I saw Star Trek over the weekend and enjoyed it, though not unreservedly. I give it a "B," maybe a 7 out of 10. I thought it was good. Not great, but far from the abomination it could've been.
I never objected to the idea of a "reboot" in theory, and thought the execution went about as well as it could have. The casting is great. Pine is a fine young Kirk, Quinto does a much better Spock than I expected--eerily so in parts--and Karl Urban is staggeringly evocative of a young McCoy. Every character gets a chance to shine. A few reviews I've read make the point that all the characters are shown to be very smart and capable professionals, and I agree and think that's a very good thing. Study hard in school, kids, and someday you may get to explore the galaxy.
I just wish the script had gotten one more pass before they filmed it. In this post's comments, I detail several problems I had with plot and characterization. A few fall into the category of nitpicks from a grumpy old-school Trekkie, but I think others--probably too many others--constitute real flaws in the story. Some took me out of the movie while I watched it, others only occurred to me upon reflection. Too bad, because most of them could have been fixed in the script.
Don't look at the comments unless you've already seen the movie or don't care if you're spoiled! I go into detail!
The fact that I enjoyed the movie and consider it a successful reboot of my beloved Star Trek despite the problems I had with it is a tribute to its energy and promise. If they want to make two or ten new movies with this cast in this universe, I will eagerly return to watch them.