Star Trek

I have to admit it, I was not really bothered about seeing the 'new' 'Star Trek'. Still one must boldly go and all that malarkey....
You all know the drill, it's a genesis story about how Kirk, Spock and the others got to be who they are. With one small twist. The makers have to somehow scrap everything that's gone before (while remaining faithful to it; can't discommode the trekkies!) and create a new money-spinning franchise. I hate that idea, but inasmuch as that was the agenda, they achieve it with flying colours. The cast are all fine (even Karl Urban as Bones), each displaying a mannerism or two from their originals just so we know who we're dealing with. The story is probably as weak as any of the plots used in the previous Star Trek movies (the villain is a miner; hey, anyone see 'Supernova'. Coincidence No. 555,569,446.), but it allows enough set pieces to be strung together to entertain us. And they do. Silly though it all is it achieves the commercial aim logically (Captain), by giving us the characters but putting them all on a new starting block. I could be wrong, but doesn't the story kind of negate EVERY bit of Star Trek that has gone before? If you read my previous post on 'Timecrimes' you'll know they take the first (or second) approach to time anomalies; going back in time alters the course of history and effectively creates an alternate reality. So either all that has gone before is wiped clean (no more tribbles), or the crew we are now dealing with are an alternate crew in an alternate universe (the J.J. Abrams universe).
Anyhow expect a lot more in the Star Trek series.