You like the others have said a number of times that your enjoyment of films doesn't hinge on reality so it seems logical that when these things are pointed out you would either have little or nothing to say against the validity.
Yet this is never the case.
So far as long as I've been here my absolute prediction has been to point out and accepted an error in medium no matter if I enjoyed the film or disliked the film. My enjoyment is usually a combination of familiarity, writing skill, flare and an appreciation for the premise...for instance exploration vs. a medium on war and even then the criteria can get deeper with themes.
TWoK is a perfect example of a film I didn't like because the plot was WAY too simple...or so I thought when I was a kid. Since then people have explained the juxtaposed themes of life and death at play constantly in the film as well as the strategy that Meyers built into the story that are rather expressly revealed in the Teleplay that makes it clear that there was literally a POWER STRUGGLE between the two ship between main power and auxilary power and thus the reasons for how Meyrs designed the exchanges of fire all the way through the film. That's Fantastic stuff... I appreciate that. It makes the work mean more than just watching a laser fight between two slow moving ships.
Now when I realized TOO that they forgot that the Enterprise and Reliant chose to fight Billions of miles from Regula One and after their exchange neither had warp speed. Yet both made it back to the Planetoid. They don't mention times of course but it's an obvious miss.
Does that error reduce the theme?
Does Checkovs retcon reduce all work?
Does the visual errors and some of the scientific inaccuracies reduce that theme, the design of the writing and skill of the writing?
In my eyes it does. Minorly. Few if any films are perfect.
But the work still stands solidly on it's good points.