[ComicGuy89]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Locke

I guess the big difference is we had three seasons and a movie before we saw the grave cost it took to take down Kahn, it was also a continuation from a story in the show with considerably greater amount of establishment, therefore we had enough of Kirk's success to feel thrilled by Kirk's incredible failure. It was in senses a grandiose character arc.

Here we've only had one film, and one rescue at the start of Into Darkness, before PineKirk is getting everyone killed and getting himself smashed into the floor.

Being in such a condense space not only gave less time to show PineKirk succeed but magnified how regularly he failed.

Hmm that is a good point, a lot of Kirk's experience is implied because they don't have a TV show to build off. It's a minor problem with series that are restricted to movies, where character development is given only mere 2-4 hours rather than the 20-60+ a TV series gives. It's a shame that every Trek captain has had a series to build off except New Kirk.

I still don't agree with you but I believe it's due to the priorities we place and how we see things. I saw evidence of Kirk's genius in the 2009 movie and his great command then. I assumed his continued adventures on the Enterprise before Into Darkness were equally well-commanded. I'm willing to accept the movie telling me that Kirk is a great captain by implying it, but I can see now how someone might look at it different. STILL disagree, but well, to each his own.