New spin: JJ Abrams steals from fan. Refuses to give back!
As long as he puts as much effort into his future films as he has in the past, he can keep it.
One of the complaints I've never understood is the idea that J.J.
hates Star Trek. If anything, he grew to love Star Trek while making the first film. Hell, from my perspective, the first film was a serious love letter to the whole franchise, and it worked. All of the little touches, the dedication to making certain the characters looked right, and behaved similarly to their counterparts without copying them. The idea that he would hate the series doesn't hold any water at all, and I wish people would just admit they don't like the
films rather than trying to assassinate the character of the man who worked to get them onto the big screen.
I realize that there are some people who actually hate Abrams, they hate him for "taking away" their Star Trek, and that just boggles my mind.
Hence my previous signature: Don't be a fan. Don't be a victim!
That which boggles you, J.Allen, boggles myself (and likely many others) as well.
Fans like that tend to be "victims" of something that they have absolutely no control or ownership over. Why do they get this misguided and delusional notion that they somehow own a property (in this case, obviously Star Trek) they never created in the first place, ergo everything must fall in lock-step with
their idea of what that given property should be? And then, to justify their delusions, they put on airs that they are the
true fans, the paragons of purism, and the defenders of the
one true vision as they see it, and that anyone who does not strictly adhere to their views is not worthy of liking Star Trek or appreciating it. They put on further airs to try and proclaim themselves as smarter than everyone else, especially smarter than those who might like the less lofty ideals and stories of Trek.
Such folk need someone to blame when things don't go exactly their way: Who better to blame than the person who decided to take a bold and different direction that at the same time still pays loving tribute to that which came before, but somehow it just revulses them? Perhaps they would be wise to look at themselves for not being as open minded as the fictional heroes they worship.
Such folk are the first to forget the fictional principal they claim to uphold: IDIC.
I've always advocated that Star Trek means different things to different people. Some folk may embrace more than one aspect of Star Trek, while others may be slavishly constrained to only one. Star Trek has something for everyone: the science minded, the philosophers, the spiritual, the atheist, the dreamer, the adventurer, the people of action, the explorers, the mirthical, the logical, the black, the white, the red, the yellow, the men, the women, the kids, the straight, the gay, the list goes on....
Although I tend to lean toward the more action oriented eps and movies, I love all aspects of Star Trek. To deny, reject, or eschew an aspect of it is to do it a disservice.
Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations.
Live Long and Prosper.
Hmmmm.....what if the Vulcans embraced hard labor over logic?
Their salutation might be:
Work Hard And Perspire. (WHAP)
Or
Work Hard. Induce Perspiration. (WHIP)
The main game is always in getting new people to become invested in the franchise. Nobody cares much about the prime universe in terms of future projects, because at this point returning to that would feel like a step backwards from where we are today. We've got a nice sampling of Prime Universe Trek that we can watch any time we like. The aim of future Star Trek projects should always be with an eye towards doing new things like the brand, not returning to old tricks. And if that even means rebooting again, then so be it. 
