Star Trek re-BOOTS (on my shoes)

2009
I finally saw the new STAR TREK movie. I waited this long out of a sense of foreboding, articulated in this article:
http://nakedmeadow.blogspot.com/2009/06/land-of-cinematically-lost-in-space.html
Despite my apprehensions, i held a little ray of hope that it would be as wonderful as so many people (some TREK fans included) were saying.
That "pfffft" sound you just heard was the dousing of a ray.
The film was bad. Painfully so. Mind you, for what it was, a Hollywood big-budget action flick, it was...okay. But it was horrible because it was horrible TREK. It was visual/character-driven, whereas TREK is story/character-driven. TREK takes on issues of social importance, but this film boldly goes...nowhere. Nothing bold. TREK gave us television's first interracial kiss, and a black female officer in a white male-only world. At the height of the cold war, it showed a russian officer serving alongside americans. TREK said, "It's okay...we're going to get past all this...i promise you, we're going to get past all this." Later, TREK put a black and a female captain into the zeitgeist, and explored the rights of artificial life. So i fervently hope that abrams' work with the franchise is done. He's talented, but showed no understanding of the show's meaning...a peek into a future where war, poverty, religion, and disease are bygone relics of a barbaric past. That's why TREK fans can be so, well, zealous. It's not that they need to "get a life", it's that they've seen this vision, and they want it...not in two hundred years, but now. Abrams didn't get that, and that's not even the worst thing...in a world plagued by brutality so staggering it defies comprehension or credibility, it's unconscionable to glamorize violence. The film was also often embarrassingly contrived, particularly with the nimoy subplot. So let's get back to the TREK vision, and move it forward again. I know just the visionary for the job:
http://nakedmeadow.blogspot.com/2009/09/star-trek-dove.html