I am a huge Star Trek fan. Love all the incarnations of Star Trek, the animated series, the novels, vid games, et cetera. And absolutely loved the JJ Abrams first outing despite die hard ST fans telling me it was way off, and I felt their opinions to be very extreme. But this second outing was too much for me. First, it smacked of Lindelof's constant obsession with rewriting past cinematic glories but doing nothing more than putting a "spin" on things. The most clever aspect of this film is the way it inverts "Wrath of Khan" to help Kirk and Spock to develop in characters in albeit different ways than the first film. HOWEVER, if every time we get a new Star Trek film, I have to expect it to be an inversion of one of the previous "Star Trek" movies, then you can count me out. Why the hell do I want to watch "Wrath of Khan" part II? Khan was not the worst villain the crew ever faced -- Khan was just the most popular from a film franchise standpoint. I mean even after we find out Khan is Khan -- Khan doesn't do anything truly Khan like. It's like Lindelof expected that just by invoking Khan's name everyone should know what a big deal this fucker is. But what about non Star Trek fans? I saw this movie with people who had never seen Khan and asked me what the big deal was. Considering that this movie does little to show the type of terrifying figure Khan supposedly is, I can see why they were confused.
Moving past Khan - the film was replete with Abrams typical beats. The only thing worse than Abrams constant AE generated lens flares, is his overuse of crisis situations. Everything is a fucking crisis in this movie. Actually, it's worse than that -- it's CRISIS interrupted by untimely HUMOR succeeded by LOUD CRASH OR LASER BLAST to jerk you back into the original CRISIS, from which point the CRISIS then iterates to a NEW FUCKING CRISIS and then repeats the template. Some crises only last a few seconds, some last minutes. It just makes it complete overkill.
Now I love Leonard Nimoy as much as the next fan, but Abrams said we were only supposed to see Spock in the first one. The assumption being that at some point Spock is able to return to the original timeline. Then when the writers don't know what to throw at the audience next, they insert obligatory Leonard Nimoy moment. This means now Nimoy has to be in the third because he's no longer a catalyst in the franchise; he's now a staple of this alternate Star Trek universe (does he ever get back to the original universe? Or does this pretty much destroy the original fucking timeline for good and remember all those stories where we saw Spock later in life? Are all those moot now?) What the fuck? I have to take all of this shit in because Lindelof wants to get his nut off by recreating Wrath of Khan.
I know it's Lindelof. He's the only fucker arrogant enough and adept enough at convincing filmmakers they are making the right decisions even when they're not. He's the dumbass who said no the people in Lost are not in purgatory. Oh really? You think the average fucking guy on the street knows the difference between purgatory and the shit that happened to the characters in Lost? Good one motard. What about his rewriting Prometheus so that it's basically a rip off of Alien except undercooked and done with slightly different themes? This kook needs to stop plagiarizing Stephen King and needs to stop fucking rewriting every cinematic moment he loved as a kid. COME UP WITH SOMETHING NEW!!! GIVE US A NEW VILLAIN. THERE WERE OTHER VILLAINS DURING THE EUGENICS WARS.
JJ Abrams did a great job with the visuals as always, and the action was stellar. I still think Spock should have unleashed a FLURRY of pinches and pressure points (not just two major ones) on Khan but overall, I don't want to see Wrath of Khan again. Fuck I don't even want to see Khan again. Star Trek had amazing villains and characters they encountered. Bring those on. And get rid of Lindelof. Fucker had the balls to tell George Martin he was wrong about Lost. Loser.