Here’s something I’ve always wondered about:
Would you really be shaken around when your ship is struck by a phaser blast, when the artificial gravity is relative to the ship itself?
The inertial dampeners, they canna take no more!
Funny, this was EXACTLY the stupidity that I was thinking of as what you should NOT do in three dimensions!!! :smack:
Kirk goes down, yes. Then he comes back “up” and, while on the same “level” as the other ship, blasts it from behind. Why? Why not just shoot up at it from below as it passes overhead?? Kirk’s own thinking is almost as two-dimensional as Khan’s. :smack:
Almost. 
Of course, the real reason is that the writers are hacks and/or the producers are idiots and/or the average viewer is a moron.
Similarly ships almost always face off with the same pitch and roll and never drift (unless all power is lost).
I assume it’s because they don’t want to confuse or disorient the viewer. Or it’s their own lack of imagination 
Similar the holodeck safeties are rather easy to disable. It’s also easy to re-route holodeck power, or whatever, so that it can’t simply be turned off.
If the ship shook, you’d notice. It’s inertia, not gravity.
But by that token, shouldn’t the crew be thrown backwards whenever the ship accelerates under impulse?
There’s some handwaving for that, but it’s an expected movement that can be compensated for.
That would be the inertial dampeners mentioned upthread.
It’s not that silly when the species that built the ships evolved under gravity and then fitted their ships with artificial gravity. Are they supposed to fasten chairs and consoles to the walls & ceilings and turn the gravity off?
I always thought the ships would just smash into each other until one lost their shields. The other one would just plow through until their shields fell, and be destroyed also. Isn’t this what happened to Kirk Sr. did in the latest movie?
Maybe the rear of the ship is the most vulnerable, and least well armed?
Besides; it was more dramatic that way IMHO; I give it a pass due to artistic license.
Any naval captain worth his salt knows that a good stern rake wreaks the most havoc on the enemy vessel.
I recall mumbling something about that the first time I saw TWOK.
They did rake a warp nacelle in addition to the bridge, but your link points out that a rake is more difficult to aim than a broadside.
“I spit my last breath at Thee!”
Man, that was a good movie, morons or not. 
Another stupidity. Why is the bridge of the Enterprise shown as being on the top deck of the saucer section, instead of buried safely much deeper in the ship? I mean, they’re not looking out actual windows, but at displays, so there’s no need to be that vulnerable.
I remember having a TOS tech manual that had the bridge facing about 30 degrees in one direction instead of pointing straigh forward. Anyone remember that? why would anyone do that on a ship?
They do have windows on top. But as I recall, the bridge was modular and designed to be capable of being swapped out. But yes; putting it far inside would be a much better design.
Seems to me that if ships can launch antimatter torpedoes at each other, by the time the shields are down it won’t matter if you’re a bulb on the surface or ensconced deep inside the ship - you’re dead.
Of course the ST writers don’t follow this consistently; we sometimes see chunks flying off ships with the rest mostly intact. The writers just seem to have a problem with the scale of space and the energies involved. As another example, the ramming in Nemesis was far too effective; the ships weren’t moving that fast and the hulls just buckled. You’d expect that substances that can take plasma torpedoes and laser beams would be more resilient.
IIRC, the photon torpedo tubes were mounted below the saucer dish, so that the saucer would block upwards fire.
The Enterprise-D did have a combat bridge buried deep inside the main hull, but was rarely used for some reason. I think the real life reason was to save money. They didn’t want to show the removal of the saucer section every time the Enterprise went to combat.