I agree that it may be difficult to see these actors as 'our' Star Trek characters and feel the same emotions that we did with Shatner/Nimoy/Kelley etc. That being said, a good movie can still evoke emotion about a character. It just won't be as personal. IMO
This is where I differ. I see Kirk/Spock/McCoy are characters
-- characters who have a well-established set of character traits. In my mind, Kirk, Spock, et al. are NOT just TOS character they are characters that exist outside
of TOS and belong to the greater agglomeration of simply "Star Trek" (of which AbramsTrek also belongs). Sure -- Shatner/Nimoy/Kelley portrayed those characters, but so do Pine/Quinto/Urban.
It's the character
whom I feel emotionally connected to -- albeit the original actors did help shape that emotional connection somewhat. If an AbramsTrek character is written and portrayed with that proper set of character traits (an I mean the character traits that go beyond the TOS actor portrayals), then I can see that AbramsTrek character as being the same character, albeit a different version...
Therefore, that AbramsTrek character should still be able to evoke an emotional feeling. I'm not saying they automatically WILL did so -- the writers and actors need to deliver on their end. However, what I'm saying is that these characters have the same potential
to evoke those emotions.
True. But there are different traits that these actors bring to well established characters. While I thoroughly enjoy the new Trek, for me anyways, it may
take a while before I seem them as Kirk & company and not just actors 'playing' them. I do think that the Kirk/Spock/McCoy/Scotty characters are well on their way.
Uhura/Chekov/Sulu not so much yet.