View Single Post
Old August 4 2013, 03:53 AM   #34
SeerSGB's Avatar
Location: RIP Leonard Nimoy
Re: When did the perception of Insurrection change?

Dream wrote: View Post
sonak wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post

Which is the major flaw with this film. No one acts normally. The S'ona are secretive when they don't need to be and no one simply asks the Ba'ku if they're willing to move.

Insurrection is easily the poorest of the twelve Trek films.

yep, that's basically the problem. Insurrection is basically one giant idiot plot, meaning, a movie that falls apart completely if ANY of the major characters involved show a bit of common sense and don't act like idiots.

Why doesn't Ru'afo just tell Dougherty the truth? It would make the whole deception unnecessary. This is COMPLETELY unexplained.

Why doesn't Picard or Dougherty ask the Baku to relocate voluntarily?

again, the answer to both is "because the premise is poorly thought out."
I think if Insurrection had just been a bad TNG episode, it would have been more forgivable because it would have been over after 45 minutes. Instead the movie just kept going and going.
True. The movie is overly padded and not in the right spots. Did we need the Data going crazy subplot or the welcoming party scene? Why not combine the two: The S'ona are approaching the Federation with a miracle cure and Starfleet sends the Enterprise to check out the claims. Enterprise gets caught in the middle of a Civil War between the Baku and S'ona with Starfleet (Federation) wanting the cure at all costs. You can still have Doughtery, but as an Admiral that shows up after the S'ona roll out the big guns.
- SeerSGB -
SeerSGB is offline   Reply With Quote