If I were Kirk or Spock, I'd be awfully curious about a Romulan from the future going around destroying planets. And if you want to stick to your first person narrative the writers could have explored this when Kirk was interacting with Old Spock.
Is it absolutely necessary for the story? No, certainly not as necessary as I felt giving more depth to Nero was but I have always appreciated when writers add little details that enhance the story. All the writers needed to do is include one line in Pike's conversation with Kirk at the bar when he was discussing George about why the Enterprise was being built there.
I understand that not everything need be spelled out by the writers. Lots of forms of entertainment these days place the burden on the viewers to fill in the blanks and connect the dots. But those programs provide enough information to do so. A lot of the elements in XI require making broad leaps to come to these conclusions that the writers should have clarified some of them. Obviously, it is an issue or they wouldn't have to go to such lengths to clear them up in these Q&As.
Nero is not fine as he is. He is a cliched villian with hackneyed anemic motivations. I'm really not that hung up on the missing 25 years but moreso on how his backstory was handled and how the explanation for the events in 2387 amounted to nothing more than a sketch.
That didn't bother you, fine. But it did bother me and I consider it a significant weakness in the film. The scientific accuracy, the updating of designs, the reboot--none of these things bothered me the way they did others. My issues were with the fundamentals of good filmmaking.
now if I was Squiggy, I'd have done something with that post of yours...
