RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 137,915
Posts: 5,331,376
Members: 24,557
Currently online: 589
Newest member: PlayerUp

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: Inquisition
By: Michelle on Jul 12

Cubify Star Trek 3DMe Mini Figurines
By: T'Bonz on Jul 11

Latest Official Starships Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Jul 10

Seven of Nine Bobble Head
By: T'Bonz on Jul 9

Pegg The Prankster
By: T'Bonz on Jul 9

More Trek Stars Join Unbelievable!!!!!
By: T'Bonz on Jul 8

Star Trek #35 Preview
By: T'Bonz on Jul 8

New ThinkGeek Trek Apparel
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7

Star Trek Movie Prop Auction
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7

Drexler: NX Engineering Room Construction
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7


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 January 17 2014, 03:21 PM   #211
AgentCoop
Fleet Captain
 
AgentCoop's Avatar
 
Location: Chillin' in the Black Lodge since June 10th, 1991
View AgentCoop's Twitter Profile
Re: You know what really irks me about "Insurrection"?

If only the writers of the movie had put half as much thought into these issues as the people posting in this thread.
__________________
Two penguins were walking across an iceberg.
One penguin turned to the second penguin and said
"You look like you're wearing a tuxedo."
And the second penguin said "Maybe I am..."
AgentCoop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 17 2014, 06:58 PM   #212
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: You know what really irks me about "Insurrection"?

T'Girl wrote: View Post
Mr. Laser Beam wrote: View Post
Hell, Section 31 had a spy inside Jaresh-Inyo's Cabinet!
Batman had a camera and listening device in the Mayor of Gotham City's office.

If the person in the president's office found out that the founders were going to be taken seriously as a threat (years before they were), S31 might have simply turned their attentions elsewhere.

sonak wrote: View Post
I think his point was that unaccountable power in a society is dangerous no matter who is wielding it and for what purpose.
And I contend that it is what is done with that "power" that is the most important consideration.

Being unauthorized doesn't mean you'll alway get things wrong, anymore that being legally fully empowered means you know what you're doing.


As long as unauthorized, unaccountable and amoral power is being wielded by flawed Humans, that power will be abused and lead to disastrous effects eventually.
__________________
"why oh why didn't I take the blue pill?"
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 17 2014, 07:04 PM   #213
trevanian
Rear Admiral
 
trevanian's Avatar
 
Re: You know what really irks me about "Insurrection"?

AgentCoop wrote: View Post
If only the writers of the movie had put half as much thought into these issues as the people posting in this thread.
You can say that about every trek movie, probably most trek episodes too.

If you read Piller's unpublished book on INS, you can see that an awful lot of stuff WAS considered, but discarded because Berman didn't like it, or Berman thought Stewart wouldn't like it, or because Steward didn't like what they did instead, or ... (and so it goes)

It might have been a better movie if you'd actually had Picard's crew divided on the issue ... so they were facing off with one another (sort of what they should have done in GENERATIONS with the E-A somehow in conflict with the E-D.) Would have made for an interesting PicardvsRiker battle of starships, maybe ... but that is clearly a whole other movie.
trevanian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 18 2014, 07:25 PM   #214
T'Girl
Vice Admiral
 
T'Girl's Avatar
 
Re: You know what really irks me about "Insurrection"?

sonak wrote: View Post
As long as unauthorized, unaccountable and amoral power is being wielded by flawed Humans, that power will be abused and lead to disastrous effects eventually.
But power, whether authorized or unauthorized, alway has at least some potential of being misused. Their plan to infect the founders did work, their plan to position a Romulan favorable to the Federation in the Romulan government worked, the 22nd century plan to cure the Klingons of the augment virus was well thought out and to the benefit of Earth (yes the Klingons were being duplicitous).

There's no indication in any episode that S31 ever tried to take control of the federation or assassinate federation leaders, that would be a move against what the federation is, which is what S31 is protecting.

In their own way.

trevanian wrote: View Post
It might have been a better movie if you'd actually had Picard's crew divided on the issue ... so they were facing off with one another ...
Some level of disagreement between Picard and Riker would have improved the movie (not to the point of weapons fire thought), especially in the early seasons Riker was shown to hold different opinions from Picard's, and wasn't afraid to voice them.

I feel that the person who really should have strenuously opposed Picard's position should have been Beverly Crusher, the end result of Picard path was going to be to deign an important medical discovery to a large number of people of the federation and beyond. Beverly (like early Riker) occasional openly disagreed with Picard.

Her sitting down opposite Picard and systematically knocking down his position points would have made for a great scene. Picard then ignoring the advice of two of his primary advisers and doing basically what we saw in the movie would have increased the movie IMHO.

__________________
.
There's turkeys in there now. Real turkeys.
T'Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 18 2014, 08:34 PM   #215
AgentCoop
Fleet Captain
 
AgentCoop's Avatar
 
Location: Chillin' in the Black Lodge since June 10th, 1991
View AgentCoop's Twitter Profile
Re: You know what really irks me about "Insurrection"?

^I made the argument in another thread that I feel the reason we never got such an arguably necessary scene is because the filmmakers were afraid the audience might turn on Picard. If Crusher or Riker made a compelling enough argument then large portions of the audience might have gone "Hey, that's a pretty good point, what the hell, Jean-Luc?".

I maintain that the basic problem with this movie is that it tries to have it both ways. They make a (very superficial) pretense that the story is about murky, morally grey events, yet they're never willing to let us disagree with Decisive Action Hero Picard.
__________________
Two penguins were walking across an iceberg.
One penguin turned to the second penguin and said
"You look like you're wearing a tuxedo."
And the second penguin said "Maybe I am..."
AgentCoop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 18 2014, 09:05 PM   #216
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: You know what really irks me about "Insurrection"?

AgentCoop wrote: View Post
^I made the argument in another thread that I feel the reason we never got such an arguably necessary scene is because the filmmakers were afraid the audience might turn on Picard. If Crusher or Riker made a compelling enough argument then large portions of the audience might have gone "Hey, that's a pretty good point, what the hell, Jean-Luc?".

I maintain that the basic problem with this movie is that it tries to have it both ways. They make a (very superficial) pretense that the story is about murky, morally grey events, yet they're never willing to let us disagree with Decisive Action Hero Picard.

This makes sense as a reason not to go that route. Because you're right, if you put a good argument into Beverly or Will's mouth, then you've got the audience scratching their heads going "yeah, why are we supposed to be rooting for Picard here?"

What they REALLY wanted was a "fun," "silly" action movie, not a movie with an ethical dilemma at its core. So instead of debate, we get a weak, half-hearted minute or two from Dougherty, and then it's sit back and enjoy the show!

If they wanted to go the route of fun little action movie, one wonders why they used such a flawed premise for it. It makes you either think that they're not very observant for missing the flaws, or that they thought THE AUDIENCE would be unobservant or lazy enough to overlook the other side of the debate.
__________________
"why oh why didn't I take the blue pill?"
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 19 2014, 01:26 AM   #217
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: You know what really irks me about "Insurrection"?

I don't see a flaw in the premise. I agree with Picard, I disagree with Dougherty.

You, as many others here as well, just don't like that none of the heroes in this film share your personal opinion on the issue. And that is exactly what makes this film interesting. It's not a clear black and white problem, but the characters make a clear decision and stand by it.

Yeah, if it was about 6 billion people getting killed, everything would be nice and fine again, because everybody can agree on that. But no, it's just about a couple of folks not wanting to get relocated.
__________________
lol
l
/\
JarodRussell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 19 2014, 06:51 PM   #218
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: You know what really irks me about "Insurrection"?

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
I don't see a flaw in the premise. I agree with Picard, I disagree with Dougherty.

You, as many others here as well, just don't like that none of the heroes in this film share your personal opinion on the issue. And that is exactly what makes this film interesting. It's not a clear black and white problem, but the characters make a clear decision and stand by it.

Yeah, if it was about 6 billion people getting killed, everything would be nice and fine again, because everybody can agree on that. But no, it's just about a couple of folks not wanting to get relocated.

they don't "share my personal opinion" because they're not actual people forming their own views on it. They're characters who are all mouthing the views of ONE PERSON, Michael Piller. There is no other side presented by ANY of the crew and that's a huge problem, because REALISTICALLY there would be.


Look at threads on INS on this board alone. There's always significant disagreement, with the PRO-removal crowd often having more support. Yet in the film, NONE of the crew of the Enterprise, senior officers or not, disagrees with Picard.


It's phony and absurd.
__________________
"why oh why didn't I take the blue pill?"
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 20 2014, 01:47 AM   #219
DonIago
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Burlington, VT, USA
View DonIago's Twitter Profile Send a message via ICQ to DonIago Send a message via AIM to DonIago Send a message via Yahoo to DonIago
Re: You know what really irks me about "Insurrection"?

I would say the same issue was raised to a lesser extent in FC. Crusher and Worf, at least, know that Picard's behaving irrationally, but ultimately they're both cowed by him and it takes a civilian to make Picard see reason. INS was in a sense the next logical step along that path of blind obedience.
__________________
--DonIago
It was the best of Trek, it was the worst of Trek...
"If I lean over, I leave myself open to wedgies, wet willies, or even the dreaded Rear Admiral!"
DonIago is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 20 2014, 02:25 AM   #220
trevanian
Rear Admiral
 
trevanian's Avatar
 
Re: You know what really irks me about "Insurrection"?

I have lots and LOTS of problems with FC, and that is definitely one of the bigger ones. Even if you still wound up with the same result, you could have had a tense exchange between Bevery, Baldy & TurnoverHead as they were on the line to repulse an attack, so they're snapping at each other while something else is going on, like a real movie does. Instead it is 'stand and pontificate' which don't exactly put the motion in motion picture.

I've posted about this before, but a number of years back I read an interview in a screenwriting mag with the writer of RUSH HOUR, in which he claims he was brought in to punch up FC (presumably movie-ize it.) I've often figured 'the line must be snorted here!' was his, but maybe they looked at a real movie script and thought, 'no, this is NextGen,' and just went back to what they had. I've never seen Moore or AntiChristo comment on any other writer being involved, so I guess that's just another dangling modifier in trek history.
trevanian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 20 2014, 04:14 AM   #221
Hartzilla2007
Vice Admiral
 
Hartzilla2007's Avatar
 
Location: Star Trekkin Across the universe.
Re: You know what really irks me about "Insurrection"?

sonak wrote: View Post
Look at threads on INS on this board alone. There's always significant disagreement, with the PRO-removal crowd often having more support.
Probably because their also the ones still going on about it.

DonIago wrote: View Post
I would say the same issue was raised to a lesser extent in FC. Crusher and Worf, at least, know that Picard's behaving irrationally, but ultimately they're both cowed by him and it takes a civilian to make Picard see reason. INS was in a sense the next logical step along that path of blind obedience.
Um, they kind of chose to follow his lead on this one, there was a scene and everything.

I mean hell Riker even pointed out that without the uniform he couldn't order them to do crap when he tried shoo them away while he was planing his one man war thing.
Hartzilla2007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 21 2014, 12:04 AM   #222
Shaka Zulu
Fleet Captain
 
Location: Bulawayo Military Krral
Re: You know what really irks me about "Insurrection"?

AgentCoop wrote: View Post
^I made the argument in another thread that I feel the reason we never got such an arguably necessary scene is because the filmmakers were afraid the audience might turn on Picard. If Crusher or Riker made a compelling enough argument then large portions of the audience might have gone "Hey, that's a pretty good point, what the hell, Jean-Luc?".

I maintain that the basic problem with this movie is that it tries to have it both ways. They make a (very superficial) pretense that the story is about murky, morally grey events, yet they're never willing to let us disagree with Decisive Action Hero Picard.
sonak wrote: View Post
AgentCoop wrote: View Post
^I made the argument in another thread that I feel the reason we never got such an arguably necessary scene is because the filmmakers were afraid the audience might turn on Picard. If Crusher or Riker made a compelling enough argument then large portions of the audience might have gone "Hey, that's a pretty good point, what the hell, Jean-Luc?".

I maintain that the basic problem with this movie is that it tries to have it both ways. They make a (very superficial) pretense that the story is about murky, morally grey events, yet they're never willing to let us disagree with Decisive Action Hero Picard.

This makes sense as a reason not to go that route. Because you're right, if you put a good argument into Beverly or Will's mouth, then you've got the audience scratching their heads going "yeah, why are we supposed to be rooting for Picard here?"

What they REALLY wanted was a "fun," "silly" action movie, not a movie with an ethical dilemma at its core. So instead of debate, we get a weak, half-hearted minute or two from Dougherty, and then it's sit back and enjoy the show!

If they wanted to go the route of fun little action movie, one wonders why they used such a flawed premise for it. It makes you either think that they're not very observant for missing the flaws, or that they thought THE AUDIENCE would be unobservant or lazy enough to overlook the other side of the debate.
JarodRussell wrote: View Post
I don't see a flaw in the premise. I agree with Picard, I disagree with Dougherty.

You, as many others here as well, just don't like that none of the heroes in this film share your personal opinion on the issue. And that is exactly what makes this film interesting. It's not a clear black and white problem, but the characters make a clear decision and stand by it.

Yeah, if it was about 6 billion people getting killed, everything would be nice and fine again, because everybody can agree on that. But no, it's just about a couple of folks not wanting to get relocated.
sonak wrote: View Post
JarodRussell wrote: View Post
I don't see a flaw in the premise. I agree with Picard, I disagree with Dougherty.

You, as many others here as well, just don't like that none of the heroes in this film share your personal opinion on the issue. And that is exactly what makes this film interesting. It's not a clear black and white problem, but the characters make a clear decision and stand by it.

Yeah, if it was about 6 billion people getting killed, everything would be nice and fine again, because everybody can agree on that. But no, it's just about a couple of folks not wanting to get relocated.

they don't "share my personal opinion" because they're not actual people forming their own views on it. They're characters who are all mouthing the views of ONE PERSON, Michael Piller. There is no other side presented by ANY of the crew and that's a huge problem, because REALISTICALLY there would be.


Look at threads on INS on this board alone. There's always significant disagreement, with the PRO-removal crowd often having more support. Yet in the film, NONE of the crew of the Enterprise, senior officers or not, disagrees with Picard.


It's phony and absurd.
DonIago wrote: View Post
I would say the same issue was raised to a lesser extent in FC. Crusher and Worf, at least, know that Picard's behaving irrationally, but ultimately they're both cowed by him and it takes a civilian to make Picard see reason. INS was in a sense the next logical step along that path of blind obedience.
And this is why I think Star Trek Into Darkness is better than Star Trek-Insurrection (and maybe even Star Trek: First Contact.)
Shaka Zulu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 21 2014, 12:08 AM   #223
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: You know what really irks me about "Insurrection"?

Shaka Zulu wrote: View Post
AgentCoop wrote: View Post
^I made the argument in another thread that I feel the reason we never got such an arguably necessary scene is because the filmmakers were afraid the audience might turn on Picard. If Crusher or Riker made a compelling enough argument then large portions of the audience might have gone "Hey, that's a pretty good point, what the hell, Jean-Luc?".

I maintain that the basic problem with this movie is that it tries to have it both ways. They make a (very superficial) pretense that the story is about murky, morally grey events, yet they're never willing to let us disagree with Decisive Action Hero Picard.
sonak wrote: View Post


This makes sense as a reason not to go that route. Because you're right, if you put a good argument into Beverly or Will's mouth, then you've got the audience scratching their heads going "yeah, why are we supposed to be rooting for Picard here?"

What they REALLY wanted was a "fun," "silly" action movie, not a movie with an ethical dilemma at its core. So instead of debate, we get a weak, half-hearted minute or two from Dougherty, and then it's sit back and enjoy the show!

If they wanted to go the route of fun little action movie, one wonders why they used such a flawed premise for it. It makes you either think that they're not very observant for missing the flaws, or that they thought THE AUDIENCE would be unobservant or lazy enough to overlook the other side of the debate.


sonak wrote: View Post


they don't "share my personal opinion" because they're not actual people forming their own views on it. They're characters who are all mouthing the views of ONE PERSON, Michael Piller. There is no other side presented by ANY of the crew and that's a huge problem, because REALISTICALLY there would be.


Look at threads on INS on this board alone. There's always significant disagreement, with the PRO-removal crowd often having more support. Yet in the film, NONE of the crew of the Enterprise, senior officers or not, disagrees with Picard.


It's phony and absurd.
DonIago wrote: View Post
I would say the same issue was raised to a lesser extent in FC. Crusher and Worf, at least, know that Picard's behaving irrationally, but ultimately they're both cowed by him and it takes a civilian to make Picard see reason. INS was in a sense the next logical step along that path of blind obedience.
And this is why I think Star Trek Into Darkness is better than Star Trek-Insurrection (and maybe even Star Trek: First Contact.)

Not only is STID far, far better than INS, I think it's insulting for the former to be compared to the latter. It's like comparing The Empire Strikes Back to The Phantom Menace.
__________________
"why oh why didn't I take the blue pill?"
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 21 2014, 12:17 AM   #224
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: In the 23rd Century...
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: You know what really irks me about "Insurrection"?

Star Trek Into Darkness is miles ahead of any of the NextGen films, in my opinion.
__________________
"When I first heard about it (the Enterprise underwater), my inner Trekkie was in a rage. When I saw it, my inner kid beat up my inner Trekkie and made him go sit in the corner." - Bill Jasper
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 21 2014, 12:30 AM   #225
AgentCoop
Fleet Captain
 
AgentCoop's Avatar
 
Location: Chillin' in the Black Lodge since June 10th, 1991
View AgentCoop's Twitter Profile
Re: You know what really irks me about "Insurrection"?

I'd put First Contact ahead of either of the Abrams movies, but yeah, they're both better than Insurrection. At least JJ seemed to know what kind of movies he wanted to make.
__________________
Two penguins were walking across an iceberg.
One penguin turned to the second penguin and said
"You look like you're wearing a tuxedo."
And the second penguin said "Maybe I am..."
AgentCoop 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 02:24 PM.

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