1 Ooooh.  If I were his employer, I'd be taking a "dead peasant" life insurance policy out right about now.   He REALLY doesn't like Nimoy, does he?

2

I was interested right up until I read "time travel."  Larry Niven once said that to write time travel SF, you didn't need to be a good writer, you just needed a good history text.

In any SF story it's a lousy crutch, but in the Star Trek 'verse it's a pimped out electric wheelchair.

3 They're using time travel as an excuse for trashing canon. The universe has forked, and future movies will be on a separate branch, where events will take a new course.

4 Honestly, I don't think its a bad idea, at least in theory.  Star Trek has accumulated a *lot* of cruft over the decades.  Resetting to the early TOS era, and starting from there again?  Has more potential than trying to work through the post-Voyager post-Enterprise mess.

5 They didn't need to do the time travel wheeze to reboot the franchise.  BSG didn't use it and did just fine (at least until season 3 when it became obvious the writers had no idea where they wanted to go).  But even the initial time travel incident was tolerable.  It was the second time traveller that nearly sank the movie - the initial time travel incident having already forked the timeline it was completely unnecessary to play deus-ex-time-travel again.  Had events at the snowbound station played out without his assistance (the engineer having come up with the critical equation over the preceeding months of boredom instead of having it handed to him on a plate) then the movie and characters would have come across much more strongly.