Back to the marketing!!!
I'll be the first to admit SRs marketing campaign was not the best, but you also remember most complaints originally came from Bryan Singer, who was also the producer - as in responsible for the marketing too!!!
That film failed due to the film itself. The marketing was aimed at nostalgia - promising a Superman we all knew. The General Audience were much smarter than most fans - they saw the truth - SR had nothing new to offer.
With MOS, every trailer, poster and picture promise something different - the exact opposite approach to SR.
By this point in 2006, we had 1 teaser (full of scenes not even in the final film!) and a poster of Superman over Earth. Where was the new stuff? MOS isn't even in the same catergory.
And if you're talking about the big marketing of STID, REALLY look at it and think of Abrams track record. We're being teased of a classic villain, action and a true classic. The marketing is also trying REALLY hard to admit its a Star Trek film. Where are the ideas? The subtext? Even Wrath of Khan had that, the idea of growing old. Even Nemesis, the WORST ST film, looked at the end of a Generation. Then look at Cloverfield, Alias, Lost, Super 8, Nero in ST. There is next to no chance of STID living up to the hype, which may work against it.
IM3 looks great, and I have more faith in Shane Black than Favreau, but IM2 looked amazing too, remember?
Point is, hope for the best. MOS marketing has got us all talking. It's done it's job, perfectly.