Well, sure, of course it's subjective, but I honestly do believe there is some level of objectivity when it comes to analyzing a work of art's level of ambition. TOS, TNG, and DS9 all feel very different from one another, but they are all masterful shows in their own right because they all have high ambition to mean something, to say something, to do something new. Voyager and Enterprise were largely failures not due simply to individual tastes - there is a factual lack of originality and ambition in the storytelling of those two shows. Likewise, Wrath of Khan, Search for Spock, Voyage Home, Undiscovered Country, and First Contact, to somewhat varying degrees, are all more or less agreed to be the best of the bunch, due to their desire to tell a new and interesting kind of story. Now, Abrams has changed the "feel" of Star Trek once again, just as the creators did when TNG started, and DS9, and etc - but this time, much like with the creation of Voyager and Enterprise, there is not an equally high level of ambition to do something thematically interesting or risky. He's good at the entertaining, but he lacks the will to risk. God forbid he make a movie that tries to do something we've not seen in Star Trek before on a storytelling level. It's not that he's incapable (I assume.) It's that he doesn't have the interest.