WilliamCQ Seeing the trailer, it's obvious that the direction is lacking but other elements could be entertaining. Even as the film is ongoing the special effects isn't up to mainstream features but still enjoyable if you consider that most people couldn't do any better. The acting was good but the bad direction had a toll on it. I thought it deserved 7 by then.What drew the line is the story: It's bad at best and confusing most of the time. One shouldn't have to connect the dots through any other thing than than the current story. If there's references to anther story, there should be a hint or flashback to it. But most importantly, the story should be a journey for the viewer either in emotions or knowledge (albeit some is only useful in fandom). In this production, it seem various short stories were put together ; some relating to the film progress while others are filling time and would need reference to be more than the most basic of entertainment.Overall the non-cohesive story blew it. I thought the film deserved 5, maybe 4, but I felt sympathy toward their attempt at the great Star Trek franchise.

Stephan Ortmann This Star Trek movie is the best fan produced Star Trek feature that I have seen. Others have lacked such great acting and screen writing. This picture has a marvelous script and a truly exciting plot. It brings back lot's of memories of the original show. The movie may lack sophisticated CGI but, instead of being a downside, it actually adds a certain flavor to this movie. I found this very refreshing and actually pretty cool.I especially liked the performance of Nichelle Nichols, which brought enormous depth to the Star Trek adventure. Also Walter Koenig's performance was superb! A nice treat was also the appearance of Tuvor as played by Tim Russ, who is also a very good director. He can really play the good and bad guy at once. The story of family and the idea of interracial marriage was what made Star Trek so unique in the first place. This is a great tribute to the creator of the Star Trek universe Gene Roddenberry.

katyzone Done lovingly and so wonderful to see a few of the old faces some of us knew so well. I actually liked the CGI used, it was crisp and clean and relied on the person watching it rather than making the person a subjective viewer, kinda put the viewer in league with the movie, it is up to the viewer to decide how much they will enjoy it.Heck, the graphics reminded me when computer games were about the puzzles, tactics and maneuvers inherent rather than the gee whiz blow you away factor with a hollow center in most I run across- simply human nature I guess- "a beautiful person need not be as deep as one plain"- not that I buy that, I don't, it's just, unfortunately it is just that way betimes. SPOILERIf you can get past the first scene, it gets better. "Charlie X" doesn't get his "acting shoes" quite laced till his next scene. To me, overall, I like this addition to the universe of Star Trek, heck, better than Nemesis IMHO anyway. The acting is good. Think BBC (Doctor Who, Blake's 7, "bad" effects and all are easy to ignore, but actually the effects in this are a tad better than the older BBC stuff, which I love BTW).I give it a 7/10, but I am biased!

nm17750 Very good idea and it does move along but at a lesser pace than i would like. The direction shows the smaller budget as does the special effects. But it begs to be asked why it took so long and why did Tim Russ let the actors be so boring for the most part. But again great concept and just a tad shy of what it could be in this reunion made for video. definitely a Trekky flick But with a huge Star Wars influence. The special effects takes me back to the first trek movie but without the gloss. Again it shows the low budget. But the rawness does capture the feel. Seeing the actor who played Jake Sisko was nice. As another put it where is Sulu? it would have been nice to see him there. I look forward to seeing the next part and how they can repair the time space continuim that gets destroyed at the beginning