DVD Talk
Decline of the Star Trek Movies: I think I know why.... (Spoilers!!!) [Archive] - DVD Talk Forum

PDA

View Full Version : Decline of the Star Trek Movies: I think I know why.... (Spoilers!!!)


needamazing
09-30-04, 04:06 PM
Spoilers ahead!!!

Ok, I enjoy Star Trek. I've always been a lover of Sci-Fi and Fantasy so Star Trek was one of my favorite franchises. But the last few movies have not faired well and I doubt we see another one in quite some time.

Why did this happen? What is the cause? Well, I don't know for sure but I have an idea. See what you think.

It is all about Major Events in the Star Trek Universe. Events that not only affect the movie they are in but also affect the Star Trek Universe as a whole. The good movies (most of them) had the Major Events. The bad ones did not. And when you have a couple of movies without the Major Events in a row, the series in general is hurt.

Here is what I mean.

Star Trek I: The Motion Picture - Event: The new Enterprise (sort of)
This movie is not regarded as one of the best and one of the reasons is not much happened. A new Enterprise is something of a Major Event but not really. What saved this movie is that is was the first one. (Of course I thought Voyager becoming aware and returning was cool)

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan - Event: The Death of Spock

This movie is regarded as the best Star Trek movie featturing the original cast and look at why. Spock dies!!! A huge event in the Star Trek universe. Of course the plot was awesome too and all the action was included but the fact that Spock died in the best movie is not a coincidence

Star Trek III: The Search of Spock - Event: Destruction of Enterprise and Spock reborn (sort of)

This movie is really the only true sequel of the series. It continues the story of Star Trek II so its success is tied to the success of the that movie. Of course, Spock being reborn somewhat dampens the effect of Star Trek II but that movie was so well received it did not matter. The other event, the destruction of the enterprise, is enough to leave a mark on the Star Trek Universe and enough for this movie to be remembered fondly.

Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home - Event: Star Trek visits Earth now (sort of)

This movie was well received and thought of fondly by most fans. It is the one movie that goes a little against my theory because nothing really big happens. I guess visiting Earth of today is something and helped the movie.

Star Trek V: The Final Frontier - Event: Nothing

Here is where my theory really starts to show. This movie is not one of the favorites and is regarded as not that well done. Why?? well besides some poor acting, directing and production value, NOTHING HAPPENS that is major. The Star Trek universe is not affected by the story and you don't remember anything that enlightens you about the universe. This is the beginning of the first decline.

Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country - Event: Nothing

Again in this movie nothing big really happened. No one died. Nothing got invented or destroyed. It felt like a long episode although it was well done. But, since nothing really happened the movie is not remembered for anything extraordinary and thus is not looked upon as one of the best. The decline continues

Star Trek VII: Generations - Event: Death of Kirk, passing the torch to the TNG cast and an Enterprise is christened and destroyed

This one had major events. We learn how Kirk actually died (which is huge), the torch is passed to the new cast and a new Enterprise is not only christened on its maiden voyage but it is also destroyed. I really enjoyed this movie and those are the reasons why. Some don't regard it as one of the best but I disagree. Whatever you think about it, you still have to agree that is was the start of a short-lived revival in the excellence of Star Trek movies. It was great enough to start the incline.

Star Trek VIII: First Contact - Event: Invention of Warp Speed Travel and the human race's first contact with aliens

This movie is awesome!! Besides the Borg it also had the key major events listed above. The movie told a very realistic story of how warp speed was invented and how humans contacted aliens for the first time. Both things that we always wondered about and now we know. That was huge. I remember watching the movie and thinking "This is a good movie, the Borg are cool, the action is great, the Borg queen was a nice touch" but then when first contact was made at the end I thought "Wow, this is the best Star Trek movie ever. They really told us some things about the Star Trek universe that were interesting and things we always wanted to know. This is the height of the second revival.

Star Trek IX: Insurrection - Event: Nothing

This movie was the beginning of the final decline. Nothing major happens. It feels like a long episode. Some of the plot devices were cool but it doesn't matter. We didn't learn anything more about the Star Trek universe. You would have thought they would have learned that from First Contact.

Star Trek X: Nemesis - Event: Nothing

Two in a row with nothing happening. Killed the franchise. Again in this movie no one died, nothing was invented, etc. We didn't learn anything more that sparked our imagination about the universe and made us want more. We learned a little about the Picard character but not enough. So much potential has been lost.

Final Thoughts: They could have gone so many ways after First Contact. Set a movie on an alien world where we learn A LOT about one of the races like the Klingons or the Romulans etc. etc. Kill one of the major characters off in a dramatic and universe-affecting way. Give us more information about the structure or hierarchy of the Society. What are the closest systems to earth? How is the leader of the Free Universe chosen, etc. etc. They could have come up with something huge like they did with the first contact or invention of warp travel. Maybe how the transporters were invented or maybe a movie that really delved into and gave some unknown details about the technologies of the time. Phase guns, transporters, etc.

Well that is what I think. I am sure many of you will disagree with me especially on which movies were liked and which weren't. It was not my desire to upset anyone. I just know that this is the reason why I lost interest.

Let me know what you think

Rypro 525
09-30-04, 04:08 PM
i thought data dies in nemisis.

needamazing
09-30-04, 04:26 PM
You may be right about Data dying. What I would say about that is that Data is an android so you are never quite sure if he will come back or not. What I mean is the FINALITY of his death is not certain.

Very good point though. Maybe not enough to save the franchise from the decline though

RocShemp
09-30-04, 04:34 PM
And Klingons first begin to have favourable dealings with the Federation in The Undiscovered Country. That was big since it addressed what initially shocked Star Trek fans when the Next Generation first aired: a Klingon in a Federation starship.

calhoun07
09-30-04, 04:43 PM
The treaty between the Klingons and the Federation resulted from the events in Undiscovered Country. I think that was a pivitol moment in the Star Trek universe, and made TNG what it was, as well as Deep Space Nine, which dealt far more with the Khitomer Treaty (don't blast me for my spelling, I know it's not right). And Star Trek 6 is arguably perhaps the best original cast movie.

And Nemesis, in spite having a major event in Data sacrificing himself, really gained no ground because of B4 and also it really felt like it was trying to be Star Trek 2 all over again.

Also, Generations is arguably one of the weaker of the franchise.

needamazing
09-30-04, 04:57 PM
The treaty between the Klingons and the Federation resulted from the events in Undiscovered Country. I think that was a pivitol moment in the Star Trek universe, and made TNG what it was, as well as Deep Space Nine, which dealt far more with the Khitomer Treaty (don't blast me for my spelling, I know it's not right). And Star Trek 6 is arguably perhaps the best original cast movie.

You're right!! That is exactly the kind of event I was alluding to. I knew something like that happened in VI but I couldn't quite remember. The treaty between the Federation and the Klingons was huge because the Klingons were one of the original main foes of Star Trek: OS.

I'll have to give more kudos to Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country from now on. So really Star Trek V: The Final Frontier was the only downturn with the original cast and the second revival of the movies began with VI and continued in VII with the peak in VIII.

See, if they would have included more events like this in the final two movies we may still be anticipating another one.

needamazing
09-30-04, 05:06 PM
Also, Generations is arguably one of the weaker of the franchise.

That has always surprised me. I know there were some problems with the plot and you had to suspend disbelief a lot but I really enjoyed that movie!!! I thought it had a very epic feel to it due to the jump of 70 years in time, the destruction of a star system and the meeting of Kirk and Picard. Just my opinon.

I understand why it is not well regarded I just don't personally feel the same.

Green Jello
09-30-04, 06:15 PM
Personally, I think the films are declining simply because there have been 10 of them now and they are running out of good ideas.

Joe Molotov
09-30-04, 06:54 PM
I think the problem was that with the original Star Trek, it had already been off the air for a long time, so the creators were willing to take some chances with those characters. If you listen to the commentaries or watch the documentaries on the first discs, back then they were taking it like each movie would probably be the last one.

But then TNG comes along, and the series has just ended so it's still pretty fresh on everyone's minds. Plus, based on the original Star Trek's run, they know they probably know they can milk TNG for several movies at least. So they take less chances with the characters. They don't want to mess anything up make any big changes. According to IMDb, they were going to destroy the Defiant in the battle with the Borg in First Contact, but they decided not to even do that since they might need it for Deep Space Nine. If they had done more with the TNG movies, instead of just designing them like extened episodes, I think the TNG movies would have been better.

DonnachaOne
09-30-04, 07:07 PM
STAR TREK: THE OVERSTRETCHING SEQUEL

Starring: THE SAME OLD, OLD CAST, only older and fatter (even Androids)

CAPTAIN: Engage! Warp speed!

(Fill in the blank) EVIL ______S: Haha! Puny humans! We will destroy you!

TROI: I sense... (states obvious)

WORF: (Something harsh and hostile)!

RIKER: The ______s are attacking!

(Big CG blast on surface of CG ship, clealy audible in the vacuum of space)

(Sparks fly inside Bridge, peopel shake about, yet curiously stay where they are and nothing is dislodged)

RANDOM ENSIGN: We've lost power to the nucleositronic encanabulatomatic! AAAAGH! (dies)

GUY WITH VISOR ON EYES: Shields are down 20%!

CAPTAIN: I have an utterly silly way of resolving this situation. It will sound plausible because I'm an exceptional actor.

SEEMINGLY INEXPENDABLE MEMBER OF CAST WHO WANTED MORE MONEY: Well, I'm dead.


THE END

Jason
09-30-04, 07:27 PM
The reason that Star Trek movies have gone downhill can be summed up in two words:

Berman and Braga

These guys simply don't know how to produce a movie. While First Contact was good, it could have easily been a season cliffhanger from TNG. In fact, it's not as good as the season cliffhanger "Best of Both Worlds". Insurrection was a dull TV story arc compressed into 2 hours, and Nemesis was just pointless. We finally get to see the Romulan Senate, and there's only about 20 people there? WTF? Nemesis was more like one of those cookie-cutter Star Trek 'novels' which have been polluting book shelves for the last few decades.

Television and Star Trek on TV has a completely different set of dynamics than a motion picture. Once B&B recognize this, or even better, if someone gets control of the franchise, things may turn around.

das Monkey
09-30-04, 07:28 PM
DonnachaOne

CAPTAIN: I have an utterly silly way of resolving this situation. It will sound plausible because I'm an exceptional actor.
OK, that part's funny. :lol:

das

QuiGonJosh
09-30-04, 07:39 PM
Heres how I look at it:

Original Crew = Awesome

TNG and Everything Else = Crap

Dr. DVD
09-30-04, 07:45 PM
I agree with your analysis, except for what you said about Undiscovered Country and Nemesis.

IMO, I think they SHOULD have ended the Trek movies with First Contact. Think about it. Warp drive is invented, first contact is made with the vulcans no less, and everything that is essentially Star Trek begins. In short, it is with that movie that everything comes full circle. Insurrection did nothing, I agree with you there.

Nemesis has its problems, but I don't think it's all that bad. While you know they wanted things differently, they billed it as the last Trek for a while, and they shot the movie in such a style. IMO, it was a great ending note for the Trek movies. And in all honesty, I remember leaving the theater and thinking to myself as I left: "this will be the last time I see a Trek movie in the theater." Not because I didn't like it, but because I felt as though the movies had done all they could for me.
On another note, I think interest in the movies had waned since First Contact. The audience I had for Nemesis was on the Saturday after it opened and it was half full, and comprised mostly of guys by themselves! In short, only a few were holding on, and it seemed more or less because they had nothing better to do with their time that night. Go figure.

Giantrobo
09-30-04, 08:21 PM
I can see your points needamazing. Frankly the franchise needs a new direction. Something bold.....like a Borg Origin Prequel a la Episode I. Because at this point the Borg <i>are</i> pretty much the only interesting thing in the Star Trek Universe.

Supermallet
09-30-04, 08:52 PM
I disagree with your theory. Each individual movie didn't succeed or fail because of the major events, they succeeded or failed because of the strength of the writing and directing.

Star Trek: TMP wasn't so great because a) it basically recycled an old episode, and b) it tried way too hard to be 2001: A Space Odyssey. There was almost no interplay between the characters, most of what anyone said was exposition. The ending was silly and a lame attempt to once again imitate 2001. This movie really could have just been "generic crew goes out in space." There was nothing about it that made it Star Trek.

Star Trek II is the best because of Nicholas Meyers, plain and simple. The man knew how to write and direct well, and made the characters the paramount concern. And the action was pretty good, too. Of course, what II has going for it is the best villain in the series, and the Spock death is great not because it's a major event, but because Meyers has made us feel how important the characters are.

Star Trek III is good because Nimoy knows how to get the most out of the rest of the cast, it's a direct sequel to II, and again, it's all about the characters. The villain is less than interesting, unfortunately.

Star Trek IV is so great precisely because it breaks the mold of the series, and makes the whole thing a comedy. The writing is absolutely spot-on, as is the direction.

Star Trek V doesn't work because Shatner has no idea what he's doing as a director. The compositions are flat, the editing is flaccid, the story is abysmal. It's just stupid.

Star Trek VI is almost as good as II, and as good as IV, and again, it's because of Meyers. The detective sequence in the middle is superbly done, and finally there's another worthy villain, played wonderfully by Christopher Plummer.

Generations is a pretty bad movie, in my opinion. It felt completely inorganic, like the creators were trying so hard to squeeze everything that made TNG unique into it that they forgot to just have a good story. The Kirk storyline was also fairly tame. I didn't see the need to "pass the torch" since TNG was so successful on TV.

First Contact worked because again, we have good villains, and like Wrath of Khan, there's a history there to work on. It also helps that it's a balls to the wall action flick.

I actually like Insurrection. It's certainly better than Generations. A more subtle and subdued film than any other TNG film, but not an unworthy one.

Nemesis sucked because it felt like they were treading water. Forget whether or not a major event happens, does anything interesting happen at all? Nope.

das Monkey
09-30-04, 09:05 PM
While I'd defend <b>Generations</b>, placing it at the same level of <b>Insurrection</b>, I agree with the rest of it.

das

calhoun07
09-30-04, 10:25 PM
Wow. I really thought Insurrection was the worst of the series. I'd rather watch V over and over again than watch Insurrection again. I am a Star Trek whore, so I will undoubtedly buy the SE when it comes out, so if I am missing something with this movie, fill me in so I an appreciate it when I inevitably do watch it again.

Supermallet
09-30-04, 11:14 PM
Originally posted by das Monkey
While I'd defend <b>Generations</b>, placing it at the same level of <b>Insurrection</b>, I agree with the rest of it.

das

To be honest, I haven't seen Generations since it came out, but I remember disliking it.

Holly E. Ordway
10-01-04, 12:13 AM
I've always thought it ironic that while I think that Next Generation is superior to the Original Series as a television show, the Original Series feature films are far superior to the Next Generation ones.

My theory (which doesn't contradict the excellent points others have made already) is that with the OS movies, the filmmakers felt more able to take chances with the characters and situations, and *change* the status quo. There was already a ton of distance between the TV show and the films, in terms of time passing, and so we get some great stories with Kirk dealing with *not* being a captain any more, etc. Also, there really wasn't much character development in the OS, and what there was, was just in the "big 3" of Kirk, Spock, and McCoy, which I think made it easier to take the characters to film and develop them there.

OTOH, the strength of Next Generation is largely in its characters, who are a true ensemble cast and who change and grow over the course of the series (which of course ran a whole lot longer than the OS). I think that the filmmakers haven't figured out how to make films that make use of the character dynamic, and they're hesitant to really shake things up in terms of either plot or character. (Data in Nemesis is an exception, but somehow not a very satisfying one - probably because the film itself was such a blatant copy of Wrath of Khan, but not as good.)

I agree that Insurrection and First Contact felt like extended episodes. Fun, don't get me wrong, but lacking the feeling of really being a full film. Generations was actually better than I remembered it being - for one thing, it actually moves the characters of Data and Picard forward in a way that's consistent with the series background.

Supermallet
10-01-04, 12:29 AM
I guess I should see Generations again. Maybe if HBO showed it once or twice instead of First Contact over and over.

Fok
10-01-04, 12:57 AM
Good points about the movies, I agree with you.

DRG
10-01-04, 01:37 AM
IMO, the film series' popularity decline, focusing strictly on financial success and not quality issues, is largely due to oversaturation/burnout. At this point we're on the fifth series. There's been at least one Trek series on the air nonstop since 1987, and for periods there were two. (Not to mention all the other space sci-fi shows that have co mpeted for attention: Babylon 5, Farscape, Stargate, Firefly, Andromena, etc.)

According to epguides.com, there have been 80 episodes of the original series (counting the pilot), 178 episodes of TNG, 176 episodes of DSN, 172 episodes ofVoyager, and 76 (and counting) episodes of Enterprise. At some point, all but the biggest diehards will just stop caring. Throw in a drop in quality and you seal the deal.

Dr. DVD
10-01-04, 09:23 AM
I was shocked that Nemesis didn't open that well. Typically any Trek movie, even the ones that weren't that great, opened decent. That's why I explained its lackluster performance overall as waning interest.

jaeufraser
10-01-04, 11:33 PM
The problem with the Star Trek movies is that...well, they're just poor filmmaking these days. Badly written, lazy acting, uninteresting stories.

The event thing is a reason...granted even with an "event" they can still screw it up. Data died in the last film, but it's just so awfullly done I could've cared less. Generations is helped by a great crash, but the Kirk death is weak at best, and even though an "Event", does little to help the film. His mere occurance along side Picard though, does help the film.

So yeah, events are good. That just means there's a good storytelling arc. The reason why the movies are so bad is simply bad talent behind the franchise. The people who run Star Trek just make shitty movies and television, something that can be closely related to its parent company Paramount, who in general make a lot of shitty movies. Trust me, put some intelligent and good writers and directors in charge of this, and you could have a good Star Trek movie. But Paramount is too dumb to fix it, so I suppose we're screwed until they do.

tanman
10-02-04, 02:54 AM
Originally posted by needamazing
You may be right about Data dying. What I would say about that is that Data is an android so you are never quite sure if he will come back or not. What I mean is the FINALITY of his death is not certain.

Very good point though. Maybe not enough to save the franchise from the decline though

That was my biggest beef with nemesis. Either end it or don't, it makes his death totally meaningless. Whoever said that this was a great series ender must like endings that just fray the rope instead of tying of lose endings. It was the absolute worst last movie they could have thought of.

I really don't think that either TOS or TNG had a better run. For every Wrath of Khan and First Contact there was a Final Frontier and Nemesis. Both had some pretty high points and both had low points. In terms of just the cast I personally like TNG.

I don't think the decline has anything to do with major events. It all boils down to one thing. Poor writing. Rewatching TNG is like a breath of fresh air where virtually every episode has an interesting story behind it. Now (latter movies and series) the writing is much more formulatic. Instead of further defining and pushing the universe of star trek they are caught working within strict rules of the star trek formula.

nightmaster
10-02-04, 10:59 PM
I don't know why we ever needed to see how Kirk dies. The simple fact is, viewers showed up for the sake of nostalgia for the original cast movies but TNG was too fresh in the moviegoers' memory. There was a cancellation of the first series whereas TNG ended because the cast was ready to move on. Given several years between the TV screen and the cinema the interest may have been higher, as was the case with the original cast.

Supermallet
10-02-04, 11:01 PM
I think the success of TNG on TV was plenty of justification for the features appearing when they did.

das Monkey
10-02-04, 11:10 PM
tanman

That was my biggest beef with nemesis.
Just one of many for me. It's the only film in the franchise that I refuse to defend on any level. It represents everything wrong with the franchise and why it's dying a slow and embarrassing death. If you like formula action films, I can see how you'd enjoy it, but I still fail to see how any self-respecting Trek fan can even stomach it. I'll defend even the lamest aspects of the other 9 but not this trash. It's fitting that Paramount fucked with the DVD spine on this one, because it doesn't belong.

das

BizRodian
10-02-04, 11:12 PM
Nemisis was an episode of Voyager, with a couple of better actors...

Supermallet
10-02-04, 11:17 PM
I'll defend any TNG film, just because Patrick Stewart is that good. But other than that, I agree with das.

al_bundy
10-03-04, 09:55 AM
TOS movies were made before the internet and the chance that it offered crazed fans to instantly dissect a movie for "canon" violations even before it is released.

TNG movies are dissected by fans and there are huge campaigns when there is supposed to be something in there that isn't canon or not liked by fans. Look at Enterprise, almost all the old fans are finding all kinds of little things wrong with it.

And with TNG movies they have B&B to make sure it drags on and on with no plot.

King Jaspo
10-03-04, 10:04 AM
I have always thought it was because the chemistry of the original cast overcame a weak script. Unless it was a really bad script.

I simply didn't care if the TNG cast lived or died. Could be the most amazing script and I wouldn't have cared. The chemistry was never strong enough to boost the TNG movies.

Captain Harlock
10-03-04, 08:49 PM
I think the whole Star Trek universe (for want of a better term) has been on the downward slide the last few years. Not just the films. Voyager was okay, nothing really great. Enterprise, it was good for a while, but it didnt' hold my interest. I haven't kept up with it so I don't know what's been going on or if it has gotten better as of late mind you.

They need to come up with something "different" in terms of Star Trek. DS9 was good because it was different. They never showed what exactly went on day to day on a space station before.

I don't know what it's going to take to rejuvinate the ST universe but they better come up with it and fast!

El-Kabong
10-04-04, 02:46 AM
One of the reasons that The Old School trek works while Next Gen doesnt is because there's a story there - that the movies feel like a part of a bigger whole (the first one aside). Lets break it down -

- Spock dies
- Kirk's son dies and the enteprise is destroyed and the crew are now outlaws.
- We get Spock back, but now we have to get in good with the Federation by saving the earth.
- Kirk comes to terms with the death of his boy and and comes to terms with his long term enemy.

Even the reasonably self contained ST V built on what had come before. Sure it was the low point, but it was still a character driven story that had something to say (In fact the characters are the main thing that makes the movie watchable).

Now look at the lack of story arc for the Next Generation. The movies could mix and match each other without too much difficulty. Theres no sense of "bigger picture" with this run.

Supermallet
10-04-04, 02:52 AM
Really, that theory is only true for II, III, and IV. VI mentions the death of Kirk's son, but the events of III don't really play any vital role in VI.

Dr. DVD
10-04-04, 09:30 AM
Originally posted by Suprmallet
Really, that theory is only true for II, III, and IV. VI mentions the death of Kirk's son, but the events of III don't really play any vital role in VI.


I disagree. The events of III pretty much explain the whole reason Kirk has it out for the Klingons and vice-verca for the rest of the OS movies. After III, there was a motif in every movie of Kirk vs. Klingons that culminated in VI, where it seemed like the Klingons finally had him where they wanted him.

Supermallet
10-04-04, 02:41 PM
After III there's a motif of Kirk vs. Klingons?

IV: They use a Klingon Bird of Prey. The only Klingons that appear in the film are in the court, trying to indict Kirk for his actions in III. Not much Kirk vs. Klingon there.

V: The only Klingon in this movie is the ambassador for the planet of galactic peace. Kirk harbors no ill will towards him.

VI: Kirk's son's death is mentioned twice. Once in his ship's log, and once at the trial. He also says he has many other reasons to distrust them.

VI is the most closely connected to the events of III, but it's still not tied intimately to it.

das Monkey
10-04-04, 02:58 PM
Suprmallet

V: The only Klingon in this movie is the ambassador for the planet of galactic peace. Kirk harbors no ill will towards him.
:hscratch:

das

Dr. DVD
10-04-04, 03:01 PM
Originally posted by Suprmallet
After III there's a motif of Kirk vs. Klingons?

IV: They use a Klingon Bird of Prey. The only Klingons that appear in the film are in the court, trying to indict Kirk for his actions in III. Not much Kirk vs. Klingon there.

V: The only Klingon in this movie is the ambassador for the planet of galactic peace. Kirk harbors no ill will towards him.

VI: Kirk's son's death is mentioned twice. Once in his ship's log, and once at the trial. He also says he has many other reasons to distrust them.

VI is the most closely connected to the events of III, but it's still not tied intimately to it.

A motif is a recurring theme, it doesn't have to be the focal point. IV establishes that the Klingon empire has it out for Kirk, despite what he might do to save the earth (the Klingons are not a part of the Federation at this point.
V- uh....did you even pay attention to V? There is a whole subplot about a Bird of Prey trying to track down the Enterprise while they voyage to "eden." The captain of the Klingon vessel even remarks that there is a bounty out on Kirk in the empire and this makes him bound and determined to take it out. Finally, when the Bird of Prey rescues Kirk at the end, he looks at it and says "So it's me you want you Klingon bastards." He seems to harbor some ill will

VI- What Kirk did in III is more or less the reason the whole assasination plot was able to be carried out with such ease. The general dislike the Klingons already had for Kirk made it all the easier for the people to pin the deaths on him. Also, when the trial begins, the Klingons are screaming Kirk's name; that seems to indicate they have it out for him.

Supermallet
10-04-04, 06:04 PM
Alright, I concede. And I totally forgot about the Klingons in V. :lol: Shows how much I've tried to push it out of my mind. ;)

Rivero
10-04-04, 06:21 PM
Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country: "I've never trusted a Klingon...and I never will. I could never forgive them.....for the death of my boy."

mthiel
10-04-04, 06:30 PM
I've always thought the first half of Nemesis was pretty good, but the second half is dumb.
Mostly because I thought Lore had returned.

riley_dude
10-04-04, 08:10 PM
I simply didn't care if the TNG cast lived or died. Could be the most amazing script and I wouldn't have cared. The chemistry was never strong enough to boost the TNG movies

TNG movies never had the crew working as a unit like the Original crew did. They never gave anyone but Data and Picard anything meaningful to do, so, they didnt have any real chance for chemisty because the rest of the crew was barely featured.

The first thing wrong with TNG movie was first the writing and second they made them the Picard and Data movies which was a mistake.

Dr. DVD
10-04-04, 08:23 PM
Originally posted by Suprmallet
Alright, I concede. And I totally forgot about the Klingons in V. :lol: Shows how much I've tried to push it out of my mind. ;)


Wow, a mature poster who actually respects another's arguments. That's really rare around these parts. :)

young
10-04-04, 08:25 PM
Originally posted by DonnachaOne
STAR TREK: THE OVERSTRETCHING SEQUEL

Starring: THE SAME OLD, OLD CAST, only older and fatter (even Androids)

CAPTAIN: Engage! Warp speed!

(Fill in the blank) EVIL ______S: Haha! Puny humans! We will destroy you!

TROI: I sense... (states obvious)

WORF: (Something harsh and hostile)!

RIKER: The ______s are attacking!

(Big CG blast on surface of CG ship, clealy audible in the vacuum of space)

(Sparks fly inside Bridge, peopel shake about, yet curiously stay where they are and nothing is dislodged)

RANDOM ENSIGN: We've lost power to the nucleositronic encanabulatomatic! AAAAGH! (dies)

GUY WITH VISOR ON EYES: Shields are down 20%!

CAPTAIN: I have an utterly silly way of resolving this situation. It will sound plausible because I'm an exceptional actor.

SEEMINGLY INEXPENDABLE MEMBER OF CAST WHO WANTED MORE MONEY: Well, I'm dead.


THE END

this is basically accurate... i'm getting tired of the same devices. i add the following:

1. beam me up device now can make anything anywhere...
2. shields... always going down... must get backup battery.
3. funny headed aliens.

al_bundy
10-04-04, 11:27 PM
Originally posted by riley_dude
TNG movies never had the crew working as a unit like the Original crew did. They never gave anyone but Data and Picard anything meaningful to do, so, they didnt have any real chance for chemisty because the rest of the crew was barely featured.

The first thing wrong with TNG movie was first the writing and second they made them the Picard and Data movies which was a mistake.

i think the biggest mistake with TNG was they made it too military or too official. No one really interacted off duty in any way except a few poker games. no one was friends with one.

picard was too unrealistic by being single on a ship full of families. and everyone else's idea of fun was doing some stupid scientific experiment or something else tied to their job. there was the holosuite but it was never realized to it's full potential in bringing people together.

In TNG kirk, bones and spock were friends who observed each other's birthday's, they went camping together, and their idea of a vacation was relaxation. not archeology like picard. B&B had this stupd idea that everyone in the future is always in some search of bettering themselves and they never relax not doing anything but relaxing.

you had a few that did it like dax and others on DS9, but in TNG everyone was always on some stupid quest to better themselves all the time.

Supermallet
10-05-04, 12:32 AM
Originally posted by Dr. DVD
Wow, a mature poster who actually respects another's arguments. That's really rare around these parts. :)

http://horrortalk.com/smilies/bow.gif

Yes, I know when I'm bested and can bow out gracefully. :)

darkside
10-05-04, 12:40 AM
Star Trek VIII: First Contact has always been my favorite film. Maybe even more than Wrath of Khan. I can't wait for that to come out as a SE. I though Nemesis was decent, but only because Data's death at the end saved the second half for me. However, Insurrection was such a terrible film I think it had already driven the final nail in the coffin for the franchise single handed. Granted Nemesis did nothing to help either not to mention the TV series had all gone on for so long by now that interest in the series for anyone but diehards was probably dead.

BTW, I really enjoyed all the even numbered films (even 6 and 10) and felt the odd numbered were by far the weakest of the series. I'm sure I'm giving Nemesis too much credit though. I think my expectations were so low after Insurrection that nothing bothered me anymore.

riley_dude
10-05-04, 01:39 PM
Insurrection was such a terrible film

I remember reading that originally they had planned a darker film reminiscent of "Apocolypse Now" but Stewart wanted a lighter film and that's what we got.
This is what happens when actors get too much control. Stewart with Insurrection. Spiner with Nemesis.

jaeufraser
10-05-04, 05:56 PM
Originally posted by riley_dude
I remember reading that originally they had planned a darker film reminiscent of "Apocolypse Now" but Stewart wanted a lighter film and that's what we got.
This is what happens when actors get too much control. Stewart with Insurrection. Spiner with Nemesis.

I don't think either of those stars having their control (and executive producer status) were good for the movies. They got that type of power after First Contact really, and it's obvious what it did. Hell, the same thing happened with the Alien franchise when Sigourney got a ton of power after Aliens.

Not that B&B were helping anymore.

Supermallet
10-05-04, 05:58 PM
Odd that no one mentions that Jonathan Frakes directed First Contact and Insurrection, what about the power he had?

And the original cast got a lot of power after the first film. Nimoy would only do II if Spock died, he would only do III if he could direct, he co-wrote the story on VI. Shatner would only do V if he wrote and directed.

NotoriousDRE
10-06-04, 07:21 PM
I remember first hearing about the Romulans being the featured villians for Nemesis and i thought that this was going to be a sci-fi/action/war flick....with the Klingons in the OS being the main villians,we never got a chance to get the full affect of the Romulans. We knew they were badass from a few episodes,but we were never shown they're full potential. We know they were basically evil Vulcans...intelligent,but yet...Bad!

Granted, the Borg took over that badass status, I felt Nemesis couldve gone deeper into the Romulan's relationship with Humans,Vulcans,and Klingons.Have the Romulans take advantage of the Starfleet/Borg war in First Contact,they sat all these years waiting for the perfect moment to strike...here's their chance. Starfleet being crippled and now re-building the fleet,have the Romulans best vs. Picard,in an all out war using strategy to win, fleet vs. fleet (where is that famous "Picard Maneuver" when you need it?)

IMO, Nemesis couldve been so much better this way

al_bundy
10-06-04, 07:26 PM
Originally posted by riley_dude
I remember reading that originally they had planned a darker film reminiscent of "Apocolypse Now" but Stewart wanted a lighter film and that's what we got.
This is what happens when actors get too much control. Stewart with Insurrection. Spiner with Nemesis.

i was in the army when it came out. i was expecting a major rebellion by picard against the federation for some transgression or other. what i got was some stupid stunt he pulled that maybe .001% of the people in the federation will ever care about. and the only thing riker did was command the enterprise while it got shot up with barely a shot fired back.

Rivero
10-06-04, 08:12 PM
Originally posted by needamazing

Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country - [B]Event: Nothing

Again in this movie nothing big really happened. No one died. Nothing got invented or destroyed. It felt like a long episode although it was well done. But, since nothing really happened the movie is not remembered for anything extraordinary and thus is not looked upon as one of the best. The decline continues

Have to disagree big-time here. Nothing happened?? The legendary Star Trek crew was decommisioned for Chrissakes! This was the beginning of peace with Klingons. I'd say The Undiscovered Country is very fondly remembered by fans, even moreso now than just a decade ago when it was released. A fitting close to that Star Trek chapter.

tanman
10-07-04, 04:42 AM
Originally posted by NotoriousDRE
I remember first hearing about the Romulans being the featured villians for Nemesis and i thought that this was going to be a sci-fi/action/war flick....with the Klingons in the OS being the main villians,we never got a chance to get the full affect of the Romulans. We knew they were badass from a few episodes,but we were never shown they're full potential. We know they were basically evil Vulcans...intelligent,but yet...Bad!

Granted, the Borg took over that badass status, I felt Nemesis couldve gone deeper into the Romulan's relationship with Humans,Vulcans,and Klingons.Have the Romulans take advantage of the Starfleet/Borg war in First Contact,they sat all these years waiting for the perfect moment to strike...here's their chance. Starfleet being crippled and now re-building the fleet,have the Romulans best vs. Picard,in an all out war using strategy to win, fleet vs. fleet (where is that famous "Picard Maneuver" when you need it?)

IMO, Nemesis couldve been so much better this way

Exactly, I was excited that it was going to be Romulan movie but then.....Remans. enough said.

RocShemp
10-07-04, 11:47 AM
Originally posted by riley_dude
I remember reading that originally they had planned a darker film reminiscent of "Apocolypse Now" but Stewart wanted a lighter film and that's what we got.

That's true. Stewart wanted a film reminicent of Star Trek IV and, rather than writing a whole new script or telling Stewart "maybe next time", a whole lot of goofy comedy was added ("in case of a water landing, I can double as a floatation device") and all drammatic moments were either trimmed (LaForge's eyesight, high ranking officials abusing their rank in the Federation for their own ends) or excised completely (Ruaffo's exile at an early age) to change the tone of the film to what Stewart wanted.

There was even to be an epic conflict that would have had characters from DS9 and Voyager cross over into this TNG film but it was never filmed.

EDIT: I'm not comparing Insurrection to STIV. I love the latter and hate the former. It's just that Stewart once stated that he wanted Insurrection to be TNG's Voyage Home type movie. Really stupid considering the subject matter of the film was about mass genocide approved by the Federation (well one high ranking meber of the Federation). I fail to see the comic potential in that.

Falc04
10-08-04, 03:28 PM
Originally posted by QuiGonJosh
Heres how I look at it:

Original Crew = Awesome

TNG and Everything Else = Crap


:thumbsup:

Superboy
10-08-04, 03:43 PM
The problems with the TNG movies is that they're simply not put together well.

Generations is the greatest offender here. From the uniforms to the sets to the characters, nothing really fits together very well. It's lacking a lot of internal consistency, and the plot feels simply like a 2-hour long Star Trek episode. There are a lot of neat character advances, but it's nothing we haven't seen before and better too (Data grappling with emotions, Picard's family life, etc).

First Contact is where they got a lot of things right. I don't mind the drunk genius storyline, it worked. If you wanted to see a genius strut his stuff it would have been a movie filled with stupid, boring treknobabble. The "cute" moments actually worked in this movie (blowing the hair on Data's arm, the pee joke, "engage", etc.). It also should have been the complete and total end of the Borg EVER.

Insurrection I won't even touch.

I didn't see Nemesis, because I still wanted to have some respect for Star Trek.

Furthermore, I never felt that the TNG cast lived up to the quality of characterization that the OS cast did. Picard and Data weren't great characters, and at least you could call several characters from TOS assholes. There was just something a little more interesting about swashbuckling Star Trek characters.

peon73
10-08-04, 07:24 PM
Originally posted by Rypro 525
i thought data dies in nemisis.

oh crap! spoiler tag that kind of stuff man!!! awww

das Monkey
10-08-04, 08:16 PM
peon73

oh crap! spoiler tag that kind of stuff man!!! awww
Is this a joke I'm not getting?

das


Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0