I went with Meyer, not because his direction is Earth-shattering (it does exactly what it needs to do but I don't think everytime I watch II or VI "This is some of the best directing ever!"), but because of the attitude he brought to his Trek. II to X were all made under some fairly difficult constraints, tight budgets and production schedules and large casts pretty much stuffed with people keen to have their ideas heard. Balancing all that and still having a good story left is a tricky bugger to pull off, but Meyer managed it by pretty much removing his own vanity from proceedings. "Can't afford Kirk/Khan confrontation? OK, we'll chuck it and make the bridge chats work as well as we can. Nimoy wants X number of script alterations before signing on? Right-oh, I'll do them overnight". I think it's fair to say than many of the other directors struggled to juggle all those plates (especially Shatner, which is a shame because as others have said his basic direction is pretty good. But it does seem he struggled badly with being told "No" at any point) and those are the weaker films as a result.
Wrath of Khan is the all-time best Star Trek film, and The Undiscovered Country is a personal favorite, so I have to go with Nicholas Meyer.
Nicholas Meyer did a fantastic job with Wrath Of Kahn considering they had little to no budget. He also had a wonderful and paced perfectly script. I thought he did a good job with Undiscovered Country, although I didn't think the story was as strong as Wrath of Kahn. Jonathan Frakes was great with First Contact and give the subpar script for Insurrection, I think he did the best he could with it. Stuart Baird should never be let near another Star Trek film again. He is an excellent editor but an average director. (although I loved U.S. Marshals) J.J. Abrams does a good job and would be one of my favorites if it weren't for all the lens flares and camera shaking for space battles. I like to see the battles not have to take Dramamine to watch them.
I agree with both your points, especially about Frakes. I think Nemesis would have been much better if Frakes had directed.
^Agreed. As I've said a LOT--many of the deleted scenes were frankly necessary for characterization, especially if they were gonna market it as "a generation's final journey". Picard's toast with Data...Beverly's send-off, Deanna's explanation why she couldn't read whether Shinzon was lying...Worf learning to overcome his prejudices when a Romulan doctor saves his life. The problem wasn't Logan's script--and I think we can all agree now that it CERTAINLY wasn't Tom Hardy...it was Baird's directing choices, particularly to "tone down" the characterizations and cut down the story to its bare bones.
^ Indeed. It turned from a half/emotional story about there final journey, what it should have been, to an action movie that implied it wasn't the last movie, even though it most certainly was.....
Agree with the previous two posters regarding Nemesis. Fortunately, even though much of the character-oriented material was excised from the final film, it was shot and does still exist. Some of it has been seen on the DVD releases. I would like to see someone -- not Stuart Baird -- go back and try and do a different cut of Nemesis which focused on the characters and the story of their final journey more than the action. I think it could be done quite successfully.