What sunk the TNG movie franchise: Insurrection or Nemesis?

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

  1. Sigokat

    Sigokat Commander Red Shirt

    What I never understood about Nemesis was why, when B4 was discovered, they all acted so surprised that there was another android like Data. Did they all just have their memories wiped in regards to Lore?

    Perhaps it was explained somewhere other than the movie, but I just never understood that, strictly in the sense of the movie itself.

    Anyone know anything about this?

    And while I enjoyed INS I think there were elements that really did start to kill the chances for multiple future TNG movies. While there was some action, it just did't have a traditional Star Trek feel to it for me. I cared so little about the people on the planet that watching the movie more than once took great effort.

    And was it in INS where Worf said to Picard, "If you were any other man I'd kill you where you stand"

    Maybe its my distaste of all things Klingon but that line always bothered me...its insubordination! Sure Picard egged him on by calling Worg a coward, but Worf should have been the BETTER man and resisted the instinct to go off on his superior officer like that. Maybe its just my Army mind, but that always bothered me more than it should have for being one line in a movie.

    Okay, I kind of rambled. Sorry. :)
     
  2. Cap'n Claus

    Cap'n Claus Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2002
    Location:
    ssosmcin
    One bad unprofitable film doesn't kill a franchise. If it did, the James Bond series would have ended in 1974. Or Star Trek V would have been the final Trek movie. It wasn't Insurrection or Nemesis that caused the TNH films to fail, it was overall franchise fatigue. There was already too much bland Trek on TV - for free. Why would people rush out and pay to see more Star Trek when the various TV series aren't thrilling people? Nemesis bombed before anyone saw it - there was zero interest in the film during its opening weekend, not even fans came out (except me, I was there opening night in a pretty empty theater). Even Star Trek V had a big debut weekend; Nemesis had nothing. It was second to Maid in Manhattan, a crappy J-Lo rom-com. This had nothing to do with Star Wars or Lord of the Rings, people just didn't care. "I'll wait for the DVD" seemed to be the general feeling.

    Insurrection wasn't a huge success, but people would still say "the last movie wasn't great, but maybe this one will be better" if they retained in interest in the series. The blandness of Voyager and Enterprise, regardless of their otherwise relative merits, got people tired of Star Trek (not enough of the public paid attention to DS9 for it to get any blame).

    What got people interested in 2009 was the previews, which promised a thrilling, action packed, crowd pleasing film with young Kirk and Spock. No prior commitment to the franchise was required. Clean slate. People were excited over Trek, proving the concept is still appealing to people, but the style got stale. Star Trek was like a loaf of bread. Hot and fresh and delicious that, over time, got old, stale and moldy. It was time to bake a new loaf.
     
  3. gottacook

    gottacook Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2005
    Location:
    Maryland
    In general, the movies that were "successful" in terms of audience satisfaction were those that built upon some element of a previous story from one of the TV series (TWoK, First Contact) or were direct sequels to an earlier movie (TSFS, TVH). Starting from scratch, the results weren't so satisfying (TMP, TFF, Generations, Insurrection, Nemesis). This seems pretty simple to me.

    (Admittedly TUC doesn't quite fit the pattern; there is a preexisting element, the dead-David business, but it's not central to the story, just a convenient hook to hang Kirk's feelings about Klingons upon. Why was it satisfying - at least to some of us - although essentially a new story? What could later Trek feature writers have learned from TUC that they didn't learn?)
     
  4. gottacook

    gottacook Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2005
    Location:
    Maryland
    Yes, but if TVH hadn't been (in the words of Shatner on Saturday Night Live at the time) "a huge hit," people wouldn't have been interested enough in TFF to make it number 1 for a week. Keep in mind also that four whole years passed between Insurrection (what a terrible title, oozing artistic compromise in a single word) and Nemesis, so even if the former had done quite well, its impact on Nemesis' fortunes would have been minimal.
     
  5. Cap'n Claus

    Cap'n Claus Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2002
    Location:
    ssosmcin
    True, but most Trek movies had good box office on their opening weekends. A better promotional campaign might have heped Nemesis, but no Trek film, regardless of what movie came before, did as poorly as Nemesis on opening night. To me, that says "general audience and Trekkie apathy" more than anything else. You can't truly judge a film as crappy if you never see it.
     
  6. Dream

    Dream Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2001
    Location:
    Hotel Transylvania
    Also since TVH was a huge hit, Paramount decided to go ahead on making TNG on tv.
     
  7. King Daniel Beyond

    King Daniel Beyond Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2008
    Location:
    England
    There was a line about Lore, but it was cut. Presumably not to confuse those who hadn't seen those episodes of the TV show (like the director.)
     
  8. Bry_Sinclair

    Bry_Sinclair Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2009
    Location:
    The glorious Shetland Isles!
    I personally don't have any huge issues with INS (though I could have done with less of the cutsie Data-Artem stuff) it's no TFF!

    NEM was just bad. Gaping plot holes and story elements that made little sense (Worf and Wesley back in uniforms, Shinzon's hatred of a planet he's never set foot on, pointless nature-vs-nurture debates between Picard and Shinzon, the fact that there are uncharted planets along the Neutral Zone [probably the best patrolled region of space there is], Troi seemingly unable to press buttons by herself), needless buggy ride on an world where aliens are hostile for no reason, the E-E growing multiple decks with a massive chasm that goes nowhere and does nothing.

    But the biggest thing that ticks me off about that film is B-4 and the fact that Data's death is cheapened by having him there as a back-up at the end of the film. If they are going to kill off Data, then do it and do it right (don't do a Spock and leave a loophole in there in case more films get made).
     
  9. USS Firefly

    USS Firefly Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2013
    I agree with you, and again Data unfortunately without a emotion chip
     
  10. Tosk

    Tosk Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2001
    Location:
    On the run.
    I've never understood this complaint about B4. Lore is not an option, his remains are a known quantity. The crew know that there were more than just Data and Lore created, have discovered "unknown" Soong-type androids in the past...so their reaction seems pretty legit to me. Mild curiosity over having found another one, and Picard makes the comment about Soong having a penchant for whimsical names. What exactly is the problem?
     
  11. Bry_Sinclair

    Bry_Sinclair Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2009
    Location:
    The glorious Shetland Isles!
    I'd forgotten about that.
     
  12. JarodRussell

    JarodRussell Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2009
    Trek 2009 sunk it.
     
  13. CorporalClegg

    CorporalClegg Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2001
    Location:
    Land of Enchantment
  14. King Daniel Beyond

    King Daniel Beyond Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2008
    Location:
    England
    Nah, TNG movies had been long laid to rest before ST2009 came along. ST2009 killed Star Trek: The Beginning, the Romulan war movie that was greenlit and written, then dropped when the reigns of Trek were handed to JJ Abrams.
     
  15. Lance

    Lance Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    May 9, 2012
    Location:
    The Enterprise's Restroom
    Agreed, I've never understood this criticism either. "The crew act like they've never seen another Soong android before" is a commonly heard nitpick of Nemesis, but it just ain't true. Oh sure, they don't mention Lore by name... but as you correctly say, they do acknowledge the reality of there being other Soong androids, and they've got no reason to assume its Lore because, again like you say, they've probably got what's left of him safely locked up in a Starfleet facility. And they've got no real reason to distrust another Soong android just because Lore went a bit wrong...

    In fact, the movie does have a tacit acknowledgement of Lore, without actually mentioning him by name. When B4 is shown to have betrayed the Enterprise crew (albeit unknowingly, as a pawn of Shinzon), Data's reaction is almost one of anger, as he declares "You are dangerous!" and shuts B4 down. His reaction makes perfect sense because he's disappointed in himself for taking B4 on trust and for putting the lives of his friends in danger, the unspoken line being that he's thinking he should have been more wary of B4 after all that business with Lore.
     
  16. Harvey

    Harvey Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2005
    Location:
    Los Angeles, California
    That movie wasn't green-lit; it was just in development for as long as it took Berman's contract to run out. Not all that dissimilar to what happened to Harve Bennett after the fifth feature film.

    (Re: KingDaniel)
     
  17. USS Firefly

    USS Firefly Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2013
    Lance wrote;
    No it doesn't because he shouldn't have showed any emotion because he doesn't have the emotion chip activated.
     
  18. Dream

    Dream Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2001
    Location:
    Hotel Transylvania
    The emotion chip was never mentioned even once in the Nemesis movie. It made all the scenes with emotional Data in Generations even more pointless since we know it will make no lasting impact.
     
  19. Lance

    Lance Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    May 9, 2012
    Location:
    The Enterprise's Restroom
    An entire subplot with Data trying to help B4 develop was filmed but mostly dropped from the movie. Data's storyline in Nemesis was that he had a new brother who he wanted to help along, and (at least the one deleted scene related to the subplot we do get to see) shows Data somewhat disappointed in B4's lack of progress in even the simplest of tasks. These deleted scenes show why he jacks himself into B4's neural net and tries to give his little brother a helping hand in the development department. He's therefore incredibly disappointed that he allowed himself to be taken in by the B4 sceme, and (like it or not) Spiner does seem to imply in his "because you are dangerous" speech while deactivating B4 that it's Data's decision to shut-down B4, because he's made the same mistake he made with Lore: too much trust. He blames himself for making the same mistake twice, and is determined that he won't let B4 cloud his judgement like he did Lore.

    See, THIS is the true reason why Nemesis is made of fail. Even Brent Spiner's story line got screwed over by the director this time around.

    (For what it's worth, I prefer to take the final scene as being an indication that B4 is finally beginning to develop, and that a subsequent movie could have had Spiner as B4. The route the novels took of having Data "take over" his brother seemed a little heartless IMHO.)

    Again, the emotion chip is in a deleted scene. Its omission from the plot was down to the director getting a bit too scissor-happy in the editing room.
     
  20. Tosk

    Tosk Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2001
    Location:
    On the run.
    Not in the good novels though. ;)