Hardcore Trekkies annoy me. I recently posted a comment on the trailer for the 2009 film on Youtube saying that I enjoyed the movie. Within minutes, I got a long, butthurt reply from some snot-nosed Trekkie calling me out for liking the movie, which he described as a travesty and basically called me an idiot for liking it.
He went on to ramble about the special effects, plot holes, lens flares, alternate time line, the USS Kelvin only having one warp nacelle, etc.
First, what was wrong with the special effects? I thought they were awesome?
Second, plot holes? Ya know, because we've never seen plot holes on a Star Trek film before have we?

:
Third, I agree that the lens flares were annoying.
Forth, who cares about the previous time line? The movie is a freaking reboot.
Fifth... Really? He's gonna gripe about the Kelvin, the ship that literally gets blown up five minutes into the movie, only having one warp nacelle? Out of curiosity, I went and looked up the whole nacelle issue and found out that a while back, Gene Roddenberry made up some rule that starships had to have an even number of warp nacelles to go into warp. I also found that the only reason he made this rule was to discredit the Tech Manual (which had various ship designs with single and multiple warp nacelles) because he had a falling out with the author. But whatever the case, the rule is apparently irrelevant. There were a couple times in TNG where a ship with only one nacelle appeared, thus making them canon.
Frankly I liked the design of the USS Kelvin. It was something unique and different from what we've seen in other Trek movies. In fact, I kinda wish they would have made the movie about those guys instead of trying to do a reboot. I'd kinda like to see a Star Trek movie with all new characters instead of just the guys from the TV shows.
Dang, now I sound like a Trekkie.