tanman

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

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

I think the success of TNG on TV was plenty of justification for the features appearing when they did.

das Monkey

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

Nemisis was an episode of Voyager, with a couple of better actors...

Supermallet

I'll defend any TNG film, just because Patrick Stewart is that good. But other than that, I agree with das.

al_bundy

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

das

Dr. DVD

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

Alright, I concede. And I totally forgot about the Klingons in V. Shows how much I've tried to push it out of my mind.

Rivero

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

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

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

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

young

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

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

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

darkside

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

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.