This Trek is grander. This Trek is bolder. This Trek is bigger than any of its predecessors. The question is: is this Trek any better than its predecessors? While fanboys are sure to debate the merits or lack thereof of J.J. Abrams' new re-launch of Star Trek for years to come, the answer to the question of whether or not this Trek is better isn't as easy as one might think. In many ways, it is better than you father's Star Trek, but in many ways, it's also lesser. One answer I do know for sure: this is a summer spectacle movie you won't want to miss.

The new reboot of Star Trek interjects much-needed new life and new energy into an ailing franchise. In fact, Star Trek does exactly what it needed to do; it wipes the slate clean and gave the franchise a chance to start over. That doesn't mean it's completely unrecognizable. The core essence of what makes Star Trek so unique remains, but through a complicated bit of time-traveling plot contrivance, this new Star Trek jettisons the baggage of its previous history and starts fresh while retaining its core identity. Whether or not this was the right approach remains to be seen. I'm sure Trekkers the world over will haggle over the fine details that have changed and whether or not those changes were "right" or if the violation of the Trek canon is unforgivable. Personally, I think the changes made are for the good, and in several instances present us with some new and intriguing storyline opportunities.

Where this Trek fails, however, is living up to the relevance of its predecessors. Whether it was issues of age and mortality, extinction and responsibility, or fear of change, Star Trek has always been a mirror of our society. Or perhaps a better analogy is that it was a lens through which we glimpsed our present via the perspective of a better future. This new Star Trek isn't as concerned with pondering "big ideas" or in engaging in "societal reflection." Instead of challenging us to ponder the deep issues of humanity, this Trek is far more concerned with just itself: establishing and introducing itself. Not that there's anything wrong with that, it simply makes this Star Trek feel more like "Trek for dummies"; it may have more mass-market appeal, but it loses some of what it used to be in that process

There are two other major issues that keep this film from really being as great as it could have been. One is the villain, Nero. While he certainly looks menacing and his ship is formidable, we don't really learn enough about him to truly tremble or be intimidated when he's on screen. Nero is really more of a plot device than a villain; he's the catalyst that causes the young crew of the Enterprise to meet and forces them to coalesce as the crew they'll someday become. Nero is more a force of nature than a cunning, relentless, destructive foe. In order to maintain a fast-paced and lively story, depth is sacrificed in many areas, but none more acutely felt than with the first villain the Enterprise and her crew faces off against.

Continue: 1 2