What sunk the TNG movie franchise: Insurrection or Nemesis?

The Overlord · February 25 2013, 03:52 AM

What sunk the TNG movie franchise: Insurrection or Nemesis?

heavy lids · February 25 2013, 03:59 AM

Nemesis, but it was already over before it tanked. I could be wrong, but I don't think they planned on making more TNG films. Would have been hard to do without Riker being Picard's first officer.

And I'm one of the few people that actually like Insurrection.

Dream · February 25 2013, 04:04 AM

The problem with Insurrection was that the story wasn't worth doing as a movie.

It was a big "WHO CARES"?

I don't understand why they just didn't dump it and start over with a more exciting story.

bigdaddy · February 25 2013, 04:20 AM

heavy lids wrote:

Nemesis, but it was already over before it tanked. I could be wrong, but I don't think they planned on making more TNG films. Would have been hard to do without Riker being Picard's first officer.

And I'm one of the few people that actually like Insurrection.

Insurrection took all the great press of First Contact and threw it down the drain.

And Star Trek 11 would have had Riker as the main character because I rememeber reading Patrick Swewart wanted to return to the stage.

The Overlord · February 25 2013, 04:20 AM

Dream wrote:

The problem with Insurrection was that the story wasn't worth doing as a movie.

It was a big "WHO CARES"?

I don't understand why they just didn't dump it and start over with a new story.

Well the problem is the writer was Michael Pillar, who is a TV writer, not a movie writer, that is why the film seems more like an episode. The movie reflected ideas that Pillar was interested at the time.

Lance · February 25 2013, 06:32 AM

heavy lids wrote:

What sunk the TNG movie franchise?

LOTR: The Two Towers & Star Wars Episode II.

Dream · February 25 2013, 06:56 AM

The Overlord wrote:

Well the problem is the writer was Michael Pillar, who is a TV writer, not a movie writer, that is why the film seems more like an episode. The movie reflected ideas that Pillar was interested at the time.

Pillar's "Best of Both Worlds" two parter is more epic and cinematic than Insurrection ever was.

Saul · February 25 2013, 07:39 AM

Both films. They went big with First Contact, the story felt smaller with Insurrection, but then again there were a lot of changes to the script. Nemesis was their last shot to get it right again. There was a 4 year gap to get fans hungry for a new movie and a story that was supposed to be TNG's TWOK was envisaged. I think if it had been a success we might have gotten at least one more movie from the TNG crew.

Lance · February 25 2013, 01:32 PM

The irony is that Insurrection feels smaller than First Contact, even though FC was actually much cheaper to produce, and was confined to sets and a limited amount of location shooting (whereas Insurrection had quite extensive location shooting). I still can't work out why it is that FC just feels so much more epic. It's gotta be the script. Something in that story just helps to pull the audience along for the ride more. Insurrection always loses me early on and never quite manages to get me back on side again.

I know I've said it on here before, but I still believe that there's nothing fundamentally wrong with the conception of Nemesis. It all really went south in the directing/editing, imo. Some of the best bits were left on the cutting room floor.

BillJ · February 25 2013, 01:35 PM

For me it was Insurrection. I lost quite of bit of interest in the franchise after that debacle.

The Overlord wrote:

Dream wrote:

The problem with Insurrection was that the story wasn't worth doing as a movie.

It was a big "WHO CARES"?

I don't understand why they just didn't dump it and start over with a new story.

Well the problem is the writer was Michael Pillar, who is a TV writer, not a movie writer, that is why the film seems more like an episode. The movie reflected ideas that Pillar was interested at the time.

Well, there were two things that were completely out of Piller's control:

1) Stewart and Spiner had creative input.

2) Paramount had locked in a release date before Piller was ever hired to write the movie.

Star Trek: Insurrection was a total team failure as far as I'm concerned.

Hound of UIster · February 25 2013, 02:43 PM

Both.

Tosk · February 25 2013, 03:01 PM

First Contact sunk TNG's cinematic journey...because nothing was ever good enough for some fans after that.

sonak · February 25 2013, 04:03 PM

Insurrection did, because the movie series was doing well up until that point. INS made more than $20 million less than FC. It practically disappeared from theaters after a few weeks, and didn't make an impact in fandom. Its performance was why there was a four-year gap before the next movie, at that time the longest such gap.

By the time Nemesis came out, the movie series had been sunk by INS.

King Daniel Into Darkness · February 25 2013, 04:11 PM

I really liked Nemesis. Insurrection, not so much.

How about Enterprise? It was in the middle of a wave of fan negativity and plummeting ratings. Now, from the people who made this crap - the sequel to that other crap!

Trajet · February 25 2013, 04:59 PM

I didn't mind Insurrection in the slightest, but it did feel like an enormous anti-climax after the relative high of First Contact. I think the rather "meh" feel of Insurrection, combined with it's limited impact on Trek fandom, and complete lack of impact on the general public doomed Nemesis before the terrible script had even been written.

The biggest thing that sunk the TNG movies, in my opinion, was growing creative and studio indifference to the franchise. It had become a cash cow to be milked for $70-90 million every few years, and Paramount never really cared about or invested in the production.

The blueprint for profitable, mass-appeal Star Trek was established successfully when First Contact grossed $146 million worldwide, but Paramount never saw fit to capitalise on it in any meaningful way. Insurrection and Nemesis were both products of creative burnout and studio indifference.

February 25 2013, 03:52 AM	#1
The Overlord Captain	What sunk the TNG movie franchise: Insurrection or Nemesis? What sunk the TNG movie franchise: Insurrection or Nemesis?

February 25 2013, 03:59 AM	#2
heavy lids Lieutenant Commander Location: Denver	Re: What sunk the TNG movie franchise: Insurrection or Nemesis? Nemesis, but it was already over before it tanked. I could be wrong, but I don't think they planned on making more TNG films. Would have been hard to do without Riker being Picard's first officer. And I'm one of the few people that actually like Insurrection. __________________ "Divine intervention is...unlikely" - The Doctor

February 25 2013, 04:04 AM	#3
Dream Admiral	Re: What sunk the TNG movie franchise: Insurrection or Nemesis? The problem with Insurrection was that the story wasn't worth doing as a movie. It was a big "WHO CARES"? I don't understand why they just didn't dump it and start over with a more exciting story. __________________ TWoP Forums .

February 25 2013, 07:39 AM	#8
Saul Rear Admiral Location: 東京	Re: What sunk the TNG movie franchise: Insurrection or Nemesis? Both films. They went big with First Contact, the story felt smaller with Insurrection, but then again there were a lot of changes to the script. Nemesis was their last shot to get it right again. There was a 4 year gap to get fans hungry for a new movie and a story that was supposed to be TNG's TWOK was envisaged. I think if it had been a success we might have gotten at least one more movie from the TNG crew. __________________ "It's not that you can see the strings, it's that 40 years later you're still looking at them." - Steven Moffat "This movie was big. Imagine how big it could have been with me in it?" William Shatner

February 25 2013, 01:32 PM	#9
Lance Captain Location: The Enterprise's Restroom	Re: What sunk the TNG movie franchise: Insurrection or Nemesis? The irony is that Insurrection feels smaller than First Contact, even though FC was actually much cheaper to produce, and was confined to sets and a limited amount of location shooting (whereas Insurrection had quite extensive location shooting). I still can't work out why it is that FC just feels so much more epic. It's gotta be the script. Something in that story just helps to pull the audience along for the ride more. Insurrection always loses me early on and never quite manages to get me back on side again. I know I've said it on here before, but I still believe that there's nothing fundamentally wrong with the conception of Nemesis. It all really went south in the directing/editing, imo. Some of the best bits were left on the cutting room floor.

STAR TREK

CSI

ABOUT US

February 25 2013, 02:43 PM	#11
Hound of UIster Rear Admiral	Re: What sunk the TNG movie franchise: Insurrection or Nemesis? Both.

February 25 2013, 03:01 PM	#12
Tosk Rear Admiral Location: On the run.	Re: What sunk the TNG movie franchise: Insurrection or Nemesis? First Contact sunk TNG's cinematic journey...because nothing was ever good enough for some fans after that.

February 25 2013, 04:03 PM	#13
sonak Rear Admiral Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination	Re: What sunk the TNG movie franchise: Insurrection or Nemesis? Insurrection did, because the movie series was doing well up until that point. INS made more than $20 million less than FC. It practically disappeared from theaters after a few weeks, and didn't make an impact in fandom. Its performance was why there was a four-year gap before the next movie, at that time the longest such gap. By the time Nemesis came out, the movie series had been sunk by INS.

February 25 2013, 04:11 PM	#14
King Daniel Into Darkness Admiral Location: KingDaniel has fallen Into Darkness (in England)	Re: What sunk the TNG movie franchise: Insurrection or Nemesis? I really liked Nemesis. Insurrection, not so much. How about Enterprise? It was in the middle of a wave of fan negativity and plummeting ratings. Now, from the people who made this crap - the sequel to that other crap! __________________ Star Trek Imponderables, fun video mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors. Episode One Episode Two

February 25 2013, 04:59 PM	#15
Trajet Lieutenant Commander Location: Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom	Re: What sunk the TNG movie franchise: Insurrection or Nemesis? I didn't mind Insurrection in the slightest, but it did feel like an enormous anti-climax after the relative high of First Contact. I think the rather "meh" feel of Insurrection, combined with it's limited impact on Trek fandom, and complete lack of impact on the general public doomed Nemesis before the terrible script had even been written. The biggest thing that sunk the TNG movies, in my opinion, was growing creative and studio indifference to the franchise. It had become a cash cow to be milked for $70-90 million every few years, and Paramount never really cared about or invested in the production. The blueprint for profitable, mass-appeal Star Trek was established successfully when First Contact grossed $146 million worldwide, but Paramount never saw fit to capitalise on it in any meaningful way. Insurrection and Nemesis were both products of creative burnout and studio indifference.