On my 7th birthday, I was given 4 Star Trek novels. They were good. On my 34th (today/yesterday, the 9th) I saw the new Star Trek movie, whose name I didn't even catch. It was not. My impression: it was a sequence of dramatic scenes unconstrained by coherence. I liked the aesthetics (though some others didn't), especially of the future ships, one of which made me go "it's the Vorlons!" There were a couple of good Spock lines sending up time travel tropes. But there were a lot of egregious coincidences, and unnecessary tension (kind of like the crumbling-bridge-jumping scene in Moria in the LotR movie, though without the "no one throws a dwarf" extra; you're in fucking Moria, or (spoilered), you don't need to transport into a water tube accidentally for more action. Or you shouldn't.) There was bad physics. There was what I'd call bad biology, and bad planetary defense, and... Yes, it's Star Trek. I find that a poor excuse.
Was it a good Star Trek novel? Ignoring the science, you've still got the weird coincidences. I guess the characters were okay, though no one seemed deep. Some companions complained "it's Star Trek, now with sewers!" and about the clutter in Engineering; I didn't care. But then, I'm not that attached to Trek.
And then there was the characters kissing. They were unexpected.
'Maru' is not pronounced that way, though when I complained S. pointed out that "Hikaru Sulu" doesn't make sense as a Japanese name. The r/l phoneme can be transliterated as r or l but not both...
But hey, I had a good time hanging out, talking about the movie and Moby Dick and CS stuff. I got to natter on again about the infodumps and science-fiction nature in Moby Dick, and realized that my liking non-fiction might be why I often like fake non-fiction.