Finally, we get to the end, and the most egregious difference between the two. In TWOK we get a tense cat and mouse chase through the nebula, which is won, CRUCIALLY, by out-thinking your opponent. The whole "2d thinking" thing and what not. I admit it's probably not the most air-tight of plot points, but it perfectly demonstrates the difference between the two movies, because ID ends with a loud (visually and sonically) fist-fight that is won by the person who punches hardest. Yay I guess.

Anyway, Star Trek is definitely not all sunshine and rainbows but it is crucially several things that the new movies are not: It prioritizes communication and curiousity over violence and dominance. It is not trying to be cynical or "edgy" in an attempt to be mature. The struggle of people working together to overcome a problem and find a positive solution or compromise can and is every bit as exciting as a phaser battle. And finally, that it is fundamentally optimistic, not in a the sort of "magic technology makes everything awesome" way that the new series seems, but that humans can come together and make things better for each other, the no-win scenario does not exist (mostly) and that we have to work hard to make this come true, but it is do-able.

In the context of the series, sure, where you have an hour a week to wax philosophical.

The movies are far more uneven in that respect. They attempted it in The Motion Picture. Result: total snoozer.

Khan is an action/revenge flick.

Search For Spock is another action/revenge flick.

Voyage Home is far more in the original mold, humans trying to make peace with an unknown alien force. But it also wavers between comical and absurd... no character development to be found here.

The Final Frontier... I'm not even sure where to begin. It's terrible. :)

The Undiscovered Country is, to me, the best mix of the lot... a bit action, a bit politics, the origin story of the Federation and the Klingon peace, commentary on racism, etc...

But that's one film out of five.

So be fair: you're comparing two movies to an entire franchise and then complaining they aren't what you want them to be. If you more fairly compare them to just their film contemporaries, my opinion is that they stand up reasonably well.

That's not to say they aren't clearly designed for more mass-market appeal. The Undiscovered Country, for example, is pure fan service, whereas Star Trek or Into Darkness are clearly aimed at a broader audience. I just don't think they're significantly worse than their peers simply because they don't talk it out... ;)

Best of both worlds also showed Picard becoming the enemy, riker as captain having to try to stop the Borg at the cost of his friend, and some more good background on the Borg.

Plus the effects of that episode lasted into ds9 and first contact.

Structurally, yeah, obviously they're very different.

However, thematically, they share a lot of similarities.

In The Drumhead, Starfleet begins a witchhunt to track down a suspected spy they believe is working with the Romulans.

Into Darkness involves a group of people who attempt to manufacture a war with the Klingons, whom they perceive as a fundamental threat to the Federation.

Both examine racism, fear, and xenophobia in the context of the Star Trek universe, and the lengths people will go to if they feel they're morally justified based on those perceived fears.

Well, I can tell you're open minded and not too critical. I'm sure continuing this conversation will be incredibly productive and enlightening...

And at least a handful of good episodes exist. There are no such specimens among the (two) new movies.

So you're a "Trouble with Tribbles" kind of a guy/girl.

Nothing wrong with that at all, everyone has different tastes!

But we'll agree to disagree. While Khan is clearly an action film first, it's an exploration of Kirk as a character, which is interesting. And that ending...

Frankly, I'll put myself in the minority by stating that I personally think The Voyage Home was frickin' awful... really, a fish-out-of-water tale (well, mammal-out-of-water...) via time travel? sigh

But that's just my opinion. :)