RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,769
Posts: 5,434,132
Members: 24,840
Currently online: 607
Newest member: Reece101

TrekToday headlines

The Art of John Alvin Book Review
By: T'Bonz on Sep 23

Episode Four of The Red Shirt Diaries
By: T'Bonz on Sep 22

Star Trek: The Compendium Review
By: T'Bonz on Sep 22

Orci Drops Rangers Project
By: T'Bonz on Sep 22

Retro Review: Image in the Sand
By: Michelle on Sep 20

Star Trek: Shadows Of Tyranny Casting Call
By: T'Bonz on Sep 19

USS Vengeance And More Starship Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Sep 19

Trek 3 To Being Shooting Next Year
By: T'Bonz on Sep 19

Trek Messenger Bag
By: T'Bonz on Sep 18

Star Trek Live In Concert In Australia
By: T'Bonz on Sep 18


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek Movies > Star Trek Movies I-X

Star Trek Movies I-X Discuss the first ten big screen outings in this forum!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old April 16 2013, 03:54 PM   #136
CoveTom
Rear Admiral
 
Location: CoveTom
Re: Was moving 'The Next Generation' over to movies a bad decision?

^ A big screen adaptation of "Spock's Brain."
CoveTom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 16 2013, 05:53 PM   #137
Gaith
Rear Admiral
 
Gaith's Avatar
 
Location: Washington, DC
Re: Was moving 'The Next Generation' over to movies a bad decision?

CoveTom wrote: View Post
While I agree, the problem is that Patrick Stewart and Brent Spiner would have never agreed to the films being ensemble pieces like the series was. For that matter, neither would Paramount. By the time of the films, they were considered "the big stars" and, as such, they got the major plotlines and also a lot of input into the stories. Which hurt the stories, IMHO.

First Contact did the best job of the four films, IMHO, at utilizing the ensemble, but even that was a bit too much of the Picard and Data show for my tastes.
Yeah, FC starts strong, but the absurdly melodramtic Picard and Data and Evil Hottie third act just scuttles it for me. For moi, Generations remains the best.
Gaith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 16 2013, 07:01 PM   #138
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Was moving 'The Next Generation' over to movies a bad decision?

Gaith wrote: View Post
For moi, Generations remains the best.
It's sad to say, but I think Nemesis is aging the best out of the four TNG film outings. It definitely has a "big-screen" feel the other films lack.

Though Generations gets points for showing us the Enterprise-D on the big-screen.
__________________
"I tell you what you all need, you need to take a thirteenth step, down off your high horse." - Hank Hill, King of the Hill
BillJ is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 16 2013, 08:17 PM   #139
R. Star
Rear Admiral
 
R. Star's Avatar
 
Location: Shangri-La
Re: Was moving 'The Next Generation' over to movies a bad decision?

It wasn't a mistake to move the TNG franchise to the big screen, as TNG was fizzling out and I think it's good they ended on a high note. The mistake was not in deciding to put the franchise on the big screen, but in how they did it.

Generations just wasn't well thought out and the plot really made no sense. A climax of three old guys wrestling on a mountain top just falls flat too. Not to mention Kirk died like that? I can't blame Shatner at all for resurrecting Kirk in his novels.

First Contact... well it was the high water mark. Still a lot of plot holes and inconsistencies, but this was the franchises best attempt at pulling off an action flick. Though turning Picard into an action hero just isn't convincing.

Insurrection... another plot that makes no sense at all and just has the feel of a TNG episode... and not a very good one. But hey the Riker/Troi fans finally get something after over ten years.

Nemesis... and the final nail in the coffin. Wonderful close up shots that just show us how old our heroes(and the franchise) have gotten. Everyone in this movie is just dumb... or the plot makes no sense, take your pick. The graphics and effects were great, but even the Enterprise and Scimitar exchanging fire for... 30 minutes... gets dull.
__________________
"I was never a Star Trek fan." J.J. Abrams
R. Star is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 17 2013, 10:20 PM   #140
Third Nacelle
Captain
 
Third Nacelle's Avatar
 
Location: The Denorios Belt
Re: Was moving 'The Next Generation' over to movies a bad decision?

I liked Generations and First Contact, not so much Insurrection and Nemesis, but really pretty meh about all four of them. Generations seemed sort of weird and incomplete, but it was good seeing good old 1701-D one last time. First Contact was really entertaining, but that's about it. We've all read Moby Dick in tenth grade - we get it. The last two simply felt like they were making movies because they were obligated to make movies.

I've never felt like Star Trek translated well to the big screen. I like the TOS movies (well four of them) well enough, but they lost the campy fun and color of the series. The TNG movies lost the thoughtfulness. If I were to take every episode and movie of Star Trek ever made and list them in order of most to least favorite, I'd probably list about 300 TV episodes before hitting the first movie.
Third Nacelle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 18 2013, 01:25 PM   #141
Trek Survivor
Captain
 
Location: UK
Re: Was moving 'The Next Generation' over to movies a bad decision?

BillJ wrote: View Post
Gaith wrote: View Post
For moi, Generations remains the best.
It's sad to say, but I think Nemesis is aging the best out of the four TNG film outings. It definitely has a "big-screen" feel the other films lack.

Though Generations gets points for showing us the Enterprise-D on the big-screen.
I agree that "Nemesis" looks great.
__________________
Want an awesome read? Check out "Showdown: A Darker Evil Rising" on Amazon http://www.amazon.com/Showdown-Darke...er+evil+rising
Trek Survivor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 22 2013, 01:02 PM   #142
CommishSleer
Fleet Captain
 
CommishSleer's Avatar
 
Location: At the After Party Still...
View CommishSleer's Twitter Profile
Re: Was moving 'The Next Generation' over to movies a bad decision?

I don't think it was a mistake.
Imagine if it had been a success - they had to try.

I dislike Generations of course because they killed Kirk (lamely).

I thought INS to be cliche ridden with the kid and his pet thing. I can't remember. I mostly like Data but hate it when he goes OTT and thought him most unfunny.

There wasn't that much wrong with FC or NEM IMO. Maybe NEM had too much Romulan politics for the casual viewer but I was able to pick it up.

I think timing has a lot to do with it. If the movies came out now I think they would be better received.

And look at the Transformer and Avenger movies. They're pretty much rubbish, just with great special effects but are massive hits at the box office. Would anyone say either of these movies changed their lives? All of the Star Trek movies are better than these IMO even the worst ones.
CommishSleer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 22 2013, 11:30 PM   #143
Flake
Commodore
 
Location: Manchester, UK
Re: Was moving 'The Next Generation' over to movies a bad decision?

Well they had to give it a go because it made sense from a business POV. The salarys of the actors would go through the roof if they renegotiated another 5 or 6 year contract. TNG started with almost 30 million viewers and finished with over 30 million viewers, if they could get 35 million people into the cinema (or 17.5million people see it twice!) they would make nearly $150 million in 1994 money!

In the end 18 million tickets where sold for Generations and 21 million sold for First Contact. (Insurrection 15m, Nemesis.... 7m) so apart from Nemesis it worked out ok for Paramount.
Flake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 23 2013, 01:20 AM   #144
Danger Ace
Commander
 
Danger Ace's Avatar
 
Location: California
Re: Was moving 'The Next Generation' over to movies a bad decision?

Lance wrote:
Was moving 'The Next Generation' over to movies a bad decision?
No. Sadly, however, The Next Generation's elevation to the silver screen was, by and large, poorly executed. So, in principle, TNG's promotion was a sound next step, but, in practice, turned out to be more failure than success. C'est la vie.

Samething goes for Enterprise. The premise of a prequel and temporal cold-war in and of themselves weren't bad ways to go. The executions of those ideas, however were not good.

Ultimately the mishandling of The Next Gen's big screen adventures and Enterprise's small screen exploits proved detrimental to the franchise as a whole. I believe They failed because of "attitude." An attitude of laziness and self-conscious disbelief in what they were doing which led to a collapse in the internal structural integrity of what Star Trek is, was and should be - that's were it all went wrong (by my estimation).

Even after saying that though, If I were to go back in time and had the power ... would I greenlight TNG going big and the creation of Enterprise? Yes, I would - because in both cases they were sound moves and could/should have come up aces.

In fact, I would say they beat the odds by failing. No series, either film or television, has ever enjoyed more good will and mass affection then these two projects wherein a lot was expected, too little was ultimately delivered, but much was forgiven ... making 2009's rebirth possible.

So, bigger picture, the journey from there to here hasn't been so bad and, come hell or high water, the company of "Star Trek" devotees has made it all a fan-bloody-tastic experience. No regrets. Salute!
__________________
Yours Truly,
Vic Falcone
Danger Ace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 23 2013, 05:57 AM   #145
wingsabre
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Re: Was moving 'The Next Generation' over to movies a bad decision?

I think TNG movie made sense. TOS cast were aging, and there's a point where action sequences don't work anymore. There's a reason Sean Connery is not playing James Bond anymore. They needed a new movie cast. The problem was execution. Picard was never really that action based character. All of a sudden, Ricker stopped going on away missions, and Picard did that. In all honestly, Riker and Worf should have been the ones doing the action sequence, and Picard as the general planning the mission on the ship.
wingsabre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 27 2013, 05:29 PM   #146
xvicente
Commander
 
xvicente's Avatar
 
Re: Was moving 'The Next Generation' over to movies a bad decision?

It was not a mistake to make movies, it was for other reasons they didn't came out very good. One of them it was, after 7 seasons of TNG and some more of DS9, it was impossible for the producers to shake the tv assembly-line, mass-production mindset off.

Last edited by xvicente; April 27 2013 at 05:30 PM. Reason: I have my reasons
xvicente is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 1 2013, 01:30 AM   #147
Mojochi
Commodore
 
Mojochi's Avatar
 
Re: Was moving 'The Next Generation' over to movies a bad decision?

Moving them to the cinema wasn't the bad idea. Making the films so godawful formulaic was
Mojochi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 3 2013, 08:15 AM   #148
Cadet49
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: Was moving 'The Next Generation' over to movies a bad decision?

CorporalClegg wrote: View Post
Short answer? Yes.

TNG's "sophistication" (for lack of a better term) was just too heavy for the cinematic world. TPTB were force to reinvent the series to be like the swashbuckling adventure TOS was and it just didn't work. I've often said that most of TNG's action scenes (or at least FC, INS, NEM) literally looked like grown men in the backyard playing astronauts and aliens with their ray-gun toys. It was just too hard to take seriously, which is why I think GEN, even with all its problems, is the best of the lot.

Somethings have no business on the big screen. Because you can do a thing doesn't mean you should do a thing. Or something. I'm sure that, throughout TV history, there have been countless series where someone said "Let's make a movie!" and everyone else in the room facepalmed. TNG should have been one such series.
I absolutely agree. TNG was a great show, but I felt it never worked in movies - I also felt Generations was the best one, despite its flaws, like 'Mr. Tricorder' bit, because it is the only one where the TNG characters still seemed in role from the TV Series - example: in FC and Ins, Picard suddenly became an "action" captain, who bucked orders to do what HE wanted, which is very different from the Picard we knew in the series, and never rung as "authentic" to me ... I tend to ignore these movies, and focus on the televised material...
Cadet49 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 3 2013, 08:18 AM   #149
Cadet49
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: Was moving 'The Next Generation' over to movies a bad decision?

wingsabre wrote: View Post
I think TNG movie made sense. TOS cast were aging, and there's a point where action sequences don't work anymore. There's a reason Sean Connery is not playing James Bond anymore. They needed a new movie cast. The problem was execution. Picard was never really that action based character. All of a sudden, Ricker stopped going on away missions, and Picard did that. In all honestly, Riker and Worf should have been the ones doing the action sequence, and Picard as the general planning the mission on the ship.
Absolutely! This was my biggest peeve with these movies, the component that made them feel to me like the people were all out of character - I also never pictured Worf from the TV show threatening to kill Picard where he stands, "if he was any other man"
Cadet49 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 4 2013, 03:01 AM   #150
Lee Enfield
Lieutenant
 
Lee Enfield's Avatar
 
Location: Germany
Re: Was moving 'The Next Generation' over to movies a bad decision?

Cadet49 wrote: View Post
CorporalClegg wrote: View Post
Short answer? Yes.

TNG's "sophistication" (for lack of a better term) was just too heavy for the cinematic world. TPTB were force to reinvent the series to be like the swashbuckling adventure TOS was and it just didn't work. I've often said that most of TNG's action scenes (or at least FC, INS, NEM) literally looked like grown men in the backyard playing astronauts and aliens with their ray-gun toys. It was just too hard to take seriously, which is why I think GEN, even with all its problems, is the best of the lot.

Somethings have no business on the big screen. Because you can do a thing doesn't mean you should do a thing. Or something. I'm sure that, throughout TV history, there have been countless series where someone said "Let's make a movie!" and everyone else in the room facepalmed. TNG should have been one such series.
I absolutely agree. TNG was a great show, but I felt it never worked in movies - I also felt Generations was the best one, despite its flaws, like 'Mr. Tricorder' bit, because it is the only one where the TNG characters still seemed in role from the TV Series - example: in FC and Ins, Picard suddenly became an "action" captain, who bucked orders to do what HE wanted, which is very different from the Picard we knew in the series, and never rung as "authentic" to me ... I tend to ignore these movies, and focus on the televised material...
But there are serveral episodes in which Picards does the Action Jackson. The one with the terrorists on board, during the cleansing of the Enterprise, for example.

On a side note: the first drafts of FC had Riker to be on board the Enterprise and Picard doing the refitting on the planet.
Lee Enfield is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:35 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.