Originally Posted by Kaylore
And for those whining the movies are too action packed for what Star Trek was, guess what? Most of the movies had action, and all the cerebral movies that dealt with existentialism and morals were the worst.
I think you misunderstand my complaint. I'm not complaining about the amount of action in the film. Action sequences are often an important part of any drama. Its typically the tool used to achieve resolution in a conflict. But action was never the point, even in Wrath of Khan, which is arguably one of the more action packed of the first 10 movies. Wrath of Khan was all about facing your own mortality. Hell, it even gets pretty heavy handed with it (as I mentioned, the Treks weren't always deft with their themes) But it is pretty clearly a morality play in which Kirk finally learns that he can't cheat death.
You've mentioned it earlier in this very thread, J.J. Abrams is a great visual story-teller, but hasn't got the first clue how to construct a cohesive narrative that makes any sense. Every plot point in the film is a poorly conceived attempt to stage the next action sequence. I remember reading that when Naughty Dog was creating Uncharted 3, they created the big action set pieces first, and then tried to find a way to stitch them together into a single narrative. It really feels like that is Abrams approach to story-telling as well, and it just doesn't work for me.