4. Star Trek Into Darkness
A controversial choice for some, but perhaps not so much for the very vocal minority. JJ Abrams sequel was far from a terrible film - it was entertaining and well-made for the most part, and it picked up a solid number of high ratings when it hit cinemas. But it wasn't so enjoyable for fans of the Original Series, and once you start picking at its glossy surface, it's all too easy to identify some pretty major problems.
Why So Ridiculous? I thoroughly enjoyed Star Trek Into Darkness - it was bold and entertaining, and featured some exceptional set-pieces: but I'm not stupid enough to ignore the fact that the film was extremely flawed. It was riddled with forehead-slapping plotholes, and it was one of the biggest betrayals of source material that's ever been committed to film. Yes, as a stand-alone Star Trek movie, it was good, but such was the casually destructive manner that JJ Abrams handled the source: reimagining characters, while simultaneously tying them to caricatures of the versions who came before them, and threatening to reboot, while never being able to resist the pull of the original timeline, that the film did little more than drag the Original Series through the mud. Fans of the Original Series have been rightly annoyed by the decision to retread familiar ground, particularly when Abrams clearly promised to reinvent entirely, and at the end of the day, almost all of the narrative decisions look like bloody-minded arrogance when placed into context. And the biggest joke of all? We were all told to resist the links to the Original Series. The marketing of the film, and indeed its predecessor, suggested that we should be embracing this Abrams-verse as a whole new universe, but then the film basically turned up dressed in a badly fitting Original Series costume, and proceeded to systematically pull to pieces the legacy of The Wrath Of Khan, like a petulant child. God help the internet when he does the same with Star Wars.