Originally Posted by Saquist
Even when your task is impossible it doesn't discourage the villian.
Ultimately how a villian handles himself against the Hero is the ultimate critera
Consider this aswell.
Nero destroyed the planet that would help Romulus 300 some odd years later by a supernova. 300 years from now what's to stop Romulus from being destroyed? The institute that would create that ship doesn't exist anymore.
His family will likely die again.
Instead of giving the vulcans the knowledge to do the job right he kills him and only chance to do the job right.
I don't deny it seems like his plan is self-defeating, but remember Vulcan or Spock in particular did not save Romulus, Spock was unable to stop the supanova before it destroyed Romulus. That's why Nero is so mad at Spock, he blames Spock for not doing enough, quick enough. I guess that's why he's less concerned with preventing the supanova than getting even with Spock by making him suffer the same way Nero did. Yes it's a lot more simple and less calculating, but just because Nero wasn't a genius doesn't mean he's a bad villain.
I had another thought (which may well spark another debate) what about the enemy within? Surely in this film the more threatening enemy to Kirk was his own waywardness? His rejection of responsibility and his rebellion against authority, be it his step dad or the police. That's why Pike confronts him in the bar and encourages him to put his amazing natural aptitude to good use, for a good cause; to make his father proud and so that his sacrifice was not in vein. Overcoming that side of himself was surely the bigger enemy, personally, for Kirk in this film. Was it not? I like that angle of the storyline...again going back to one of my favourite lines in the film: "I dare you to do better."