I used to do a fair amount of writing, and originally moved to California to get into the movie industry (that never happened, of course), so I guess maybe I just look into the craft more than some.
For me, the Star Trek movie was really good for at least half, but things started to fray at the end. Not terribly, but it just had too many things happen that detracted from the overall quality to me. I was kind of waiting for a "That's why Kirk is captain" moment, but it never happened. I can't think of any time where I said, "hey, that was a really smart thing to do." My girlfriend, who is not a sci-fi rivet counter, had the same feelings I did about the movie's story flow (she is an English teacher, however).
Plus I wasn't wild about the Enterprise sets, and some of the props looked cheesier than the original series to me (especially the hand phasers).
Arthonon, the reason you spotted the frays and jumps goes with having written stuff. I'm betting the original script would have ran three hours and made a helluva lot better flow and sense, and the producer and director sat down with the writer and said "keep the first section of screen play to page 113, and then reduce the other 400 to 200. But the sword fight stays; also, we like the snow monster, but can we have a bigger monster eat that one, and then have
it chase Kirk? Oh, and we paid Nemoy for the whole movie - let's see him in it."
On the
Enterprise sets: you're actually not far off, in that they recycled most of the sets for different locations, and bunches of stuff was bought off the shelf or from online sales. It really worked well for DS9, but was too easy to spot on
Enterprise due to a lack of clutter and the color pallette they worked with. I like the phasers, though, as they looked very prototype and flimsy.
[edit]
On Kirk's selection over Spock: then, as now, it is often not what one knows so much as
who one knows....