IMDB Rating: 6.4

With the unexpected success of Star Wars (1977), the work underway to create a new Star Trek television series (“Star Trek: Phase II”) quickly changed direction and a movie was given the green light (with Paramount hoping to kickstart a franchise to rival Star Wars). With series creator Gene Roddenberry at the helm, the fans’ expectations were high. When veteran Hollywood director Robert Wise was attached (director of such SF classics as “The day the earth stood still” and “Andromeda Strain”), everything was looking set for a monster reincarnation. The studio obviously had faith too, providing a budget of $46 million (USD) – the most expensive movie ever made at the time of release.

So what went wrong?

Firstly, that assumes something did go wrong. I know a lot of fans who hated this movie, but I don’t feel it’s as bad as they say. It has its problems, sure, but it was also serious Science Fiction, and for Star Trek that was a good thing. To my mind the biggest issue was the director and producer allowing the special effects, as beautiful as they were, to take over.

John Dykstra is a hero of mine. After bursting onto the scene with the ground-breaking special effects on Star Wars (1977), Dykstra was a natural selection for effects supervisor on ST:TMP. He included the sort of atmospheric effects that former colleague Douglas Trumble had introduced for Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977) and suddenly Star Trek was a special effects light show. The characters were swallowed up, under-developed, and sometimes ignored (something the actors themselves complained about during shooting). Stephen Collins and Persis Khambatta were poorly cast and their characters had some of the worst lines in a script that had consistently bad dialogue.

Best bits: Star Trek on the big screen; a strong SF concept, even if ultimately it was poorly executed; the team, though starting to show their age, still had great chemistry; they took over, but the eye-candy SFX were still great.

Worst bits: Commander Decker and Ilia; the new starfleet uniforms (even the cast hated them); the ponderous, glacial pace.

Interesting trivia: All the Klingon and Vulcan words were actually invented by actor James Doohan (Scotty), long before the Klingon language was fully developed by professional linguist Marc Okrand.

IMDB Rating: 7.7
The injection of director Nicholas Meyer into the Star Trek franchise was exactly the shot in the arm it needed. After the disappointment of the first movie, both critically and financially, a second movie was almost unimaginable. When finally given the green light, it was awarded a budget of less than a quarter of the first film. As the studio blamed Roddenberry for many of the cost over-runs of the first movie, he was demoted to a consultant and Harve Bennet – who promised he could make the movie much cheaper – was hired as producer.

The smaller budget reared its head in every department – miniatures, sets, props and even some footage were re-used from the first film, or from the aborted television series. Even composer Jerry Goldsmith was too expensive, and was replaced with the relative new James Horner.

It was producer Bennet’s idea to make the film a sequel to one of the episodes of the television series, the first time that had ever been done. It was also the first movie to use a completely computer-generated sequence.

Fans loved Wrath of Khan, and the franchise was saved. While it didn’t make as much at the box office as the first film (gross $(USD)78m), it was actually more profitable due to its much smaller production cost.

Best bits: The characters are back, and the chemistry is firing; the dud uniforms of the first film were replaced; Ricardo Montalban; the friendship between Kirk and Spock is deepened and more natural.

Worst bits: David; it seems unrealistic that Khan’s superior intelligence didn’t immediately understand Spock’s “coded” radio message to Kirk.

Interesting trivia: Saavik was originally written as a Vulcan/Romulan, much as Spock is a Vulcan/human, though this is never actually mentioned in the final film. It does explain, however, Saavik’s three, uncharacteristic, un-Vulcan emotional moments.

IMDB Rating: 6.6
In the original script for Star Trek II, and at Nimoy’s request, Spock’s death was meant to be permanent. The fans were never going to be happy with that, of course, and when Nimoy decided during the shooting of the second movie that he was quite enjoying the experience, the ending of that movie was rewritten to allow for Spock’s return.

As a condition of his return, Nimoy also managed to get the director’s chair for this outing – quite an achievement given that he’d never directed before. The choice of Christopher Lloyd as the Klingon commander Kruge is inspired and set the tone for Klingon warriors from that point forward. Lloyd is quoted as referring to this as one of his favourite roles.

The budget was nudged up just a little to $(USD)17m, but still suffered from the need to cut many corners. For example, there were very few new costumes created for this movie, choosing instead to recycle all the uniforms from Wrath of Kahn. Sets were used for multiple locations with only a little redressing (such as redressing the USS Enterprise bridge with different chairs to double as the USS Grissom bridge, and redressing the Enterprise sick bay to look like a bar).

Cracking a domestic gross of $(USD)76 put it on a par with Wrath of Kahn and it ensured the continuation of the franchise.

Best bits: Christopher Lloyd; Scotty’s line “Up your shaft”;

Worst bits: Robin Curtis as Saavik – one of the worst Vulcans; David Marcus again;

Interesting trivia: Dame Judith Anderson was 87 years old when she appeared as the High Priestess in this film. She came out of retirement at the urging of her nephew after being away from motion pictures for 14 years.

IMDB Rating: 7.3

The action in Star Trek III followed just shortly after the action in Star Trek II (and continued its storyline), so why not repeat a winning formula and set this one shortly after the events of Star Trek III? In fact, why not get Nimoy to direct again?

Star Trek IV proved enormously popular with non-trekkies (as the IMDB score suggests), and only slightly less popular with hard-core trekkies. Star Trek IV relied more on the camaraderie of the main characters than previous films, and this is one of its huge strengths. It helped to prove that a strong human story (with a little bit of Vulcan) is still the essence of good story-telling, whether or not that story be science fiction. If nothing else, Star Trek IV helped to demonstrate the comedy skills of just about all of the major cast.

Surprisingly, Star Trek IV had a higher budget than the previous two films, $(USD)25m, though the storyline (travelling back in time to contemporary San Francisco) would have suggested that they had even less to spend. The extra may have had something to do with the raises demanded by both Shatner and Nimoy. Nevertheless, it cleaned up at the box office, $(USD)104m, and was nominated for four oscars, so the budget hike was certainly well invested. The film was a fitting celebration of 20 years of Star Trek – though, taking the extra money from the budget of the Star Trek: The Next Generation TV series when it was just getting off the ground was not appreciated.

Given the success of this and the previous two Trek films, the franchise looked strong, and a fifth movie was an easy bet.

Best bits: The humour; “new-clee-ar wessels”; “Captain, it’s the Enterprise” (aircraft carrier);

Worst bits: Poor effects, especially when Scotty is seen lowering the tank parts into the cloaked bird-of-prey; why was Spock the only one in Starfleet that could work out the alien was calling for the whales?

Interesting trivia: The only Star Trek film not to include a starship called Enterprise. A public campaign had many years earlier resulted in one of the early Space Shuttles being named Enterprise. When the Space Shuttle Challenger exploded shortly after take-off in January 1986 while Star Trek IV was in production, cast and crew (and studio) proudly dedicated this film to the victims of the disaster.

IMDB Rating: 5.4

Anything Spock can do, Kirk can do better, right? No, and this is the film that proves it. Handing Shatner creative control of the fifth film was not a good decision, though it is likely the studio was given no alternative (by Shatner, that is – it was part of his deal to appear in the previous film that he direct the next one).

Just about everything in this film is wrong. Despite a similar budget to the previous film at $(USD)27m, many of the sets, props and costumes of the Next Generation TV series were used to save money, as were special effects shots from previous films, though a new bridge set was built.

This was the only Star Trek movie to win (or even be nominated for) the Golden Raspberry Award for Worst Picture. The public voted with their feet, with this film returning the worst box office of any in the franchise to that date, a paltry $(USD)52m. The studio made the decision after this result to terminate the movie franchise.

Best bits: Um … okay, the line “Excuse me – what does God need with a starship?”

Worst bits: Pretty much everything; a vulcan with emotions who happens to be Spock’s never-before-mentioned brother; if the Enterprise can get to the centre of the galaxy so quickly, why did it take Voyager so long to get home? Pretty much the whole concept of people believing in a “God” that is imprisoned in the centre of the galaxy …

Interesting trivia: This is the final film in which all original cast members appear as the crew of the Enterprise. In the next film, Sulu is promoted to his own command. Merritt Butrick, who played David Marcus (Kirk’s son) in the earlier films, died during pre-production.

IMDB score: 7.2

Star Trek VI was originally meant to be the long-rumoured “Starfleet Academy” story, using new, younger actors to portray the original characters, but as a prequel to the original television series. Roddenberry, the original cast and all the fans objected strenuously and Harve Bennet left the franchise in protest. The prequel idea finally resurfaced for the 2009 reboot.

The studio subsequently greenlit one more “original cast” movie. Perhaps it was the need to say goodbye properly, perhaps it was the need to ensure the franchise still had life in it so they could transition to the “Next Generation” cast.

Nicholas Meyer came back, both to direct and to co-write. The story is probably the strongest since at least Star Trek III (but definitely Star Trek II). It certainly contained all the necessary elements, and tied off all the important loose ends. It was definitely the last hurrah the fans wanted and the franchise needed. Gene Roddenberry, creator of Star Trek, and creative consultant on this film, died during post-production, just a few days after seeing the first rough cut. He was disappointed in the storyline, arguing that the Klingons were just being used as generic villains. Leonard Nimoy is quoted later as saying that Roddenberry was right. The film is lovingly dedicated to him.

With a budget of $(USD)30m, comparable to all the previous films, the crew needed to be extremely creative to convincingly achieve all the added elements the script demanded. Again, costumes, props and sets were recycled from previous movies and from “The Next Generation” TV series. The casting of the always brilliant Christopher Plummer as Chang was genius. To my mind he brought exactly the class and energy the role (and the movie) needed. Kim Cattrall’s casting as Lt Valeris was perhaps less inspired.

The final installment in the full original cast movies returned a respectable $(USD)74m, regaining the trust of the studio. The film marked DeForest Kelley’s last on-screen performance as Dr. McCoy, coming after his appearance on “The Next Generation”.

Best bits: Christopher Plummer; a fitting goodbye from the original cast; Kirk’s lines as he fights his shape-shifter self.

Worst bits: Not very fond of the Sherlock Holmes inspired murder mystery section; using Michael Dorn as a Klingon Defense Counsell (supposedly Worf’s ancestor), seemed a cheap and unnecessary (and slightly confusing) cross-over.

Interesting trivia: At the beginning of his acting career, William Shatner was a theatrical understudy to Christopher Plummer.

IMDB score: 6.6

Naturally, followers of the movie series would never have understood how the entire franchise cast could suddenly change, so the studio (who must have forgotten that ST:TNG had already been on air twice as long as the original series, and that four characters from the original series appeared in it quite successfully) decided that a cross-over / hand-over was needed. Having Kirk and Picard meet was obviously too monumental a storyline to pass up.

The budget was bumped up to a slightly more respectable $(USD)35m, but it’s sometimes difficult to see that on screen. Director David Carson had only ever done TV previously (including episodes of both ST:TNG and ST:DS9), and as far as I’m concerned his television heritage shows here. Producers must have thought that his experience bringing the show to life on the small screen, using the miniscule small screen budgets, would probably mean he could be miserly on the big screen too. Unfortunately, they were right.

(Nimoy was offered the director’s chair, but after reading the script and being told that there would be no changes, he wisely passed – not just on directing, but also in appearing.)

Yet again sets, wardrobe, miniatures, props and footage (even from the television series) were recycled to save money. Some of the cast even wear ill-fitting uniforms made for other actors on the television show.

The “nexus rift” idea, as a means of uniting Kirk and Picard, is a rather lame science fiction MacGuffin. How is it that Kirk has entered the nexus, seemingly believing its alternate reality and unable to leave, while Picard (and seemingly Soran) can enter and be completely aware that they are in some fake construct? That seems totally inconsistent with his character to me. And why is it that Picard can only defeat this enemy with the help of Kirk? How did his own crew (and the rest of Starfleet) suddenly become so useless?

While the crash landing of the saucer was a reasonable special effects sequence suited to the big screen, that really appears to be about the only one. Even the earlier damage to the Enterprise-B uses the model used several times already in previous movies and the ST:TNG series, but with added bits that could break away so they wouldn’t have to damage the model.

Casting Malcolm McDowall as Soran was fantastic – he loves chewing up the scenery in these sort of madman roles. Unfortunately, the final confrontation, a simple fist fight in the desert, was an absolutely dumb way to see off Kirk. After all that he’s been through in his career, including countless fist fights with much greater adversaries, and in much more inspiring settings, this was an unforgiveable anticlimax. Apparently, Kirk’s death was originally even more lame (shot in the back by Soran), but it tested badly and the whole sequence was reshot at a cost of $5(USD)m. As far as I can tell, there was little improvement.

While one of the most disappointing Star Trek big screen outings, the $(USD)75m return must have been enough to satisfy the studio, as they soon gave the green light to the first movie to star only the Next Generation cast.

Best bits: Malcolm McDowall.

Worst bits: The nexus; the lame, cheesy, over-the-top chummy interactions between the ST:TNG cast, which has always been a bugbear of mine; lame, uncharacteristic, anticlimactic death for Kirk.

Interesting trivia: This is the only Star Trek outing in which Shatner (Kirk) appears without Nimoy (Spock). Kirk’s house and horse in the Nexus are actually Shatner’s own house and horse (talk about extreme cost-saving, even on the locations!).

IMDB score: 7.6

It seemed obvious really, that for the first solo outing of the cast from ST:TNG producers would want the new Enterprise’s most feared enemy – the Borg. The introduction of the Borg Queen (really?) must have been an attempt to raise the stakes, though it almost runs counter to the lore built up around the Borg to that point.

Nevertheless, with a healthy budget of $(USD)45m, producers and the studio were obviously brimming with confidence. Fans generally hold this effort up as the best of the Next Generation films.

Jonathan Frakes had directed a few episodes of various television series by this point (including ST:TNG, ST:DS9, and ST:Voyager), but this was his first outing as a feature director. This gamble had worked once (Leonard Nimoy) and failed once (David Carson), so producers could not have been completely confident in their choice. Frakes’ efficient directing style (“two takes Frakes”) apparently won them over.

Alice Krige made a great Borg Queen, and James Cromwell was a reasonable Zefram Cochrane (though first choice Tom Hanks might have been more interesting). While the movie is almost evenly split between the action sequences on the Enterprise and the trip back to Cochrane’s time, the heavy reliance on real world locations continues to give the impression of a much cheaper film (much like “Generations” and “Voyage Home”) which, to me at least, devalues this film somewhat.

The domestic gross of $(USD)92m, the highest for any Star Trek film to that time (over $(USD)150m worldwide), must have staggered the studio.

Best bits: The Borg Queen.

Worst bits: It’s still not really clear to me why Cochrane would take Riker and LaForge aboard his test flight rather his own crew, who would be more experienced with his technology.

Interesting trivia: This was the first Star Trek film to be given a rating higher than PG.

IMDB score: 6.4

Jonathan Frakes returned to the director’s chair for his second Star Trek film. Alas, in my view, he here failed to repeat the critical and financial success of his first outing. Like many fans, I’m in two minds about this one. Perhaps our reaction can be summed up by the fact that even Marina Sirtis (Troi) confessed that she fell asleep during the premiere.

Technically, the film is fine. The budget was a very generous $(USD)58m, Frakes does a good, workman-like technical job, the various departments perform their tasks admirably, and F. Murray Abraham makes a reasonable villain. But the whole idea of the Federation’s (and therefore Starfleet’s) involvement in the main plot just doesn’t ring true. Even the idea of a planet having the ability to make or keep someone young is just too fanciful to swallow.

Much has been said by others of the inhabitant’s selfishness in wanting to keep that for themselves, their vapid lives, and their apparent inability to do simple things like swim in the lake they live next to. Even more obvious is that the apparent “good guys” are all pretty and white, while the obvious “bad guys” are ugly and deformed – even though the two groups are supposed to be related.

The focus on the character of Data, either as comic relief or to explore his desire to become more human, is getting tiresome by this point in the film series (as it was in the television series). Much of the humour seems too contrived, as do the supposed “friendly” crew interactions, which by this stage are just getting sickeningly cringe-worthy  – these exchanges lack all the subtlety that the original cast managed so well.

Frankly, this could have been a one hour televised episode of ST:TNG, and not a very memorable one at that.

The film only just made its money back at home (returning $(USD)70m at the US box office), though a healthier $(USD)112m worldwide, and this close call may have given the studio cause for concern.

Best bits: Reasonably good CGI for its time.

Worst bits: Again, the cheesy winks and smiles between the crew are lame; a silly MacGuffin (a planet that keeps people young and healthy), and an even sillier conspiracy; overall, a very poor script.

Interesting trivia: The first Star Trek movie that doesn’t include any action on or near Earth, and the first movie where all of the space scenes are completely computer generated (no models).

IMDB score: 6.4

So the Romulans have a clone of Picard that they no longer need. So somehow this lowly clone takes over the Romulan Empire. So for some reason, this clone is obsessed with Picard, someone he’s never met. Sounds good – let’s throw $(USD)60m at it and see what happens.

Though an improvement on the very lame “Insurrection”, there are too many things wrong with this movie for it to be called good Star Trek. The opening wedding scene is one of the lamest Star Trek scenes I’ve ever witnessed. Picard’s speech is pathetic. Tom Hardy makes a reasonably convincing younger Picard (named Shinzon), and a good villain, but that’s about it. (Hardy credits the disaster of this film, which was supposed to be his break-out role, with the breakdown of his relationship, his turn to alcoholism and his contemplating suicide.)

The choice of Stuart Baird as director was an odd one. Better known as an editor, he had only two (unsuccessful) directing credits prior to this film (and then he never directed again). The cast felt he knew nothing about the Star Trek universe, and had no respect for it. He couldn’t even get the names of the main cast right.

Rumour has it that Patrick Stewart earned twice as much from this role alone as he did for the entire run of Star Trek: The Next Generation. That must be where all the money went …

The death of Data is long overdue, and perhaps the character’s greatest redeeming moment in a long history of uselessness. But having him die to save his crew (“the needs of the many”), and having a “prototype” Data conveniently turn up just prior to that so that, effectively Data is still around even after being blown up – the whole thing is just such a lame and contrived reflection of Spock’s death-that-wasn’t as to be totally nauseating. To add insult to injury, Data’s make-up is far too thick and shiny.

Even Shinzon’s death is a joke. Picard bends a metal decoration at just the right time without knowing how strong it is? And once the spike hits Shinzon and supposedly spears him, it very clearly bounces on his chest!

The film failed to recover its costs, taking only $(USD)43m in the USA and only $(USD)67m worldwide, the lowest of any film in the franchise, bringing to an inglorious end the long history of Star Trek as envisioned by Gene Roddenberry.

Best bits: Um …

Worst bits: The Enterprise rams the Romulan ship and becomes embedded in it, and that’s okay, but then the Romulan ship somehow pulls away from the Enterprise? How? Surely if all it did was engage reverse thrusters, then it would pull the entangled Enterprise along with it? What is otherwise keeping the Enterprise in place against the force of the Romulan ship? Nothing! And Ron Perlman is just wasted.

Interesting trivia: This was Jerry Goldsmith’s final score for a feature film. He died in 2004 aged 75.

IMDB score: 8

Seven years after the “final” Star Trek film, and thirty years after the first, came the reboot. Somehow, love-him-or-loathe-him director J. J. Abrams convinced Paramount to give him $(USD)150m and their most valuable franchise, and let him do with it whatever he wanted to. How does he do that?

Using the oft-proposed “prequel” idea, a brand new, young cast would be assembled, alongside cutting edge effects, with one of the most talented, powerful film-makers of his age … This should have been a powerful combination. But I have my reservations. As far as I’m concerned, it fell short of my expectations, and while there was a lot to like about this movie, it didn’t quite achieve the dizzying heights I had set for it.

First things first. The story line introduces a plot device that allows them to almost completely discard forty years of canon. By travelling back in time, Romulan Nero and Spock change the timeline, so suddenly this reboot is Star Trek in an alternate timeline. Great news for the film-makers, bad news for those of us who like the canon the way it is. They immediately set about changing the Star Trek history we all know such as, for example, killing off Amanda Grayson. It still doesn’t sufficiently explain the completely different and inconsistent look of the Romulans.

It was always going to be a tough call to recast the classic characters. I think they did a good job overall, with most not only looking the part (that is, some have a reasonable physical likeness to the original actors), but also carrying off their character with a sufficient mix of homage to the original and injecting something new. Chris Pine works well enough as Kirk, but Karl Urban as McCoy was brilliant. Quinto’s Spock has split the fans, but Nimoy is quoted as liking him and approving his casting, and that’s good enough for me. Shatner also gave Pine his tick of approval.

The introduction of Pike was a nice touch, and he gets some excellent lines delivered beautifully by Bruce Greenwood. There may be a touch too much humour in this one, but Star Trek never minded having a good laugh now and then (consider the fourth movie, as well as episodes like “Trouble with Tribbles”) so I’m happy to concede that one.

Grossing a massive (for Star Trek) $(USD)257m in the USA and $(USD)385m worldwide was an unheard of return for a Star Trek movie, so the studio was hooked.

Best bits: Some good casting – especially Chris Pine, Karl Urban, and Bruce Greenwood (I’m still in two minds about Simon Pegg, even though I love him as an actor); so many nods to the canon (like the uniforms, the communicators, and the Kobayashi Maru scene) even though other parts are discarded;

Worst bits: Starships don’t get built on the surface – they’re built in space – so while a shot of a starship being built across the desert may look nice, it’s blatantly impractical; using a Budweiser brewery as the engine room of a starship was a stupid move – it looked utterly ridiculous; Abrams likes using shaky cam, crash zooms on effects shots and lens flare in abundance – all of which I hate, and all of which look crap in this context; Anton Yelchin as Chekov doesn’t work for me; the interior of the Romulan ship makes no sense.

Interesting trivia: Zachary Quinto, like many people, has difficulty separating his fingers for the Vulcan salute. When it came time to film him doing it, he had to have his fingers taped. Winona Ryder, who plays Spock’s mother, Amanda, is only six years older than Zachary Quinto, who plays Spock, but 24 years younger than Ben Cross, who plays Sarek, Spock’s father.

IMDB score: 7.8

Star Trek fans on IMDB clearly enjoyed this film more than I. Like Abrams’ previous effort, this film has many likeable nods to the canon, but in other aspects ventures too far away. The biggest problem for me is the inclusion of Khan as the antagonist.

Khan was the villain in the second film, but that doesn’t mean he should automatically be the villain in the second reboot film. Fair enough, this is supposed to be Khan well before the events of the second film (in fact, before the events of the original series episode in which he was introduced, even though the throw-away line about “the Mudd incident” might try to suggest otherwise), but this appears to be a completely different person to the Khan of canon.

Benedict Cumberbatch is no Ricardo Montalban. That’s no one’s fault, of course, least of all his own, and he has every right to bring his own perspective to this character. But suddenly we have a completely different Khan to the man we thought he was, with no explanation as to why. His high opinion of himself is about the only recognisable character trait. Khan’s introduction here certainly doesn’t fit at all with his introduction in the original television series (yes, I know, alternate timeline and all). But even ignoring the alternative timeline, at this point even in this timeline, he and his crew should still be in cryo-sleep aboard the Botany Bay somewhere out in space. There is no way this Khan would ever have become the Khan from ST:TOS or the second movie. When Khan suddenly started helping Kirk, effectively becoming a good guy, I was lost (I know, it was all to his ultimate evil plan, but still …).

I’m in two minds about the swapping of roles between Kirk and Spock in the radiation scenes. It reeked far too much of repeating events in the second film (after all, we’ve already had Khan and Carol Marcus), when these events are supposed to be happening much earlier to these characters than the events in the second film (yes, alternate timeline, I know). This just felt far too contrived. And Leonard Nimoy declared very early on in his development of the Spock character, that Spock – despite his superior strength – does not fight.

Director J. J. Abrams has since acknowledged that he made many mistakes with this film – not just with the characters and the canon, but with the massive over-use of his stupid pet lens flares. Hopefully, he really has learned his lesson and he won’t cock up the Star Wars franchise as much as he has this one. If there is a third reboot film, let’s hope it gets the series back on track.

With a budget of a massive $(USD)190m  (more than the first five films combined), this was a big film. The film more than made its money back, taking $(USD)228m in the USA and $(USD)467m worldwide. So what do I know?

Best bits: Good effects, if somewhat over the top; building on the backstory of Kirk and Carol Marcus (which is ironic, given that the first time anyone knew of her was in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan); nice re-use of the original theme music.

Worst bits: Completely destroying the character of Khan; seriously compromising the character of Spock; while it was always good to see Nimoy’s Spock in a Star Trek movie, his appearance in this film made absolutely no sense – it certainly had no real contribution to the plot – and therefore as a mere token, was a sad and unfortunate final appearance on film for both Nimoy and Nimoy’s Spock; Abram’s ridiculous over-user of blinding lens flare – well over 800 instances in this film! Get a new trick Abrams.

Interesting trivia: Travelling to Iceland for some shots, this was the first Star Trek film to include production outside of the USA.