What? You must not have been paying attention. Did you go for a toilet break at any time? Ducked out for extra popcorn?
It hasn't opened here.
Well it seems wrong to be telling you what happens when you could see it for yourself tomorrow, but as you have hinted that this won't be happening, and seeing as you asked...
Pike lays out the riot act for Kirk and details Kirk's screwups. It was a survey mission, not a rescue. He should never have sent his first officer into the volcano in the first place. He does what he likes and uses luck to justify his actions. He doesn't have an ounce of humility. One day he'll get himself and everyone under his command killed. He doesn't respect the chair because he's not ready for it. It's a pretty comprehensive bollocking. Kirk tries to argue that Pike hired him because he's a rule breaker and that he hasn't lost a single man. That point's quite important to Kirk, obviously his own personal measure of success, but Pike won't have a word of it and informs Kirk he's lost command of the Enterprise.
As the movie progresses, we see Kirk face every single one of these faults. His luck deserts him. His surrogate father is brutally killed and he can do nothing about it. He can match his opponent with neither brain nor brawn. He's not in control of anything. Things go from bad to worse. His crew argue his every decision to a standstill. He is forced to question his own inadequacies and realise that Command is no longer easy.
What does he learn? The fragility of life. That he bears the responsibility for every life under his command. At one stage. when the Enterprise is beaten and the enemy turns her guns on them for one final salvo, Kirk is forced to turn, look every member of his bridge crew in the eye and apologise, because his bravado and thirst for revenge has just gotten them all killed.
He learns that luck will not always be on his side. He learns that he doesn't have the knowledge or training to do his job and when others tell him he's wrong, he should listen. He learns that he is often driven by emotion, and that leads him to make bad, immoral decisions. He's forced to admit that he has no idea what he's doing. And in the end, he learns that he's not immortal and when the only thing he's got left to give is his life, he gives it. And right at the end, he also learns that he's afraid of death.
I'm not sure exactly how much more the movie could have torn down Kirk's ego in 132 minutes. From a character perspective at least, I thought it was a very powerful journey, powerfully acted. I'm not sure why some commentators are criticising the movie of being devoid of character focus. To me, the VFX were just surface decoration for those willing to look no further. This movie is ALL about the character journey, about the heart and soul of this franchise, about making the journey from cadet to captain, about not letting a thirst for vengeance turn you into your enemy. While I enjoyed ST2009, I never really embraced the new characters, especially Kirk, or thought it felt like "Trek". This movie completely turned that on its head for me.
This had all the character interaction and "feel" of Trek that I so missed in the first movie.
Sure it has its problems. Kirk's journey from captain, to academy, back up to first officer and back up to captain again is no less rapid and contrived than it was in the first movie, but this time every promotion comes with a hefty slice of humble pie. Kirk's childlike fantasies about the shiniest ship in the fleet and a five-year mission become very adult, messy realities.
The movie has leaps of logic and technical contrivances that move characters around the chess board quickly, but that makes the plot "dense" rather than scattershot. It's no worse than any other Trek outing in that respect. Leave it to the next technical manual to fanwank all that into some semblance of order. It is certainly aimed at the modern movie-goer, but more in the delivery of the visual quality that audiences expect and in the pace at which it asks you to switch gears rather than simple "dumbing down". What sort of anthropological assessment is justified in calling a whole generation "dumber" than the one that went before. Was there some genetic crisis that I missed?
Anyway, I think you should go along and give it a go. At least that way your opinion on what the movie does and doesn't deliver can be a fair and informed opinion, rather than wishful thinking.