A complicated case of uncomplicated story

Rating: 4/10 (16 May 2013)

It is really a bit difficult for me to comment on this movie, because the people I joined in watching it all thought it was excellent. I did not, and I think I know the reason: I love "The Wrath of Khan". For a few hours after watching it, I was sort of preoccupied with the question if knowing the old movie(s) should somehow improve your experience of "Into Darkness". By now I am sure: It doesn't.
"Into Darkness" is a modern action movie with great fighting scenes, effects and a near to perfect acting performance by Benedict Cumberbatch. That proved to be enough to yield a great cinematic experience in the past, if well done, and it should be here. If you do not know Star Trek or what it stands (stood) for.
Things started to get out of hand once I noticed that the plot was some alternative timeline to the Khan-events. But they somehow managed to take out nearly all the aspect making "The Wrath of Khan" a great movie, in my opinion. "The Wrath of Khan" was sort of a chamber drama, mainly starring Kirk, getting older, and Khan, being riven by grief and his wrath. It was intense, Khan hating Kirk from all his heart, and Kirk using all his wits to defeat his foe. It had some clearly defined, evolving characters, but mainly focused on Kirk and his opponent. It had philosophy, and a (though maybe too obvious) meaning. All in all, it was Star Trek.
Now how about "Into Darkness"? If we just forget about Khan for a moment, every dialogue seemed to be devised to either a) have an action scene as a consequence or b) provide comic relief. There was, for example, no depth in Uhura and Spock discussing their relationship or Spock's thoughts about feeling. There could not have been any, because there was no time to elaborate and reflect. It was a fast roller-coaster trip on multiple routes. In other words: The golden thread, so obvious in "The Wrath of Khan", was either lacking or I simply missed it. (If it was just a simple "friendship is great", uh, well...).
Was the repetition of dialogues from "The Wrath of Khan" with different speakers something like a humorous reference to the past? It seems so, because I cannot derive any sensible meaning from, for example, exchanging Kirk and Spock and so on. Carol Marcus? She did not add anything of interest to the plot (just some boobs...). I would have expected a bit more from the woman supposed to be the mother of Kirks son.
As a side note, am I the only one thinking that it is odd that star fleet officers, even captains, sort of behave like schoolboys? I would have thought it would take more maturity to be in command of a spaceship...
In summary, I would have like this movie as an action movie. Maybe even loved it. Maybe I could have accepted it being named "Star Trek" if it had not referred to "The Wrath of Khan" and the other timeline in general too often. But as it is, I do not manage to like it. Sorry.