I agree with you that the TNG era went off the rails. At best, it was watchable, not must-watch TV. I don't agree with you that the nu-Trek approach was the right solution. I think it's possible to hate how Berman and Braga slowly ground the franchise to dust while not welcoming JJ Abrams and his lens-flare with open arms. All they really needed to do was find a better steward of the franchise without having to pass the ball to someone who saw Trek itself as something that was broken and needed a hip-hop ADD do-over.
The problem with what your saying is that J.J. Abrams didn't have twenty-six, or even thirteen, episodes to hook the audience on Star Trek 2009
. He had two hours and likely a laundry list of things that had to be accomplished in that time frame...
- Reset the universe.
- Do origins for Kirk and Spock.
- Introduce the minor characters.
- Introduce the Enterprise.
- Have Kirk as the Captain by the end of the film.
- Plus introduce a villain and give us a reason for the events to unfold.
Are there things I'd do differently? Sure! I loathe the Academy section of the film for a bunch of reasons I won't go into. But I thought both the Kelvin
sections of the film were well done with a couple of nitpicks. I thought Abrams did a competent job directing and thought only Pegg and Saldana felt wrong for the roles they were given.
When they were actually making this film there was no guarantee of a sequel, so they had to make it count. And I think for the most part they did.