Wolverine vs Star Trek

this last weekend, Victoria and I saw both X-Men Origins: Wolverine and Star Trek.  I gotta say that both movies were very good.  Its hard making a prequel.  How do you make these movies without violating the movies that are already been established?

Wolverine started down the tricky road of not ignoring the existing 3 movies.  They established Wolverine as a child, as well as Sabretooth.  Then they slowing introduced the supporting cast of Wraith, Bradley (Who I didn't know), Wilson (Deadpool), and Dukes (The Blob).  Then Silverfox and Striker.  They even had a surprise appearance of an important character.  

I thought Gambit was good, but he didn't have the black eyes.  Also, how do you explain that Gambit and Cyclops are at a wide different age?  Emma Frost really didn't have a major role.  

This movie was still very good, but it wasn't blockbuster blow me away.  but still good to see in the Theater.

Star Trek took it a completely different direction.  They created an alternate reality.  But right from the get-go, they explained what happened, and why it happened.  So in that they did not reject the many many years and episodes that made this franchise so great.  A simple Sulu doing fencing is a demonstration of not ignoring the established franchise.  

Star Trek is the blockbuster right now.  It has a great plot, a great story, and a pseudo-reboot with the skies the limit now for the franchise.  It is set up for a great run with a new cast.

So both were very good films. Star Trek is bigger.  And that franchise is in a better position than X-Men