It's kind of funny that for all the secrecy, so many people here and on Trekmovie.com practically pieced together the plot from the trailers. Then there's the fact that apparently the villain's identity leaked out really early, and Cumberbatch's casting is the only thing that kept it from being suspected in any way - it leant his real identity some plausible deniability.
My disappointment in the spoilers isn't in the plot... it's in the total lack of surprise. For all of Abrams' intent on surprising us, I feel like I already saw the movie several months ago. I was hoping that the spoilers would indicate that all of the pieced together evidence was wrong, but it isn't. Abrams actually laid everything right out on the table early on.
I'm still going to see it though, probably several times in the theaters, and in all likelihood, I'm going to love it. I think I already do - because it's a pretty novel approach and I love seeing a different approach. IMO, this *is* how the same character would be written in this time and it fits Greg Cox's "Bond villain" approach to the character. The nature of warfare has changed.
Why did he specifically have to be Khan, though? Would the film have really been missing anything if he wasn't?
How do you all feel about the different personality and characterization portrayed by Cumberbatch, vs Montalban? That he seems like a different person?
It doesn't matter in the end, to me, I'm probably going to see the film five plus times in the theaters while it's out.