RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,142
Posts: 5,401,905
Members: 24,748
Currently online: 428
Newest member: ChrisCrash

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: Time’s Orphan
By: Michelle on Aug 30

September-October Trek Conventions And Appearances
By: T'Bonz on Aug 29

Lee Passes
By: T'Bonz on Aug 29

Trek Merchandise Sale
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Star Trek #39 Villain Revealed
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Trek Big Bang Figures
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Star Trek Seekers Cover Art
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Fan Film Axanar Kickstarter Success
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Two New Starship Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26

Trek Actor Wins Emmy
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26


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 December 6 2013, 09:05 AM   #136
CommishSleer
Fleet Captain
 
CommishSleer's Avatar
 
Location: At the After Party Still...
View CommishSleer's Twitter Profile
Re: You know what really irks me about "Insurrection"?

So the 'nice' Sona would rather die than taint their parents with technology.

At least Anji would have the occasional rendesvous with an aging Picard to make up for the loss of her offspring.
CommishSleer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 6 2013, 12:45 PM   #137
starburst
Fleet Captain
 
starburst's Avatar
 
Re: You know what really irks me about "Insurrection"?

AgentDreidel wrote: View Post
^The S'ona needed Starfleet because it's a Federation planet.
Its in Federation Space, in an area that once there they could pretty much do what they wanted unless a Starfleet survey ship came along which didn't look like would be too much effort to deal with. Its not like it seems to hard to wander round Federation Space until you come across a Federation planet or base. Space is big so there could have been a way for the S'ona to get their people in place.

The reason I am now thinking they didn't was time, if the collector had only recently been developed then time would be of the essence for at least some of them, time they didn't have to slowly move into position. Of course your right about needing to get there they needed Federation approval as they could have settled far, far away from the Patch.

Elf Spock wrote: View Post

I can never figure out what Starfleet were doing with the holoship. Its like why did Marcus put 72 augment-laden torpedoes in the Enterprise in nuTrek.
The holoship brings up another problem, the cloaking device which could have led to the Romulans siding with the Dominion. Then again the Duck Blind also uses some form of cloaking technology, or possibly its based on holo technology which would solve the Romulan issue with both the Blind and the Holoship.

As for Marcus; deal with Khan, get rid of the remaining evidence and start a war at the same time… another topic though.

Elf Spock wrote: View Post
Sorry I've asked this before but if Dougherty was doing something dodgy why would he get Data involved. Why not just call Picard and Riker in as well ? Why did he need Data there? Why not just have a bunch of flunkies?
Data being there makes as much sense as Troi or Crusher or Worf IMO?
I think the script or novel (or both) suggests that in the original story Data was needed because of 'environmental anomalies' which obviously wouldn't effect him, the question was asked by Troi or Riker and answered by the other in the original library scene.

BillJ wrote: View Post
Hober Mallow wrote: View Post
This is a lot more in-depth discussion than this film deserves.
You're absolutely right. 
Its not much more discussion than some other topics which really haven't needed discussing before.

Elf Spock wrote: View Post
Hartzilla2007 wrote: View Post
know from The Augment trilogy that the Briar Patch belonged to the Klingons two hundred years prior so they may have had a claim on it long before that.
Actually from the Augment trilogy it sounds like the Klingons either had only recently moved in to the area (which was a century after the Ba'ku moved to the planet) or were just not interested in it (The Briar Patch is a crappy piece of real-estate) as it was said that they hadn't mapped the region at that point.
They had been there long enough to give it a name and know there were some planets there but obviously took little interest in it otherwise.

SeerSGB wrote: View Post
The holoship could be a bit of standard long-term observation kit. You've got the duck blinded, and then holoship for sims or other research.
Couldn't they have incorporated that into the Duck Blind? Plus bit random for a Holoship to be part of the standard equipment on such a mission and then hide it at the bottom of a lake.
starburst is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 6 2013, 05:34 PM   #138
SeerSGB
Admiral
 
SeerSGB's Avatar
 
Location: Out There...That Away
Re: You know what really irks me about "Insurrection"?

starburst wrote: View Post
SeerSGB wrote: View Post
The holoship could be a bit of standard long-term observation kit. You've got the duck blinded, and then holoship for sims or other research.
Couldn't they have incorporated that into the Duck Blind? Plus bit random for a Holoship to be part of the standard equipment on such a mission and then hide it at the bottom of a lake.
Well the duckblind could be limiting: After all, how much or how big of a base could you hide right under the natives nose without something happening? Who Watches The Watchers for example.

So perhaps on a typical mission the holoship serves as larger lab and living space and gives them more flexibility. Hiding it in the water makes some form of sense: Keeps it off the trails, reduces the chance a stray hunter or someone out gathering food might stumble on it. The stupid move is hiding it in the village water supply.

As for cloaking tech: Yeah, that is one that didn't get explained. Especially when you toss in those nitfy cloaking suits the team has. You could argue that it wasn't a military type of cloak and was a variant of the duck blind holographic camo.
__________________
- SeerSGB -
"I've made many mistakes, and it's about time that I did something about that." The Doctor (Deep Breath)
| Zombie Bots From Mars! |
SeerSGB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 6 2013, 05:57 PM   #139
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: You know what really irks me about "Insurrection"?

Why would you need to land it on the ground at all with transporters?
__________________
"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 offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 6 2013, 06:25 PM   #140
SeerSGB
Admiral
 
SeerSGB's Avatar
 
Location: Out There...That Away
Re: You know what really irks me about "Insurrection"?

BillJ wrote: View Post
Why would you need to land it on the ground at all with transporters?
Probably wouldn't need to, unless you were on a planet with some exotic radiation issues that bugger up the transporter or the coms.

Which is another problem with the movie: Why land the holoshp at all? Transporters and coms clearly work on the planet. So why not bulk transport the Baku while on orbit?
__________________
- SeerSGB -
"I've made many mistakes, and it's about time that I did something about that." The Doctor (Deep Breath)
| Zombie Bots From Mars! |
SeerSGB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 6 2013, 07:06 PM   #141
Hartzilla2007
Vice Admiral
 
Hartzilla2007's Avatar
 
Location: Star Trekkin Across the universe.
Re: You know what really irks me about "Insurrection"?

SeerSGB wrote: View Post
starburst wrote: View Post
SeerSGB wrote: View Post
The holoship could be a bit of standard long-term observation kit. You've got the duck blinded, and then holoship for sims or other research.
Couldn't they have incorporated that into the Duck Blind? Plus bit random for a Holoship to be part of the standard equipment on such a mission and then hide it at the bottom of a lake.
Well the duckblind could be limiting: After all, how much or how big of a base could you hide right under the natives nose without something happening? Who Watches The Watchers for example.

So perhaps on a typical mission the holoship serves as larger lab and living space and gives them more flexibility.
Except if it was supposed to be there why did someone shot Data because he found it?

Also why would they need it seeing as they had three perfectly useable ships in orbit for that stuff?
Hartzilla2007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 6 2013, 07:10 PM   #142
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: You know what really irks me about "Insurrection"?

insurrection is honestly a movie that makes no sense on so many levels. Shame Piller went out on that note.
__________________
"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 offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 6 2013, 07:16 PM   #143
SeerSGB
Admiral
 
SeerSGB's Avatar
 
Location: Out There...That Away
Re: You know what really irks me about "Insurrection"?

Hartzilla2007 wrote: View Post
SeerSGB wrote: View Post
starburst wrote: View Post


Couldn't they have incorporated that into the Duck Blind? Plus bit random for a Holoship to be part of the standard equipment on such a mission and then hide it at the bottom of a lake.
Well the duckblind could be limiting: After all, how much or how big of a base could you hide right under the natives nose without something happening? Who Watches The Watchers for example.

So perhaps on a typical mission the holoship serves as larger lab and living space and gives them more flexibility.
Except if it was supposed to be there why did someone shot Data because he found it?

Also why would they need it seeing as they had three perfectly useable ships in orbit for that stuff?

The Federation was the only side of the deal that was interested in doing the right thing the safe way. The Sona could BS that that their ships weren't equipped or some such nonsense.
__________________
- SeerSGB -
"I've made many mistakes, and it's about time that I did something about that." The Doctor (Deep Breath)
| Zombie Bots From Mars! |
SeerSGB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 7 2013, 03:44 AM   #144
CommishSleer
Fleet Captain
 
CommishSleer's Avatar
 
Location: At the After Party Still...
View CommishSleer's Twitter Profile
Re: You know what really irks me about "Insurrection"?

SeerSGB wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
Why would you need to land it on the ground at all with transporters?
Probably wouldn't need to, unless you were on a planet with some exotic radiation issues that bugger up the transporter or the coms.

Which is another problem with the movie: Why land the holoshp at all? Transporters and coms clearly work on the planet. So why not bulk transport the Baku while on orbit?
This all sounds just like bad writing to me. You can't beam down except sometimes. The reason Data was there. The 'road trip' with the natives. None of it seemed justified.

Thats not to say they didn't have the same issues with the other Star Trek movies.
CommishSleer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 7 2013, 01:22 PM   #145
2takesfrakes
Commodore
 
2takesfrakes's Avatar
 
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Re: You know what really irks me about "Insurrection"?

Without the Holoship, Picard's not going to figure out that transporting the inhabitants is even in the works, unless he's informed, directly. Or, if he finds out through some other means - like an intercepted communiqué. Everything revolves around this elaborate rouse that never does go anywhere. Not only that, but as Data points out, it's a cheap piece of shit, anyway, with obvious flaws that reveal its true nature. If there were no plan to use this thing, there would be no movie and Data would not have been made to go all apeshit, just so Brent would have something passionate to do and Picard would take an interest in the Baku. It does, however, have one other purpose: it reveals a previously unknown and fascinating function of Data - to serve as a floatation device!

Weeeeeeeee ... splish! Splish!! SPLISH!!!
__________________
It Takes Two.™
2takesfrakes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 7 2013, 07:00 PM   #146
Hober Mallow
Commodore
 
Location: The planet Terminus, site of the Encyclopedia Foundation on the periphery of the galaxy
Re: You know what really irks me about "Insurrection"?

BillJ wrote: View Post
insurrection is honestly a movie that makes no sense on so many levels. Shame Piller went out on that note.
The thing is, I feel like I get what Piller was trying to do, it just fell completely flat. At the time of the release of "Insurrection" he was comparing the movie to "The Magnificent Seven," which was based on the Japanese film "Seven Samurai." Specifically the comparison is to a group of heroes who come in to save the day not because they have a personal stake in the outcome, but because they don't: simply because they're good and they're out to do something noble.

Now I've never seen "The Magnificent Seven," but "Seven Samurai" is one of my favorite films. And while Piller's sentiment of the selfless hero sounds nice (and I think Roddenberry would have loved it) it misses the point: the heroes of "Seven Samurai" are not all noble and certainly have a personal stake in what happens to the village they defend. One of the heroes (spoiler alert) is actually a farmer himself pretending to be a Samurai, and so his personal journey is one of proving himself worthy, while still reluctant to "die in a dungheap" from which he came, his greatest fear. The other characters are ronin, wandering Samurai without a master; they come together to fight for a cause because they have nothing else. They risk their lives and some of them will die. Furthermore, there's conflict between the villagers and the Samurai. The villagers have killed wandering Samurai before; the Samurai have brutalized villagers before. The "villains," the bandits from whom the villagers need defense, are simply starving and desperate. There actually is moral ambiguity in "Seven Samurai," whereas in "Insurrection" there is none: the good guys are all good, the bad guys are all bad, because Piller says so. Basically, "Insurrection" seems to me a version of "Seven Samurai" rewritten by someone who didn't actually understand the movie.

Imagine turning "Seven Samurai" into "Insurrection." First, you remove all personal conflict between the Samurai, which is one of the most interesting parts of the first half of the film. Next, remove most conflict between the Samurai and the villagers. Next, you say that the bandits are actually the children of the villagers, and eventually have an joyous reunion. Everyone is happy, and no one has died or faced any consequences except the really bad leader of the bandits who deserved it. The Samurai go off smiling to their next adventure. Gag me.
__________________
"Beep... beep!" --Captain Pike
Hober Mallow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 7 2013, 07:31 PM   #147
Hartzilla2007
Vice Admiral
 
Hartzilla2007's Avatar
 
Location: Star Trekkin Across the universe.
Re: You know what really irks me about "Insurrection"?

Hober Mallow wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
insurrection is honestly a movie that makes no sense on so many levels. Shame Piller went out on that note.
The thing is, I feel like I get what Piller was trying to do, it just fell completely flat. At the time of the release of "Insurrection" he was comparing the movie to "The Magnificent Seven," which was based on the Japanese film "Seven Samurai." Specifically the comparison is to a group of heroes who come in to save the day not because they have a personal stake in the outcome, but because they don't: simply because they're good and they're out to do something noble.

Now I've never seen "The Magnificent Seven,
And this is the part where this particular criticism of the film falls apart, if you haven't seen "The Magnificent Seven" you can't really say if Piller got it right or not becuase he was basing it off of "The Magnificent Seven" not "Seven Samurai."
Hartzilla2007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 7 2013, 07:39 PM   #148
Hober Mallow
Commodore
 
Location: The planet Terminus, site of the Encyclopedia Foundation on the periphery of the galaxy
Re: You know what really irks me about "Insurrection"?

Hartzilla2007 wrote: View Post
And this is the part where this particular criticism of the film falls apart, if you haven't seen "The Magnificent Seven" you can't really say if Piller got it right or not becuase he was basing it off of "The Magnificent Seven" not "Seven Samurai."
That's true enough. Have you seen "The Magnificent Seven?" If you have, can you tell me if the plot is anything like this?
Imagine turning "Seven Samurai" into "Insurrection." First, you remove all personal conflict between the Samurai, which is one of the most interesting parts of the first half of the film. Next, remove most conflict between the Samurai and the villagers. Next, you say that the bandits are actually the children of the villagers, and eventually have an joyous reunion. Everyone is happy, and no one has died or faced any consequences except the really bad leader of the bandits who deserved it. The Samurai go off smiling to their next adventure. Gag me.
I may be wrong, but I have a feeling it isn't.
__________________
"Beep... beep!" --Captain Pike
Hober Mallow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 7 2013, 08:31 PM   #149
SeerSGB
Admiral
 
SeerSGB's Avatar
 
Location: Out There...That Away
Re: You know what really irks me about "Insurrection"?

Here's a thought: How many Sona did Picard condemn to death? We're told the Sona don't have the life expectancy left for them to chill on the planet and the rings run a natural course. How many of them are going to die as a result of Picard's actions?

Elf Spock wrote: View Post
SeerSGB wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
Why would you need to land it on the ground at all with transporters?
Probably wouldn't need to, unless you were on a planet with some exotic radiation issues that bugger up the transporter or the coms.

Which is another problem with the movie: Why land the holoshp at all? Transporters and coms clearly work on the planet. So why not bulk transport the Baku while on orbit?
This all sounds just like bad writing to me. You can't beam down except sometimes. The reason Data was there. The 'road trip' with the natives. None of it seemed justified.

Thats not to say they didn't have the same issues with the other Star Trek movies.
Well that the thing with most movies, which sticks out worse with Trek movies cause we're always expecting more from them: You can usually nullify the "threat" fairly quickly with plain old common sense.

The people we're supposed to feel sorry for are just utter assholes. Picard makes a bad situation worse. We're told the Federation backs this, Dougherty makes it clear Picard is free to leave and report whatever he wants, it probably won't change anything or it'll be to late cause of the time table they're own. Ruafo didn't care beyond Picard might cause a debate in the senate...oops council; he was cool with letting Picard report till it looked like it might fuck up his time table or might cause someone in power to change their minds.

BillJ wrote: View Post
insurrection is honestly a movie that makes no sense on so many levels. Shame Piller went out on that note.
Insurrection feels like a cheap movie. We're given this large, grandiose question: Does the Federation violate it's principals in the name of helping its people? What cost is too high when billions of lives are on the line?

Then every damn thing is so small scale. We're never shown anything that legitimately sets up the question. As good as the effects were, they weren't as good as First Contact's and looked television quality--at their best. We're given one tiny little village of people. There's nothing there that makes me say that there 600 people are worth more than whole worlds that could benefit from the rings.
__________________
- SeerSGB -
"I've made many mistakes, and it's about time that I did something about that." The Doctor (Deep Breath)
| Zombie Bots From Mars! |
SeerSGB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 7 2013, 08:48 PM   #150
Hartzilla2007
Vice Admiral
 
Hartzilla2007's Avatar
 
Location: Star Trekkin Across the universe.
Re: You know what really irks me about "Insurrection"?

SeerSGB wrote: View Post
\Picard makes a bad situation worse. We're told the Federation backs this, Dougherty makes it clear Picard is free to leave and report whatever he wants, it probably won't change anything or it'll be to late cause of the time table they're own. Ruafo didn't care beyond Picard might cause a debate in the senate...oops council; he was cool with letting Picard report till it looked like it might fuck up his time table or might cause someone in power to change their minds.
So Picard encouraging debate in his supposedly democratic society is a bad thing?
Hartzilla2007 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 08:31 AM.

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