Yeah, applying the Bechdel test to any single film, particularly one whose characters had been selected in the 60s and whose
, is not a fair application of the test. They did put women in nearly half of the commanding positions, and made nearly half of the bridge crew women, so it is not like there was not any attempt to represent women fairly.
Now, if you insist it should have been a more central goal (which makes sense if you see Star Trek as a vehicle for progressive messages of fairness and equality), you could have made
, you could have made Keenser or Gatt's character female, or made the tactical officer from the Kobayashi Maru a black woman in 2009 (or the Kobayashi Maru supervisor).
But if you do, I'd like to point out something: In both films, with the exception of Gatt's character, the only non-main cast that ever spoke on the Enterprise bridge were women
. I don't recall a bridge guy ever speaking.
Even cupcake shut up once he went up there. The universe in which the film seemed pretty fair and equal to me.
And the film is centred around Kirk, who has a perception of the world that can be described as harmlessly sexist-ish, so you could claim it makes sense for the story to fold around his perception because he does not hang out with his female comrades as much and pays less attention to their actual accomplishments. Not a good excuse, but you can come up with something in-universe to explain the focus on the original crew. Two crew women arguing in the turbolift about the captain's attitude will do for me.
ETA: The turbolift thing is cheesy. Give a crew woman an assignment meant for Chekov after she went to complain to the captain for showing too much favouritism for the kid, even though she was as qualified as him for it, even better, give it to her after Chekov screws it up. Or something along that line, just not written by me.