Yes, couldn’t agree with you more and I think I forgot to refer that, the pace of the movie, it really feels too paced. Could have been told at a slower pace, the tempo is like that I think so they could fit all the story they wanted to tell in the same movie.

Yes it is a decent movie and Yes there are a few clever moments, but as a whole I felt it kind of ends up falling over the ledge and gripping on with the fingers of special effects. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, but compared to all the previous Treks (movies and series) this one is clearly more effect heavy.

I fully agree that the current IMDB rating is way way over what the movie would merit. As for proving something, the ratings and the way it’s been recieved clearly show that the people in charge of making Star Trek (Abrams and Co.) have a very good nose when it comes to sniffing out what they should give their audience. Of course it’s pure speculation on my part if that has indeed been the leading idea. But is it coincidence that Lost happened to appear at a time when people were wanting and thus ready to recieve something else than just predictable events? And is it coincidence now that Star Trek manages to find the right tune for a lot of people to like it?

I felt the movie was a bit too fast and furious, the pace in which events evolved was very rushed. Unlike other Treks, this one could’ve used more time than it did. Oh, and adding that odd creature in the federation outpost was very un-Trek-like, for a moment I was confused which Star **** I was watching.

Also the way engineering looked like aboard the NCC-class spaceships was very out of place. Not even Enterprise, the series, that is earlier in the timeline compared to Star Trek had anything like that. Who you gonna call? The Plumbers.

It’s also good to see that the academy dress code has always been the same sexist, form fitting pyjamas =]

.mindseass last blog post… LotRO Diary: Concerning elves