What sunk the TNG movie franchise: Insurrection or Nemesis?

Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies I-X' started by The Overlord, Feb 25, 2013.

  1. Gov Kodos

    Gov Kodos Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2004
    Location:
    Gov Kodos on Mohammed's Radio, WZVN Boston
    Aye, so they should.
     
  2. JarodRussell

    JarodRussell Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2009
    [​IMG]
     
  3. MikeS

    MikeS Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2008
    Location:
    Liverpool, UK
    "What sunk the TNG movie franchise: Insurrection or Nemesis?"

    Neither. I would argue that the over-saturation of televison and movies killed "nineties Trek".
     
  4. RAMA

    RAMA Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 1999
    Location:
    NJ, USA
    It always amazes me when I see those numbers of posts...incredible. I've been here 14 years and managed to just hit 13,000. Even that number gave me a headache. :lol:
     
  5. Lt. Cheka Wey

    Lt. Cheka Wey Commander

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2013
    Nemesis was my first movie too. I had no idea what the heck was going on.
     
  6. GalaxyX

    GalaxyX Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2004
    Location:
    Canada
    I couldn't have said it better myself. This is exactly, at the core, what was wrong with the TNG films. They all became caricatures of what they were in the TV series. Mostly at the expense of bad comedy, but also due to lack of vision.

    I would have loved to see a TNG film of the enterprise and crew exploring some unknown world on a movie budget. Something along the lines of the game "A Final Unity" would have been awesome on the big screen.

    Instead we get the tired plot of "a madman wants to kill many people we don't care about" for 3 movies.
     
  7. sayonara maru

    sayonara maru Lieutenant

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2013
    Location:
    Davidson County
    Neither.. the TNG franchise literally had no where else to go. The Insurrection and Nemesis movies were great on their own...But they just didnt add anything to the franchise that couldnt be seen on one of the hour episodes. ..

    Still wouldnt have missed either for the world though. Data wigging out, Commander William Babyface, Will and Deanna finally hooking up (on screen!), Picard driving a Subaru, Data making the ultimate sacrifce...and sweet sweet Anij..
     
  8. CaptainStoner

    CaptainStoner Knuckle-dragging TNZ Denizen Admiral

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2007
    Location:
    Hill dweller

    I think the ball was dropped with GEN. That was one awkward, strange film that just doesn't sit right no matter how you slice it. And this is from someone who sees a lot of good in GEN. So, you had millions of people watching TNG, which was a character driven sci-fi drama thingy, and the first feature film is half about Kirk, who has nothing to do with TNG, Data plays with his emotion chip, and the ship you've identified the show with for 7 years is sacked.
    They didn't do anything with the characters, and de-branded TNG somewhat by crashing the ship. Really, nothing significant happens with the characters until NEM, by which point those millions of people had long since stopped caring. They stopped telling their stories. Should have had the wedding and Data's death in the first film. And just kept giving reasons to care or be interested in these characters while the crazy sci fi thing is happening.
    I agree that neither INS or NEM are to blame, but TNG had lots of places to go.
     
  9. Chrisisall

    Chrisisall Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2009
    Yes, I also agree.:techman:
     
  10. R. Star

    R. Star Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2012
    Location:
    Shangri-La
    I'd say it was a combination of INS and NEM having their problems along with the cast just visibly getting older. Whatever you want to say about NuTrek they are all attractive young people.
     
  11. sayonara maru

    sayonara maru Lieutenant

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2013
    Location:
    Davidson County
    Agreed. That made seeing picard go mario andretti in his subaru and Ellen Ripley (in insurrection) that much more hilarious

    Can we say midlife crisis?
     
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2013
  12. sayonara maru

    sayonara maru Lieutenant

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2013
    Location:
    Davidson County
    This is kind of what I mean. You raise a good point about the most significant parts of star trek happening with Nemesis.. But when you think about it, just changing the dynamic isnt really enough to say you're going into new territory.

    Example:
    -First Contact was great but would have been better if they used the Borg Storyline from Star Trek Destiny. Here would be significant "new territory" since it closes out the borg arc

    -Doing something significant with the Q continuum (like they lose their omnipotence and simply become immortals stranded on the planet in innsurrection. Closure to the Q and plenty of material for the extended universe to play with.

    -William Shatner wrote a book called "The Return" which was centered directly after Star Trek Generations. If you subtract the ridiculous borg origin story, the general premise of the romulans resurrecting him would have been a better centerpiece to Star Trek Nemesis..

    My point is even ideas like those wouldnt come from the TNG writing team. Id wager they were just burnt out.. and when that happens to any show, sharks start to jump and pigs start to fly..

    I also agree that by the time insurrection and nemesis rolled around, the general audience had lost interest in star trek. First Contact while the best of the new films, really did lose steam. Plus there was interest in other franchises to consider (star wars was hot and heavy, firefly was popular.. I think battle star galactica had spun up again)

    Whats also sad about the newtrek movies is there werent really any memorable lines like in legacy trek ("KHAAAANNN!", "You klingon bastards! you killed my son", "You will, and always have been.. my friend")

    Have high hopes for JJ Abrahms though.. Star Trek 2009 is in my 10 ten.. I cant wait for this summers sequel
     
  13. Danger Ace

    Danger Ace Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2013
    Location:
    California
    Both. The fact they had two bombs back-to-back plus "Enterprise" disillusioning audiences on television.
     
  14. Galileo7

    Galileo7 Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2010
    Location:
    east coast United States
    Agree. :klingon:
     
  15. Allyn Gibson

    Allyn Gibson Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2000
    Location:
    South Pennsyltucky
    That's the real problem with all four of the Next Generation films. None of them break new ground with the characters or the universe. They're simply two hour long episodes with a budget.
     
  16. Danger Ace

    Danger Ace Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2013
    Location:
    California
    No where else to go ... but UP! Especially considering Nemesis followed a lackluster effort such as Insurrection (a title which was a misnomer btw). It took a special kind of ineptitude to drive away even the most loyal die-hards. Look at the box-office where it made little more than its budget WORLDWIDE! Not even the most staunch Trekkies could not stomach more than one theatrical viewing.

    I'm sorry but that is over-the-top revisionism. I know box-office results are not barometers of quality but they do indicate to what level a film connected with audiences and reveals whether a film had "legs" (sustained interest of movie-goers). Nemesis was a box-office gimp. It did worse, far worse than Star Trek V: The Final frontier despite a substantially wider release (about +500 screens).


    I agree with that. They didn't, but it's debatable to what extent (if any) that general audiences or fans want change in their "Star Trek." Much of the DS9 criticisms seems centered on folks not wanting any ripples upon the pristine waters of Trek.

    Sorry, no credit for the "ultimate sacrifice" when Lt. Data has a (introduced within the same film) backup. That wasn't a foreshadowing of Data's impending sacrifice it was a full blown annoncement via mega-phone, "DON"T WORRY, WE'RE GONNA "KILL" LT. DATA BUT AS YOU CAN PLAINLY SEE WE HAVE A SPARE READY TO GO. SO PLEASE ENJOY THIS RIPE-OFF OF "WRATH OF KAHN" (MINUS, OF COURSE, ALL THE ORGANIC ELEMENTS OF DRAMA THAT MADE "WRATH OF KAHN" SO SPECIAL TO BEGIN WITH!)"
     
  17. Lord Garth

    Lord Garth Captain Captain

    Joined:
    May 7, 2011
    I'd have to say Insurrection sunk the TNG films. I don't dislike the movie, but it doesn't do anything for me. When I went to see the INS, it was in a full theater and I could tell it didn't do anything for a lot of people in the theater either, especially when I overheard people talking about what they thought afterward.

    INS killed any momentum the TNG films had after FC. By the time NEM came around, four years later, no one cared anymore. The theater I went into was only half-full. There were also newer and better film franchises emerging by then. It's as simple as that.
     
  18. Lord Garth

    Lord Garth Captain Captain

    Joined:
    May 7, 2011
    Insurrection broke the Cardinal Rule of sequels: go bigger than the previous installment. And if you can't go bigger, go bigger in another direction.

    When it's "just another adventure" people start wondering what's the point of going to see this story in theater when there are stories just like it on TV? It's what also did in TFF.

    The only difference with the TOS films was that TFF didn't flop quite as bad as NEM, the TOS movies (excluding TMP) cost less, TNG was keeping interest in Star Trek not only alive but increasing, and there was a 25th Anniversary to make the audience nostalgic. The TOS movies also had the Genesis Trilogy to fall back on, so TFF looked more like a freak accident that people could forget. The TNG movies didn't have that same batting average to back them up after INS and NEM performed the way they did.
     
  19. sonak

    sonak Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2007
    Location:
    in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination

    Data's emotion chip?

    Riker and Troi getting married?

    Riker moving on to a different command?

    Data dying?

    Enterprise being destroyed?

    if you compare this to the TOS movies, TNG arguably did more stuff to change it up. In TOS, you got Spock's death which was quickly undone, Kirk's promotion which was undone eventually, Kirk getting a son which was undone, the Enterprise being destroyed, and... Sulu becoming a captain in the last movie.
     
  20. Maurice

    Maurice Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Location:
    Walking distance from Starfleet HQ
    ^^^Three of those couldn't undone because they happened in the last movie. As to the emotion chip, they "turned it off" in the 2nd TNG film and effectively forgot it thereafter. Hardly any better a track record than the TOS films. Getting a new ship of a different design is hardly changing things up.