Harmy said:
I found STID waaaay more entertaining than ST2 - ST2 was a better written film in terms of internal logic of the plot, there's no denying that but I was pretty bored watching it and after all the hype of a lot of people saying it was the best ST film, I was quite disappointed.
I think, to me, the Abrams' ST films are so entertaining, because they have very well written dialog between the principle characters. This is also why my favorite old crew ST movie is ST4 - like Abrams, I'm just not a big ST fan and I like these films, because they are less Star Treky. This, I think is the principle problem why the opinions on the new ST films vary so much, the hard core ST fans are disappointed, because it's not really Star Trek, where as people like me are happy for the very same reason :)
I am bored to death by action movies which aren't character-driven. That's why I enjoy The Wrath of Khan more every time I watch it. I don't care about stuff blowing up if I don't give a damn about who's blowing stuff up and/or who's getting blown up. It's really that simple. Action should be used with restrain, otherwise it completely loses its impact. Without drama there's no story and without a story there's no movie, maybe a light show at best. ST2 is easily the most entertaining (and by far the best) Star Trek movie to me.
The funny thing is, ST2 was Star Trek made by (Nicholas Meyer) and for people who weren't fans of Star Trek. Hence the submarines in space angle and all that. It's the same idea as with ST 2009 and STID, except that I feel the audience isn't treated like drooling morons by The Wrath of Khan. As a member of said audience I appreciate not being treated like a drooling moron ;)
As far as directors go I find Abrams pretty unremarkable overall. The lens flares really are the most distinct feature of his movies up to this point and that's very telling.
You know, when he was announced as the director for Ep VII I thought the movie was in fairly good hands. After watching STID and thinking it over again, I'm no longer so sure for a lot of reasons. I also think that unless he evolves as a filmmaker he might become a (profitable) punchline very soon, but that's another discussion.
One question about STID that bugs me is this: how much control did Abrams have over the movie? Because if he didn't have any, not all hope is lost. For instance, the cop-out ending felt like it was tacked on because the real ending didn't go well with test audiences, and this would explain the weak set-up as well. At least that one. Then again, if that's how the movie was intended, Ep VII is likely going to suck pretty hard (which won't prevent it from being infinitely better than the PT, but, again, that's a different matter).
Ah, speculation.