster that simply makes no logical sense if you think about it. For a while it seems that the entire universe must only consist of about two dozen people who keep bumping into each other. The only other shortcoming: Simon Pegg is terribly miscast as Scottie, distractingly unable even to maintain a Scottish accent without occasionally wandering into Yorkshire or even the Midlands, and his alien sidekick looks like one of George Lucas's bad ideas. All in all, it's probably the best summer movie Hollywood is likely to muster this year, and it handles the many difficult tasks of a prequel with aplomb. Thoroughly enjoyable, but not quite the perfect undertaking many fans will insist it is. Expand
  10. MariaA.
    May 8, 2009
    10
    the movie rocked it! action beginning to end, characters dead on and insider jokes hilarious!
  11. JeanneR.
    May 8, 2009
    10
    This movie was fantastic. My husband and I have followed Star Trek since day one. I was a bit leary, wondering if we were going to be able to believe the new younger actors playing our favorite characters. But we were pleasantly surprised and even our 12 yr old daughter was enthralled with it. None of us wanted to see the movie end. We are eagerly looking forward to perhaps the next one.
  12. TheBaron
    May 8, 2009
    7
    When I first left this movie, I felt a certain confusion. How did I feel about this remake. Was it truly one of the best Star Treks? What I can say is that it's the BEST of the odd numbered Treks. It's also way better than the abomination STX. Is it better than TWOK? No. Is it better than TVH? No. Is it better than TUC or FC? No. STXI is a really good film. It brings the When I first left this movie, I felt a certain confusion. How did I feel about this remake. Was it truly one of the best Star Treks? What I can say is that it's the BEST of the odd numbered Treks. It's also way better than the abomination STX. Is it better than TWOK? No. Is it better than TVH? No. Is it better than TUC or FC? No. STXI is a really good film. It brings the characters together, gives us some shock scenes that we'd never think to see, and has great character interaction. Some plot holes, but a great feeling that future Treks will be well handled. I'm not sure it will bring in hordes of new fans, but it's a positive step to a star trek rebirth. Expand
  13. ChadS.
    May 9, 2009
    9
    [***SELF-POLICING SPOILER ALERT***] "Star Trek" was never cool, until now. The prologue is rousing stuff, but it's not until we hear the Beastie Boys blaring over the soundtrack that this shrewd reboot irreparably distances itself from the campy original, as Kirk(Chris Pine), a rebel without a cause, sends his vehicle careening over a cliff(perhaps, a subtle nod to the 1955 film [***SELF-POLICING SPOILER ALERT***] "Star Trek" was never cool, until now. The prologue is rousing stuff, but it's not until we hear the Beastie Boys blaring over the soundtrack that this shrewd reboot irreparably distances itself from the campy original, as Kirk(Chris Pine), a rebel without a cause, sends his vehicle careening over a cliff(perhaps, a subtle nod to the 1955 film directed by Nicholas Ray). Painting Kirk as a lost child with suicidal tendencies repositions William Shatner's lecherous take on the captain as being symptomatic of overcompensation. Finally, Kirk becomes relatable to the masses, and breaks the filmic text wide open. Enlistment with the Star Fleet makes all the sense in the world; he has nowhere else to go. In the original series, the viewer never gets a sense that the Enterprise crew members had lives outside of the ship. Never has an origin story been this crucial, or game for self-invention. The film's masterstroke, no doubt, is its reimagining of Kirk and Spock(Zachary Quinto) as rivals. You always took their friendship for granted. The way Leonard Nimoy played the half-breed alien, Spock was always so cool and collected, like he was on a perpetual Quaalude high. The fiery temper that the Vulcan displays here is a revelation. So many unknown scenarios, death-causing scenarios, could have arisen once Spock jettisons Kirk off the ship. His dislike for the future captain nearly makes a murderer out of him. This Spock is no celibate. This Spock kicks ass. As does the film. For a refreshing change, it presents military service in a positive light, completely free of the nihilism found in Paul Verhoeven's "Starship Troopers". Nero(Eric Bana) is given a choice; the violence that comes down on the Romulans isn't senseless. Expand
  14. StephenX
    Aug 2, 2009
    2
    Plot was so thin it was see through. Nothing but special effects. Makes the old star trek films look good.
  15. Moe
    Oct 19, 2009
    9
    Amazing! Need I say more?
  16. BobN
    Dec 25, 2009
    0
    Huge disappointment! I've watched Star Trek since the 60's and am a great fan. I was really psyched for this movie but hugely let down after watching it. As other critics here have mentioned, wonderful SFX, but contrived, formulaic and predictable plot and (except for Kirk, Spock, McCoy) virtually non-existent character development for the others. Plot also has inconsistencies, Huge disappointment! I've watched Star Trek since the 60's and am a great fan. I was really psyched for this movie but hugely let down after watching it. As other critics here have mentioned, wonderful SFX, but contrived, formulaic and predictable plot and (except for Kirk, Spock, McCoy) virtually non-existent character development for the others. Plot also has inconsistencies, is not believable and diverging from established Star Trek 'history' is very unsatisfying. This is one of the few movies I've purchased. Expand
  17. PeterK.
    May 10, 2009
    10
    Star Trek is back and better than ever! Loved this! Great casting and more than plausible plot kept the audience riveted!
  18. Cathie
    May 11, 2009
    8
    Check out the big issue website. Star Trek director JJ Abrahams and Simon 'Scotty' Pegg talk about relaunching the Enterprise: http://www.bigissuescotland.com/features/view/57
  19. JasonL.
    May 10, 2009
    10
    Amazing feeling. want to watch it again.
  20. KatieB
    May 12, 2009
    9
    The personal reviews have got me laughing. Trekkies calling this story improbable and hard to follow!? Three words: Star Trek IV. Anyone remember Kirk and crew going back in time to get some WHALES? Not saying I didn't enjoy it, but the time travel was not explained well, and why the crap was the monolith looking for whales by destroying the atmosphere? Comparatively, this movie made The personal reviews have got me laughing. Trekkies calling this story improbable and hard to follow!? Three words: Star Trek IV. Anyone remember Kirk and crew going back in time to get some WHALES? Not saying I didn't enjoy it, but the time travel was not explained well, and why the crap was the monolith looking for whales by destroying the atmosphere? Comparatively, this movie made time travel look possible and probable. I really enjoyed it. It was fun, and laid a firm ground for the next movie. This was a reboot; understand it on those terms, and I think you will appreciate it more. It does what it set out to do, and presented some great new actors. Expand
  21. AndrewC.
    May 10, 2009
    6
    [***SPOILERS***] Disappointed - that's how I feel. The new Star Trek film promised so much, and in some ways delivered, but in others fell oh so short. Firstly the most positive thing - thae actors. They all faced a difficult task in picking up established characters. They all did a good job, being instantly recognizable as who they were supposed to be. Secondly the pacing was good [***SPOILERS***] Disappointed - that's how I feel. The new Star Trek film promised so much, and in some ways delivered, but in others fell oh so short. Firstly the most positive thing - thae actors. They all faced a difficult task in picking up established characters. They all did a good job, being instantly recognizable as who they were supposed to be. Secondly the pacing was good for an action movie, and to bring in non-trekkies. Having said that there were some bits that were pointless - the car going off the cliff, the monster chase (one of the monsters looked quite badly evolved for an ice planet BTW) served no purpose than to get Kirk to bump into old Spock. From there on in though the problems really start. The set design is way off the mark. The new bridge is sterile and engineering looks more like an oil refinery than the bowels of a starship. The biggest problem though is the script. OK, I completely understand that there was a difficult task here in trying to reinvent the franchise, but too many liberties have been taken. The moving of the Enterprise's construction to Iowa I can just about cope with. Romantic involvement for Spock? Destroying Vulcan? These are just steps too far. Then we get into the scientific holes. Like they wouldn't have spotted that a star was about to go supernova, like that wouldn't have affected Vulcan (which is just around the corner from Romulus) too. Why do none of the black holes formed have any time dilation effects? Why would the black hole have to be at the centre of a planet, when it would be just as effective anywhere near? Then there's the plot holes. What was Nero doing for 25 years, and why didn't he age? Once he realises when his is, wouldn't he just warn the Romulans what would happen in the future? Taking revenge for something that hasn't happened yet makes no sense. Why throw kirk off the ship in an escape pod? What's wrong with the brig? Isn't it a bit too much of a coincidence that he lands on the planet where Spock is hiding (and wanders into his cave) and where Scotty has been working? Then there's the interplanetary beaming - something that wasn't even possible in the ST:TNG era. Ooh, the transporters, Why can a 17 year old cadet get a transporter lock when experienced techies and the computer can't? Why is Vulcan, one of the founder members of the federation, defenceless when Earth has a defence system that Nero needs information on? So, all in all? It's a long long way from the best Trek ever. Treks 2,3,4,6 and 8 are all light years ahead of this. Before the next film they need to employ some script writers who actually know something about Star Trek and who can write a plot that makes sense. Expand
  22. JimS
    May 13, 2009
    9
    Solid in every aspect. The acting is better than the original series, excluding Leonard Nimoy who is/was always very good. An excellent story that is weaved together so well it underscores what is best about Star Trek. Kudos to the writers and director.
  23. E.igor
    May 10, 2009
    10
    I have never even liked star trek... but this movie was incredible.
  24. MichaelB.
    May 10, 2009
    10
    Fantastic, i went to see Star Trek having the gut feeling it was going to be a childish space journey but was thrilled to find it was an action packed movie filled with great story, wit and characters.
  25. WillG.
    May 10, 2009
    9
    A bold, daring and fresh reboot that grabs hold of you from the first minutes into the film -- and I saw it dubbed in Italian. Like many, I'm a lifelong Trek fan and I was dubious at the outset of this project. Many of the carping comments here remind me of the criticism of the prior major reboot, The Next Generation. All isn't how I would've done it but it's not my A bold, daring and fresh reboot that grabs hold of you from the first minutes into the film -- and I saw it dubbed in Italian. Like many, I'm a lifelong Trek fan and I was dubious at the outset of this project. Many of the carping comments here remind me of the criticism of the prior major reboot, The Next Generation. All isn't how I would've done it but it's not my vision. It's J.J. Abrams' vision and he's done a terrific job, particularly in casting. The cast is just about pitch-perfect and I had no trouble accepting them in their roles. Hard-core fans, like me, will have some pangs over some of the developments, especially surrounding Spock. Zachary Quinto merits special mention for an uncanny performance that never once veers into imitation. I particularly love how Abrams took hints from ST:TOS about the characters and explored them. Like others before me, I would remind some of the fan critics of a few cogent points: This is an *alternate* reality and some events from ST:TOS have changed. Vulcans -- and Romulans -- have 250 year life expectancies. We are not told at what point Spock Prime (and Nero) exited the main ST timeline but it clearly was much later than the ST:TNG period and tech undoutedly had advanced. Wesley Crusher was a prodigy and it was implied in TOS that Chekhov was also. TOS episode "Mirror, Mirror" was one of the best. So relax, don't let the best be the enemy of the good, and enjoy a great new Trek adventure. The Trek universe is more than big enough to hold an alternate storyline or two. Expand
  26. DaveJ.
    May 10, 2009
    10
    Great movie! very exciting with some laughs I wasn't expecting. Overall like the story line very much and mixing the old star trek with the new.
  27. DaveS
    May 20, 2009
    6
    Sadly, I left this movie that was more frenetic than anything else. The plot was dense yet didn't make much sense, was sort of pointless. The production values/effects were amazing, though, but I hated the guys they cast as Scotty and Chekov. A weird experience that left me a little disappointed.
  28. JohnH
    May 22, 2009
    9
    Amazing! Great cast. McCoy, Spalk, Kirk, Lahurra, Chekov, Scotty, Sulu, and all of them. Great special affects. The plot was pretty good but was unrealistic at times, but as I have said many times, the great characters made up for it. Everyone should see this marvelous outstanding movie. I cannot wait till they make a sequal, which I think they are planning on doing. See this movie!
  29. CharlesT.
    May 7, 2009
    10
    Had all the heart and soul of the original series!
  30. LondonAntonio
    May 7, 2009
    10
    Story, action, cassic lines cleverly inserted without cheesiness all make for a wonderful eye-candied amazing movie.
  31. TDKinDallas
    May 7, 2009
    9
    Incredible! I recommend it to anyone, emphatically! See it on the biggest screen you can find. Cinemark's XD3 screen is unbelievable...like a widescreen IMAX!
  32. TimB
    May 7, 2009
    10
    BEST PREQUEL ever, Abrams gets my lucas money from now on.
  33. WadeP.
    May 7, 2009
    0
    They have some balls, to do this to such a great franchise. The last 50 years worth of movies and tv shows never even happened in this new, rebooted, startrek universe. It is not a prequel, it's a sh.tty attempt at a remake ment to appeal to the lowest common denominator. Not to mention the use of the cheap modern "shaking the camera" trick to avoid any artistic input into the They have some balls, to do this to such a great franchise. The last 50 years worth of movies and tv shows never even happened in this new, rebooted, startrek universe. It is not a prequel, it's a sh.tty attempt at a remake ment to appeal to the lowest common denominator. Not to mention the use of the cheap modern "shaking the camera" trick to avoid any artistic input into the shooting. A real sin. This is the first startrek movie and or show that negates everything else. Terrible. Expand
  34. AndrewW.
    May 7, 2009
    10
    Exciting, funny, thrilling and moving! Star Trek is a fantastic movie and a loving tribute to this enduring franchise.
  35. ChristopherG
    May 7, 2009
    10
    Absolute masterpiece - saw it at IMAX and would have happily walked straight back in and watched it again.
  36. DrewS.
    May 8, 2009
    10
    This movie is excellent, no matter how you look at it. It
  37. RickB.
    May 8, 2009
    9
    A total reset of the Star Trek mythos but with familiar characters... loved it and look forward to this new timeline!
  38. JosephM.
    May 8, 2009
    9
    Wow. This was an impressive use of the J.J. Abrams style of cinematography, character depth, and pure graphics. It was like a mix between the excitement of "Cloverfield", and the mystery of "Lost". Not to mention that J.J. Abrams actually directed this film. This is by far his best work, using the full potential of visual effects, humor, and pure style. The characters are so familiar, but Wow. This was an impressive use of the J.J. Abrams style of cinematography, character depth, and pure graphics. It was like a mix between the excitement of "Cloverfield", and the mystery of "Lost". Not to mention that J.J. Abrams actually directed this film. This is by far his best work, using the full potential of visual effects, humor, and pure style. The characters are so familiar, but as such only through the chemistry these actors create. One of the coolest things I found was the immediate understanding of Spock given to the audience by an extremely able cast built around his character. Expand
  39. ShawnR.
    May 8, 2009
    10
    I attended the midnight showing of this incredible movie. I made a point of not researching and went in with an open mind. I was a little concerned at the beginning as I started to notice some deviation from the original series when I finally "caught" what Abrams had done. Time travel that changed the space time continuum!!! What a stroke of genius!!!! After I realized what he had done I attended the midnight showing of this incredible movie. I made a point of not researching and went in with an open mind. I was a little concerned at the beginning as I started to notice some deviation from the original series when I finally "caught" what Abrams had done. Time travel that changed the space time continuum!!! What a stroke of genius!!!! After I realized what he had done and where he was going it was a great trip and I was literally hanging on the edge of my seat. What better way to change up the story line and still stay true to the essence that is Star Trek. I for one am looking forward to this...... trilogy??? I think it has great potential. Expand
  40. JeremyC.
    May 8, 2009
    5
    Bad writing leads to an amalgamation of mediocre sequences. This film fails at both recreating the original Star Trek by avoiding any sort of moral or ethical conflict in the story and it fails at establishing a newer realistic portrayal of the Star Trek world. You are regularly asked to to suspend disbelief, not merely to afford over-the-top action, but often so that you can accept basic Bad writing leads to an amalgamation of mediocre sequences. This film fails at both recreating the original Star Trek by avoiding any sort of moral or ethical conflict in the story and it fails at establishing a newer realistic portrayal of the Star Trek world. You are regularly asked to to suspend disbelief, not merely to afford over-the-top action, but often so that you can accept basic aspects of the plot. This film is Galaxy Quest with better special effects but less funny. Expand
  41. PaulK.
    May 8, 2009
    9
    The prequel killed it. see this at all costs. worth the price of getting a sitter, if you have to.
  42. RafaR.
    May 8, 2009
    8
    Damn good movie. This film really isn't perfect, but its so much fun. The quibbles I have about this film are so minor, it didn't tarnish the viewing experience. This is what Star Trek has been missing for years... great characters, action, humor... can't wait to see it again
  43. AndrewZ.
    May 8, 2009
    10
    As a 53 yr old self professed Star Trek fan from the original series, I have to say I was stunned and delighted watching Star Trek not once tonight, but TWICE! I loved watching this perfectly cast new group of young actors slip comfortably into the characters made famous in the 1st go round. It reminded me of how neatly the new James Bond slipped into the shoes worn by Sean Connery. What As a 53 yr old self professed Star Trek fan from the original series, I have to say I was stunned and delighted watching Star Trek not once tonight, but TWICE! I loved watching this perfectly cast new group of young actors slip comfortably into the characters made famous in the 1st go round. It reminded me of how neatly the new James Bond slipped into the shoes worn by Sean Connery. What a BLAST! I can't wait for the next installment. Live long and prosper JJ Abrams!! Now if he could just end LOST next year on such a strong note that would also be appreciated! Expand
  44. KenR.
    May 8, 2009
    8
    Great job fleshing out most of the characters, laying the groundwork for a new series of Captain Kirk/Spock/Bones.... movies.
  45. ChrissieJ.
    May 8, 2009
    10
    I was not disappointed, it met all my expectations as a Trek fan of 40 years. The best Star Trek movie ever.
  46. JohnL.
    May 8, 2009
    10
    I dont even like star trek nor did i get the ''inside'' jokes but i had a blast watching this movie!!! easily one of the best movies of the year and the reason i like going to the theater..so grab some popcorn and enjoy it for what it is.
  47. NigelG.
    May 8, 2009
    2
    There is no snippet of hope in this film. It is worse than even I had felt possible and symbolizes everything that is currently wrong with the Hollywood film industry and its treatment of Science Fiction in particular. The final minute gives us the immortal Trek tagline, spoken wistfully by Leonard Nimoy. As the words echoed around the cinema, (
  48. ChrisS.
    May 8, 2009
    10
    Best movie of the year. Action Packed, the overall developing of the characters is Excellent.. Well Done! Interesting to see how the stories will change regarding the time line.. When is the next one!
  49. LizzieBeth-1
    May 8, 2009
    6
    Heartless, largely humourless, a bit Nazi, this "Lost" in Star Trek plays like it was created by an Asperger's Syndrome sufferer. It hits all the right marks without having any gifts, and is forgettable eye candy 1/2hr later. At least it didn't kill the franchise. Uhura's love for Spock is stupid; Simon Pegg is an uncomfortable fit for Scotty; and the plot is too buried for Heartless, largely humourless, a bit Nazi, this "Lost" in Star Trek plays like it was created by an Asperger's Syndrome sufferer. It hits all the right marks without having any gifts, and is forgettable eye candy 1/2hr later. At least it didn't kill the franchise. Uhura's love for Spock is stupid; Simon Pegg is an uncomfortable fit for Scotty; and the plot is too buried for the sake of action. Heartless pap that's too fast and too flashy for people with short attention spans. Frustrating. No longevity. Talk to me in 3yrs. Lizziebeth-1, IMDb Expand
  50. JanewayOut
    May 8, 2009
    10
    Amazing movie. Saw it on IMAX and was very impressed.!
  51. JohnM.
    May 8, 2009
    10
    This movie has given the Star Trek franchise new life, gone are the endless and pointless technobabble scenes. Orion babes are back, the genuine humor of the Original Series has been captured perfectly and the storyline is better than Wrath of Kahn by far. This is what Star Trek should be!!! It grabs you from the first scene and does not let you go until the end.
  52. JoanG.
    May 8, 2009
    10
    For Trekkies and, I suspect, non-Trekkies alike, a joy from start to finish. I had come to the conclusion that the people who were most recently running the Star Trek franchise (before Abrams) held the fans in contempt -- thinking that any deviation from a decades-old style of storytelling would be rejected. But the series was cutting-edge when it started 40 years ago, and the only way to For Trekkies and, I suspect, non-Trekkies alike, a joy from start to finish. I had come to the conclusion that the people who were most recently running the Star Trek franchise (before Abrams) held the fans in contempt -- thinking that any deviation from a decades-old style of storytelling would be rejected. But the series was cutting-edge when it started 40 years ago, and the only way to respect that spirit is to remain cutting-edge today. Thank god that Abrams, the writers, and this phenomenal cast have finally brought this beloved sci fi universe into the 21st century. Expand
  53. ReginaN.
    May 8, 2009
    10
    Awesome. This movie has something for everyone from the most seasoned Trek fan to the new viewer. It is the best prequel ever.
  54. JamieE.
    May 8, 2009
    9
    I had High expectations. This film exceeded them!
  55. LuluH.
    May 8, 2009
    9
    Good trek movies even for non trek fans. Good pace and action
  56. SteveM.
    May 8, 2009
    7
    Star Trek has returned. JJ Abrams directs a movie that is designed to reboot a franchise. After over 40 years and at least one generation it needed some renewal. After watching and enjoying another reboot Battlestar Galactica my simple conclusion is that the film is very entertaining but it falls short in small but noticed places. All the parts are great. The early life of Kirk and Spock Star Trek has returned. JJ Abrams directs a movie that is designed to reboot a franchise. After over 40 years and at least one generation it needed some renewal. After watching and enjoying another reboot Battlestar Galactica my simple conclusion is that the film is very entertaining but it falls short in small but noticed places. All the parts are great. The early life of Kirk and Spock was well done. The part with the Romulans and Spock was also great. etc The casting was excellent. There are action scenes that are worth the price of admission. Yet when you merge all the parts the whole package looks not quite right. Like a painting repainted you can see where one artist has painted over the original. The story is about another universe that has been changed by a vengeful Nero. (aka JJ Abrams ) Spock tried to stop the inevitable but failed. How he meets Kirk and advises him. This creates the first hole. It is here the script falls short. The plot is a nice work throughout but it has it's weak parts. JJ Abrams directs like someone in a hurry . One we get all the parts right we have to put it all together. This left this reviewer feeling as if this film is for a new generation. I may have have seen the future of a franchise but I will not be going there. The movie goers who ever they may be will decide. My generation saw the franchise start and watched it slowly age. The reboot was needed but if it is successful I doubt it will bring more than one generation of fans a long. I have seen it once and will keep in mind to check out any sequel. Of all the Star Trek movies it is somewhere in the middle. From the Wrath of Khan to Nemeisis JJ. Abrams should have taken a little more time to perfect the plot and to develop the characters. Where the plot looks joined together and the speed of the film is where most of the marks were lost. Expand
  57. StormC.
    May 8, 2009
    10
    They have completely revitalized the franchise. I went to the first showing opening night and turned right around and went to the next showing as well! Something I've never done before. All I can say is I want more!
  58. LeahT.
    May 8, 2009
    9
    What wins this movie props is the fantastic casting. Every character seemed fresh and new and yet the same as those we've loved for years. Will be seeing it again in cinemas.
  59. LindaT.
    May 8, 2009
    9
    I loved this movie and I have been a fan since it premiered in 1966. JJ and his team did a magnificent job of revitalizing the franchise. Chris Pine IS Captain Kirk and was a brilliant casting choice. I can't imagine anyone else in that role (except a 35 year old William Shatner). Great humor, fun and non stop action. I have seen it twice and plan on going back for thirds.
  60. MaxB.
    May 9, 2009
    9
    There probably won't be a better "summer blockbuster" action flick this year. It moves fast and feels more like a 90-minute film rather than a 2-hour one; this is a good thing. Awe-inspiring visuals, very good sound effects (and soundtrack), completely solid actors and characters coupled with the entertaining story make Star Trek a hit. A near perfect approach to the There probably won't be a better "summer blockbuster" action flick this year. It moves fast and feels more like a 90-minute film rather than a 2-hour one; this is a good thing. Awe-inspiring visuals, very good sound effects (and soundtrack), completely solid actors and characters coupled with the entertaining story make Star Trek a hit. A near perfect approach to the action-drama/popcorn genre. Expand
  61. AdamO.
    May 9, 2009
    9
    A perfect two hour "f u" to the obsessive nerds of Star Trek. Keeping a common theme of self parody as it fills itself with just as many plot holes, lame explosions and shaky camera shots as the classic series. I can't wait for the sequel of the new and improved Star Trek.
  62. Kilon
    May 9, 2009
    10
    I am like most of people around here a huge Start Trek fan. I watch the trailers and even though the graphics look very good it looked more like an action film than a real Star Trek. It looked good but it did not look Star Trek. Cause behind Star Trek is whole philosophy , it is not a Star Wars fairy tale , because it tries to predict the Future , even though some exaggeration is added I am like most of people around here a huge Start Trek fan. I watch the trailers and even though the graphics look very good it looked more like an action film than a real Star Trek. It looked good but it did not look Star Trek. Cause behind Star Trek is whole philosophy , it is not a Star Wars fairy tale , because it tries to predict the Future , even though some exaggeration is added for the sake of drama. It is however one of the very few if not the Only , serious SCI FI. So as many Trekkie out there feared that this film will disappoint me greatly. Another reason is that unlike many people out there I am not a JJ ABRAMS fan. LOST does not excite me , even though I must admit is well made. And his last film COVERFIELD even though I am a big fan of moster movies , I found it TERRIBLE. But when I went to see this movie I was blown away. Ok Let say I understand the fact that his movie has the most AMAZING Effects I have ever seen in any MOVIE in my LIFE TIME. IT blows away any other movie in its path. OK let us say that I felt comfortable that the movie respects the Star Trek Philosophy , and vaporates all my fears. But HOW, HOW ON EARTH did he take a cast of inexperienced actors and turn them to EXACT replicates of the original crew??? I was blow away , not because JJ Abrams clones the unclonable but also expands the characters in ways unthinkable. For example is the FIRST time that all the crew plays an important role. In most other movies only Bones, Kirk and Spok take the biggest part of the movie , in this one , every character is polished and ready to perform its best. Second , how on earth did manage to tell us so much about SPOK? Why the previous movies did not do it and this one does? Ok now let say What I did not like. First , the central theme of the movie is Boring. I am tried of the time machine stories that have been polluting Star Trek for so long. It is old , tried many many times and for all trek fan nothing original. Of course the Scenario is very well done, it is probably one of the best Start Trek scenarios out there, and makes you forget the boring theme and concentrate on what really happens which is so carefully crafted as a story and character interaction that you cannot escape its enchantment. My second objection is the BAD GUY, Nero. Dont get me wrong he is a fine actor, but surprisingly he never gets enough time to develop his character. There is mostly the original star trek crew. The movie makes us understand his motives , but we never have time to understand who he really is. The previous start trek movie was not like this one but he had a bad guy the alter ego of picard that really sends us deep into the dark side of picard and made probably the best Villain (or almost the best if you count the Khan, In Warth OF Kahn or the evil Klingon general in Undiscovered country ). But in this one , the bad guys play only a tiny role in the movie. However the movie is awesome, it rates as high as the last Batman, with wonderful performance, excellent art, amazing directing and a very solid yet complex Story line that fully respects and dare expand the Star Trek ethos. Even women did like it !!! and this hard to do in my country. (Greece). It pains me that the Theater was only half full, but here we are no big Sci fi or Star Trek fans. Well, they missed something amazing. So After the movie the only question remains --->I am sure there is going to be a sequel to this , but When are we going to see the new series on TV with this new cast mr Abrams ? Expand
  63. JonZ.
    May 9, 2009
    1
    Awful movie if you're a trekkie. There is very little in this movie that makes Star Trek special-- no morality, no intelligent problem solving, etc. JJ Abrams has turned Star Trek into a bad Star Wars replica.
  64. GaryN.
    May 9, 2009
    10
    Very well conceived and executed. A Star Trek movie that will re-ignite the franchise and bring a lot of new fans
  65. JoeyK.
    May 9, 2009
    9
    Fantastic. It did everything right that it needed to. The characters were done perfectly, and the modern-redoing of the look worked, because it blended modern and nostalgic styles successfully. It was far more action-packed than Star Trek ever is, and it did not venture into any true sci-fi territory. But to those who fault the film for that, I'd like to remind you that only the best Fantastic. It did everything right that it needed to. The characters were done perfectly, and the modern-redoing of the look worked, because it blended modern and nostalgic styles successfully. It was far more action-packed than Star Trek ever is, and it did not venture into any true sci-fi territory. But to those who fault the film for that, I'd like to remind you that only the best Star Trek episodes were real Sci-Fi. If you didn't like the movie because it wasn't sci-fi enough, then there's a whole lot of Star Trek that you must have hated. Either that, or you have a very strong aversion to fun. Expand
  66. AlexB.
    May 9, 2009
    10
    Excellent space romp. Truly luscious visuals complemented by some excellent acting and good humour. All the catchphrases making a return. Yet through all this they bring a new life back to the franchise, all of the actors add something to the original role. The story is not overpoweringly excellent but its very very solid. Anyway blows most of the recent action filler out of the window.
  67. DarylP.
    May 9, 2009
    10
    Words cannot describe how amazing this movie movie is. Seldom times does a movie come out that not only lives up to the hype, but also lives up to the heavy $12 one time view asking price. I'm not a Trekkie, and there once was a time when i said i would never become one, but this movie was so good, im on the verge of eating my own words. Suffice to say, this wasn't your Words cannot describe how amazing this movie movie is. Seldom times does a movie come out that not only lives up to the hype, but also lives up to the heavy $12 one time view asking price. I'm not a Trekkie, and there once was a time when i said i would never become one, but this movie was so good, im on the verge of eating my own words. Suffice to say, this wasn't your traditional Star Trek movie. It was good. They kept the sci-fi lingo, over the top dialog, and boring conversations, to a minimum. What they lacked in a traditional boring trek movie, they made up for with drama, comedy, even romance. You don't need to watch a Star Trek film to understand whats going on, as its a prequel, but it makes wonderful reference work of the greater films in the series (of which Ive only seen one). I'm not going to tell you to see this, but if you decide to see it, i can more then guarantee you wont be disappointed. Expand
  68. BillB.
    May 9, 2009
    10
    Saw it yesterday in IMAX. My first reaction, WOW. After it was over, I said to my wife "we are going to have to see it again and buy it on DVD when it comes out. This is the best of the Star Trek movies.
  69. IgorA.
    May 9, 2009
    10
    Perfect. Simple storyline returning some of the original cast, fast moving, interesting. The cast is hot, acting is realistic and the camera is unusual but cool.
  70. DavidM.
    May 9, 2009
    10
    See it twice best star trek fil ive seen ( got the others on dvd ) took the wife the second time she enjoyed it very much and she is not a fan
  71. JoshuaH.
    May 9, 2009
    9
    It is so refreshing to have a good sci-fi movie released. It was well cast and just a joy to watch.
  72. RolandN.
    May 9, 2009
    10
    Masterpiece, it is a must see movie, if you are a star trek fan you will love it, unless you are a fanatical old school star trek fan then you might have something bad about it. But for me, i loved it totally and completely they successfully revived star trek into glorious blockbuster, i can't wait for future star trek movies of this caliber. you will instantly recognize each Masterpiece, it is a must see movie, if you are a star trek fan you will love it, unless you are a fanatical old school star trek fan then you might have something bad about it. But for me, i loved it totally and completely they successfully revived star trek into glorious blockbuster, i can't wait for future star trek movies of this caliber. you will instantly recognize each character and person from the old ones, each one is played to hold their special personalities perfectly. If you love sci fi and haven't seen this yet, shame on you, it is one hell of a great movie! :D Expand
  73. Topsao
    Jun 21, 2009
    10
    Great movie. Not exactly like the original, but in fact star trek needed a new look to attract the new generations. It's a very entertaining film, very good cast, and you can see some of star trek's common themes (like offering help to defeated enemys...). I look forward for another movie.
  74. Kevin
    Jun 20, 2009
    9
    Anyone who thinks this movie sucks is still a 40-year-old virgin. And no not the funny Steve Carell version in the movie.. the one who drives a creeper van and stares at middle school children. If you don't believe me then look at the major reviews and box office numbers. This Star Trek movie was the only good one and the only one that made a considerable amount of money at the box Anyone who thinks this movie sucks is still a 40-year-old virgin. And no not the funny Steve Carell version in the movie.. the one who drives a creeper van and stares at middle school children. If you don't believe me then look at the major reviews and box office numbers. This Star Trek movie was the only good one and the only one that made a considerable amount of money at the box office. Maybe fans of the original will hate it but it's not like anyone went to see the other Star Trek movies anyways... Batman Begins was to Batman what JJ Abrams Star Trek is to Star Trek... enough said. Expand
  75. TobyH
    Jul 24, 2009
    9
    I only went to see this film because it was an action film being directed by J.J.Abrams, who had directed the pretty decent M:I:III and Cloverfield. I was completely absorbed from the hyperactive opening to the breathless ending! I've never watched the series or any of the films, and the characterisation of Kirk and the incineration of Planet Vulcan may have bothered me more if I I only went to see this film because it was an action film being directed by J.J.Abrams, who had directed the pretty decent M:I:III and Cloverfield. I was completely absorbed from the hyperactive opening to the breathless ending! I've never watched the series or any of the films, and the characterisation of Kirk and the incineration of Planet Vulcan may have bothered me more if I had, but as a purely visual and sensual experience, this was simply AMAZING!!! Who cares about a wafer-thin plot if the direction is as relentlessly breathtaking as this! Yes, it didn't exactly test the grey matter, but the characters were brimming with attitude and full of personality- a rare thing with an action film (e.g. the Bourne series). I can't recommend this highly enough. Abrams is God! Expand
  76. SusanY.
    Jul 3, 2009
    10
    I am a long time fan and know the original Star Trek stories by heart. I was skeptical but went in with an open mind. I do not go to the movies but once a year or less and do not have television anymore, but I have seen this movie four times and will see it once more before it leaves the theaters. I loved it that much! Although there were things that definitely bothered me, especially the I am a long time fan and know the original Star Trek stories by heart. I was skeptical but went in with an open mind. I do not go to the movies but once a year or less and do not have television anymore, but I have seen this movie four times and will see it once more before it leaves the theaters. I loved it that much! Although there were things that definitely bothered me, especially the first time seeing it, it was well done, consistently fast paced, with a great selection of actors to carry on the tradition, especially Jacob Kogan as the child Spock, and Karl Urban as "Bones (fantastic performance), and Zachary Quinto as Spock (very impressive and a great Spock, except for his nose). Things that did bother me that I wish they had paid more attention to, were Kirk's eyes being blue instead of brown (especially with all the close ups couldn't they have use colored contacts?), the age of Pike at this time should have been younger (even though i liked the actor and his performance), the age of Spock's mother (which at this time of his life should have been a little younger looking, though Winona Rider did an excellent job) and the casting of Chekov (Anton Yelchin) and Scotty (Simon Pegg) were very disappointing. They were too different in character than the originals. Too bad James Doohan isn't still with us to assist. His Scotty was more serious, intelligent about it all and endearing. Uhura was ok, but the original was beautiful but didn't "know" it; the new one (Zoe Saldana) was too aware of her looks, but the scenes with Spock were touching and well done. Sulu was a good cast. Great family film. If there are sequels, I hope they don't go overboard as the producers of Pirates of the Carribean did, but keep it pure, clean, fast action-paced keeping respect for the original intact and as Spock would say "logical". Expand
  77. Stephen
    Aug 2, 2009
    0
    This film was made for retards. No plot at all. Only good acting came from the McCoy actor.
  78. EdwardS.
    Oct 1, 2009
    10
    Extraordinary! The special effects were fantastic, and the story well packed in to an 122 minute package. My new favourite movie!
  79. ZackP.
    Oct 11, 2009
    6
    Great action scenes with excellent CGI, coupled with Pine and Quinto's performances, were the highlights. Most of the other bridge crew and the plot at large were badly thought out with poor pacing. Having Nimoy try and sneak by flimsy excuses in a mind meld monologue failed completely too - waste of the best actor in the film, similar complaint with Greenwood playing Pike. It comes Great action scenes with excellent CGI, coupled with Pine and Quinto's performances, were the highlights. Most of the other bridge crew and the plot at large were badly thought out with poor pacing. Having Nimoy try and sneak by flimsy excuses in a mind meld monologue failed completely too - waste of the best actor in the film, similar complaint with Greenwood playing Pike. It comes down to this; if you're young and never heard of Star Trek before, this will be one of the best films you've ever seen. If not, it's an above-average action movie with the Star Trek name on it, complete with all the usual cliched dialogue you'd expect from the genre. I liked X-Men Origins: Wolverine better and that was no masterpiece either, but amazingly the story made more sense and there weren't massive lens flares all over the place. Expand
  80. Mason1
    Nov 21, 2009
    10
    You know what defines a great movie. Well... I've seen this film in the cinema a few months ago now, and i still have the desire to say how great it was. I don
  81. BimmyV.
    Nov 20, 2009
    9
    It's funny that Zack P. praised this film's excellent CGI, because the majority of the special effects in this movie are actually good old fashioned in-camera movie magic. No really. Watch the special features on the DVD and you'll see what I mean. As much as I loved the movie, seeing how it was done made me appreciate it all even more. This Trek just plain kicks ass. As It's funny that Zack P. praised this film's excellent CGI, because the majority of the special effects in this movie are actually good old fashioned in-camera movie magic. No really. Watch the special features on the DVD and you'll see what I mean. As much as I loved the movie, seeing how it was done made me appreciate it all even more. This Trek just plain kicks ass. As soon as the credits rolled, I wanted to watch it again, and very few movies give me that urge. Expand
  82. AlbeonJ.
    May 11, 2009
    10
    Was not a Star Trek fan and believed that Terminator Salvation would be the surprise hit of the summer. But this movie by far should be the summer's best I'm going to see it again.
  83. VilhelmB.
    May 11, 2009
    10
    Well, this film has done something to dispel the long held belief about the Star Trek film franchise. It turns out that not every odd numbered Trek film sucks. We know that even numbered Treks were generally good (excepting the last film - Nemesis) but the odd ones particularly "The Final Frontier" (directed by Shatner - coincidence?) were typically bad. With this new Star Trek, J.J. Well, this film has done something to dispel the long held belief about the Star Trek film franchise. It turns out that not every odd numbered Trek film sucks. We know that even numbered Treks were generally good (excepting the last film - Nemesis) but the odd ones particularly "The Final Frontier" (directed by Shatner - coincidence?) were typically bad. With this new Star Trek, J.J. Abrahms has recreated the mold into something uniquely original, yet curiously satisfying for older fans like myself. I watched TOS in reruns whilst growing up in the '70's, and although I've never considered myself much of a "trekkie" I can pretty much give you the title of every single episode from memory, along with a great deal of the trivia. Essentially, I've seen every episode so many times that they've become impressed onto my brain like one of Dr. Daystrom's memory engrams. Much of the backstory has been procured from snippets of dialogue extracted from TOS, many of which may not even standout in the die-hard fans mind. Other bits have come from books, and the newer series'. Certain necessary liberties have been taken for the sake of efficiency. For example, the character of Nurse Christine Chapel was glaringly omitted by Abrahms, but he made sure to a least graft aspects of her character onto another crew member. Certain rules in TOS universe have been broken, or more accurately "side-stepped" via the alternate universe plot device. This has MANY original series fans up in arms, to which I say, "so what." This film is so enjoyable, and stands so well on its own, that I really did not care about the changes Abrahm's made. It did more than enough to satisfy the old Trek fan in me, while recreating the excitement and optimism I felt when I walked out of The Wrath of Khan nearly 27 years ago (god has it been THAT LONG!) Let's face it... the old film franchise had being beaten like dead horta - I mean horse - when they resorted to putting both Kirk and Picard on the screen at the same time to woo fans from both Treks. They even dropped the biggest emotional bomb imaginable in this film, and it still tanked. War weary fans were thrown a bone with First Contact, but it's hard to screw up a film with Borg in it (though they came close with the Data-Traitor plot device.) Insurrection finally nailed the lid on the coffin, and Nemesis buried it. We all breathed a sigh of relief. At last, no more Trek travesties for the sake of money. I was cautiously optimistic about this new Trek, and though critics gave it rave reviews, die-hard fans were panning it. Well, over the years I've learned to ignore critics AND fans, and just go to the movies with no expectations. This film fulfilled every expectation I had, and breathed in the NECESSARY life required to jump start a new Star Trek mythos. When TNG first debuted, it had armies of detractors. The initial character development was shaky, the scripts were weak, and many fans of TOS simply refused to watch it. Eventually, though, the series stood firmly on its own. The characters grew, the stories improved, and TNG created a new Trek universe while never disrespecting the TOS. Many of the detractors (myself included) were forced to admit we were wrong, and I eventually grew to enjoy TNG with nearly the same level of appreciation that I had for TOS. Today, I am proud... very proud to have been witness to the birth of the infant son of Star Trek, and I suspect anyone who "dares it to do better" than TOS will eventually be forced to appreciate the magnitude by which it WILL do better. I, like Captain Pike, haven't a doubt in my mind. Expand
  84. Scott
    May 10, 2009
    10
    This movie was crazy awesome. The whole thing is fast paced. The casting and acting were perfect.
  85. ChrisD.
    May 10, 2009
    10
    Great! The best Star Trek film by far, and better than all Star Wars films except Empire and about the same as A New Hope. Wonderfully cast, and wonderfully handled. Wonderful storyline. Definitely worth seeing, and amazingly creative. Great as a Star Trek film, action film, and sci-fi film.
  86. AlbertoA.
    May 11, 2009
    10
    It appeals to us Trek purists with proper references to already known story lines. It also appeals to a new audience because it just kicks butt as an action film. Finally, using the time paradox was briliant to open the door for completely new stories from the original crew. Looking forward to the next film!
  87. Franson
    May 11, 2009
    9
    This movie was spot on. I was very concerned that they would somehow miss the true character traits that made the Star Trek TV series so enjoyable to watch. I was caught completely of guard in a good way. They matched up these characters to original personalities perfectly! And if that wasn
  88. BryanK.
    May 10, 2009
    10
    This film is AMAZING!!! At first I did not expect such a good film. It occurs between the events of the first of the two pilots, "The Cage" (1964) which introduced the most of the main cast including Spock and the first series (1966-1968). The cast gave fantastic performances including Simon Pegg's funny performance as Scotty and John Cho (Harold and Kumar) as Sulu. In short, BEST This film is AMAZING!!! At first I did not expect such a good film. It occurs between the events of the first of the two pilots, "The Cage" (1964) which introduced the most of the main cast including Spock and the first series (1966-1968). The cast gave fantastic performances including Simon Pegg's funny performance as Scotty and John Cho (Harold and Kumar) as Sulu. In short, BEST FILM OF 2009!!! Expand
  89. LynnA.
    May 11, 2009
    7
    Saw Star Trek & Wolverine on successive days this weekend and liked Wolverine better ... too many WTF bits in ST. Also to many action shots much to close to figure out what is actually happening (a MAJOR complaint w/ my partner & me in action flicks over the past 10-15 years). See ST & then Wolverine & see if you don't really like the X-men flick better.
  90. RichardM.
    May 10, 2009
    10
    Fantastically brilliant. Nostalgia, humor, insane action. This movie has it all. I have not liked a movie this much in a very long time.
  91. SteveV.
    May 10, 2009
    5
    I understand the need to create an alternative Star Trek universe to kickstart the franchise so new actors, characters and storyline were required. Some of the characters were spot on causing you to reminisce for the old series others were simply distracting and took you immediately out of the story. Chekov seemed to be more for comic relief than any serious attempt at an honest I understand the need to create an alternative Star Trek universe to kickstart the franchise so new actors, characters and storyline were required. Some of the characters were spot on causing you to reminisce for the old series others were simply distracting and took you immediately out of the story. Chekov seemed to be more for comic relief than any serious attempt at an honest portrayal. Uhura - enough already. And although J.J. Abrams has demonstrated some outstanding talent he has also demonstrated that he can be equally bad - Mission Impossible 3, Cloverfield, and now this. To paraphrase Tim Burton "I am not sure I could identify a good script if it bit me in the face" Listen to Tim J.J. - Great action, cinematography, and good actors cannot overcome this kind of uninspired and ridiculous writing. As the Executive Producer you should have fired whoever whoever pitched this script to you. Additionally track down and ceremonially fire anyone who has ever encouraged them or lied to them by even implying that that had a talent for screenwriting. Expand
  92. JohnH.
    May 10, 2009
    7
    Great action, but very weak story.
  93. GeorgeM.
    May 11, 2009
    9
    Having never been a big fan of Star Trek, save for my mild interest in Star Trek The Next Generation and Star Trek Deep Space Nine, I've always been partial to Star Wars for my "Sci-Fi" fix but this "Trek" is different. I get the feeling this film will lure in a new generation of fans to the Star Trek franchise, mainly because its a fresh, exciting entry to the series that new and Having never been a big fan of Star Trek, save for my mild interest in Star Trek The Next Generation and Star Trek Deep Space Nine, I've always been partial to Star Wars for my "Sci-Fi" fix but this "Trek" is different. I get the feeling this film will lure in a new generation of fans to the Star Trek franchise, mainly because its a fresh, exciting entry to the series that new and old fans can appreciate. The story centers around two characters primarily...Kirk (Chris Pine) and Spock (Zachary Quinto)...we see both characters as "up and comers" with a bit of their origins being shown as we know these two "legends" of the series are meant for great things. The story centers around Nero (Eric Bana), playing a great (though under-used) villain, as a Romulan h*ll-bent on getting revenge against Starfleet and Spock for whom he feels is responsible for the death of his people...throw in some "time travel" and you have a rather complex tale of revenge thats still easy to follow for the average film-goer. The cast is young and refreshing and most of them truly embrace their characters (Karl Urban IS "Bones" McCoy) with an energy that shows everyone is really having a great time portraying their characters. The action scenes are big, loud, and pleasing to the senses with some impressive FX and amazing sound (or lack there-of during the "in space" sequences...a nice touch). Overall...I am VERY pleased with this film...its entertaining through-out with an amazing cast, great action, and its done in a way that will surely make fans of even the most hardcore of Trek "haters". I very much look forward to the next film of what will hopefully be a new series of flicks. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED. Expand
  94. CateT.
    May 10, 2009
    9
    I am a die hard Trekkie from the 1960s. In a world saturated with the mind-numbing sitcoms of that era (Beverly Hillbillies, Green Acres, etc), Star Trek was an (admittedly flawed) breath of reason, adventure, and really cool science. I lived it, breathed it, worshiped it. Each iteration of Gene Roddenberry's vision has added to the mythology of Star Trek and the genre of science I am a die hard Trekkie from the 1960s. In a world saturated with the mind-numbing sitcoms of that era (Beverly Hillbillies, Green Acres, etc), Star Trek was an (admittedly flawed) breath of reason, adventure, and really cool science. I lived it, breathed it, worshiped it. Each iteration of Gene Roddenberry's vision has added to the mythology of Star Trek and the genre of science fiction in general. That being said, this movie ROCKS!!! It is what I wanted the Star Trek of the 1960s to be, but limited by the FX of the era, formulaic scripts, and a network that didn't fully support it, wasn't. This J.J. Abrams version, however, gets it. It has great FX, humor, adventure, character development, and plenty of homage to the original series. I loved it and am really, really glad that I remained unspoiled. BTW, the whole red ball thing is a fun in-joke re: Mr. Abrams and Alias. Expand
  95. VeronicaC.
    May 11, 2009
    10
    Even for a die-hard Trekkie, JJ Abrams did an awesome job! Tons of fun, good old-fashioned Trek humor, and non-stop action, how great it is to take another ride on the USS Enterprise!! It took awhile to finally get to the big screen, but wow the cast is dead-on, characters young and fresh, but paid homage to our old Star Fleet friends!!
  96. MichaelT.
    May 10, 2009
    9
    Best movie I've seen in a long time.
  97. TT.
    May 10, 2009
    9
    Pretty good start to a rebirth, excellent casting. Thought the pace was pretty good, the story was not bad either. Worth seeing for sure.
  98. AlexJ.
    May 10, 2009
    9
    Very great movie. When I saw all the CGI, I was like, WOW! Yeah, a lot of nerds saw this movie where I lived. I go with one who loved it. Because it actually is breath taking! The characters are great with roles. Like Kirk. The reason why I gave it a 9 because of the end. I was NOT happy. They could have used Shatners' role! UGH, instead of him, they used some one different. But the Very great movie. When I saw all the CGI, I was like, WOW! Yeah, a lot of nerds saw this movie where I lived. I go with one who loved it. Because it actually is breath taking! The characters are great with roles. Like Kirk. The reason why I gave it a 9 because of the end. I was NOT happy. They could have used Shatners' role! UGH, instead of him, they used some one different. But the movie was still great. I highly recommend this movie! Expand
  99. toms
    May 12, 2009
    9
    A few clunky moments... especially when elder spock describes what happened... but that hardly matters since it was such a great ride... fx were awesome and startling at times, acting and casting was dead on, funny, sad, fast, exciting, great way of getting certain catch phrases in there... end credit music paying homage to the original show was a blast as well... absolutely loved it.
  100. EJA
    May 12, 2009
    7
    [***SPOILERS***] First off this movie is really fun and exciting to watch. The writing is plenty passable and the acting was fine. The only issues were someof the logic in the plot. Just a couple things: 1) Nero would probably attempt to warn the romulans of the future then get all hell bent on revenge for something not even done yet. 2) Why does spock have to pod kirk to an unhospitable[***SPOILERS***] First off this movie is really fun and exciting to watch. The writing is plenty passable and the acting was fine. The only issues were someof the logic in the plot. Just a couple things: 1) Nero would probably attempt to warn the romulans of the future then get all hell bent on revenge for something not even done yet. 2) Why does spock have to pod kirk to an unhospitable ice planet just for being disobedient? And I saw that planet, its HUGE. What a coincidence he runs into spock's cave of all places to further the plot. 3) Lastly, a gigantic drill that goes into a planet? why didn't the vulcans send one tiny spacecraft to shoot the lengthy thin drilling device down? thats all young spock did to stop the drilling. Hell any modernday jet could have torpedo'ed the drill apart to prevent the drilling. But hey, its summer, and its fun so enjoy the ride Expand
Metascore
82

Universal acclaim - based on 46 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 43 out of 46
  2. Negative: 0 out of 46
  1. Reviewed by: Bill Goodykoontz
    Dec 17, 2015
    80
    The movie is fun, it's smart and there's plenty of action. There are enough knowing nods to old-school fans to satisfy them, but the nods don't get in the way. In fact - and a feel for this kind of thing is what makes Abrams so good - they're perfect, nice accents that won't slow down the uninitiated.
  2. Reviewed by: Jeff Shannon
    Dec 17, 2015
    75
    This is easily the best “Trek” movie since “Khan,” giving the rebooted franchise ample reason to proceed at warp speed.
  3. Reviewed by: Aubrey Day
    Dec 17, 2015
    80
    Buoyant, buffed and with the promise of even better to come, this is the freshest Trek in decades.