Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies I-X' started by Lance, Nov 8, 2013.
Insurrection has its defenders. Just not very many of them.
As I've said elsewhere, I think Insurrection's biggest problem is that it's afraid of it's own premise. The movie tries to pay lip service to the idea that this is morally grey territory, but they're never willing to give both sides equal weight. They were too afraid that part of the audience would disagree with Picard's actions (which happened anyway). So they spend most of the film screaming to the viewer "SEE? PICARD IS RIGHT!!!" They try to have it both ways and wind up achieving neither.
My relationship with Insurrection is similar to my relationship to The Phantom Menace. I like it because I love the characters and the universe, but it's glaring issues are too numerous to ignore.
To be fair, though, I watch it a LOT more often than I watch The Motion Picture.
Well, to be fair, it DID have one of the better soundtracks in the series.
Unfortunately, the shitting writing cancelled that out.
I didn't hate it if that counts for anything, but it's not one of my favorites.
I love Insurrection. Unlike other Star Trek moral conundrums that are black and white, this one engages the audience in a dilemma, the lesser of two evils, that is debated to this day.
I liked TNG. And this movie is the closest in the formula for TNG. It was unabashedly unapologetically Star Trek: The Next Generation. You had to know the characters before you had any investment in the movie. You had to love Data. You had to know about the "strange, new worlds." You have to love that Data learns how to be a child. You had to love that Geordi watches a sunrise. You had to appreciate the fact that Riker shaved and he had a relationship with Deanna. You had to watch the series to understand this movie. It didn't make any effort to "expand the universe," as Rick Berman productions too often tried to do.
I like them when they are explorers and not soldiers. They are soldiers in this movie, but you have to get through 60 minutes before you see a phaser hoisted. This wasn't just light-hearted, it created two, unique cultures and had us peel the layers off of them. The Son'a had produced Ketrecel White. They are addicted to plastic surgery. The Ba'ku loved to live in isolation. They had technology that wasn't replicated, but was discovered some 10,000 years ago on Earth. They have immortality and so there society adjusts, changes, because of it. "Apprenticing for 30 years." There's more than just the exploring. These characters, in this movie, LIKE being explorers. With the exception of poo-pooing some diplomacy, Picard likes being on the planet. He tries to ask questions and see the world through their eyes.
You have to bring your imagination to this one. First Contact is very easy to understand--good versus evil, Captain is damaged, but comes around, and our heroes aren't all that perfect. Concise storytelling and mass appeal. Insurrection is about the 24th century and its belief system. How we have violated everything that Starfleet and the Federation stand for. That we have acted like the 19th century version of Americans. And Picard stands in the way of that. He is protecting the "soul" of humanity. Not high stakes if you don't understand Star Trek.
Common complaints about the Ba'ku could've said "we'll leave" after they are asked. Well, that's forgetting they rejected technology and they would have a problem with why they had to leave, not to mention sacrifice their culture in order to stay immortal. So they are damning themselves to dying if they keep their way of life. Why people don't ask "Why doesn't the Federation study the rings and find a way to replicate them?" Sure, it would take years, but it keeps the soul of humanity in-tact.
Another common complaint is that people don't like Ba'ku, the movie treats them like heroes when they are just "selfish." They didn't set out to find immortality, but they found it. And you are asking them to die. People forget that. They wouldn't die, and suddenly, they would die. That seems a pretty steep price to pay, not understanding them, and robbing them of their lives.
I like this movie. It's my favorite TNG movie, and my third favorite in the whole series of 12. I like it. It is thought-provoking, poignant, and fun. It is a celebration of what makes Star Trek unique.
I don't understand how Star Trek fans could hate it.
The Son'a didn't have years. Even if the Baku left the planet, they'd have longer than the Son'a. I say the "selfish" argument stands at that point.
Because it's a poor movie that has zero drama to engage the audience. Ru'afo is a mustache twirling villain, Dougherty is criminally underdeveloped and Picard is thinking with the wrong head.
The movie needed to show us how dire the Federation situation is and never does. The movie needs to show us Picard having his moment of doubt, weighing the decision of helping the Ba'ku vs. harming the Federation and never does.
Personally, I think Star Trek: Insurrection is the biggest missed opportunity in the history of the franchise. They could have given us something memorable but instead gave us jokes about boobs and floatation devices, and face stretching.
Thats assuming it would even take them years, I mean we are talking about people who had the technology to create planets at one point.
Meh, the federation could always see if THEIR medical tech could let the Son'a live long enough for the rings to work or maybe getting them a more concentrated dose since they have fracking starships.
The federation where during a massive shooting war Sisko can devote time to a baseball game, helping a hologram get his club back, and the dominion was getting its ass handed to it until the Breen showed up a few episodes before the end.
Yes, thing were very dire for the federation at the time
I enjoy the movie; that enjoyment being on par with my enjoyment of the TNG television run. Then again there isn't any Trek movie I don't enjoy; just some more than others. Where it falls down at--where all Trek movies, and most movies in general, fall down--for me is when I have to stop, think, and start getting critical and analytical about the movie. The problem is with Insurrection (like Nemesis) that there is so many moments that just kick you out of the narrative and make you ask "What are they thinking?"
Even during wartime, people have the need of diversion. Probably especially during wartime.
Did you see Star Trek: Generations? There, you have the potential of Picard in pain, the aftermath of the Borg (and Soran's nihilism), having the two crews unite (at least Kirk and Picard), the destruction of the Enterprise-D, the promise of the Nexus described by Guinan, etc. THAT'S the most disappointing moment in this series.
Nemesis was just a continuation of the same story line. First Contact was never going to give us anything memorable that didn't involve a phaser. Insurrection is enjoyable, at least to this fan. Generations had so much happen in it and I felt like I just went to the dentist.
Generations certainly has it's flaws, but I found it quite enjoyable. I enjoy Insurrection, but it's the only chapter in the saga where I want to slap the stupid out of Picard.
Insurrection should've been about the ravages of war and what steps a desperate society will take to save itself. The tone of the movie was simply a mismatch for the background of the story. People are dying in the most devastating war in the history of the Federation and we have Picard doing a mambo and Riker and Troi taking bubble baths.
It should've been a powerful story, the movies answer to "In the Pale Moonlight". Instead, Berman allowed the movies two stars to cut off its proverbial balls.
If they didn't have the courage to do the plot justice they should've found a different plot. One that fit the light-hearted movie Stewart wanted to do.
For me Insurrection is the most enjoyable of all four TNG movies. It's the only movie that comes close to the TNG feel, although Generations came somewhat close as well.
It would have been cool if Berman and co had taken a DS9 route with this movie and tried to integrate a lot more with the Dominion war.
But I don't lose too much sleep over it.
I like the film, for similar reasons as HaventGotALife posted above.
The dilemma isn't black an white, and even Picard points that out in the film when he asks Dougherty how many people it takes before it becomes wrong. And in my opinion he is absolutely right. It's the age old question if you were ready to kill one child if you could save a million.
Then there are many things that simply are not spoonfed to you. The Ba'ku way of life and society would die out if they weren't on the planet enjoying immortality. Furthermore, Geordi hints at the possibility that his newly grown eyes would degenerate if they left. Which means that all the elder Ba'ku would be KILLED by the relocation. Then that the Federation Council was on Picard's side, so all it took was a call from the Enterprise to officially stop Dougherty's operation. Then the condition of the Son'a was absolutely their own fault. The became sterile because of their own doctoring, and then wanted to take the radiation by force. And the idea of setting up another colony was reject ed because they were so selfish that they didn't want to live in an isolated nebula. The Ba'ku had NOTHING to do with the Sona's condition after the exile. Then the Son'a clearly would have screwed Dougherty over and kept the radiation to themselves or sold it to the Dominion. Picard and Dougherty acknowledge that they are like Romulan gangsters. And so forth. It's all there in the film.
Look I don't 'hate' NEM. It still a Star Trek movie. However I am a Star Trek fan and as such a cliche its my right and duty to nitpick the hell out of all the movies and series. I thought this movie would be an OK 2-parter in TNG. Not the worst and not the best of TNG.
You can like the movie but is it really poignant?
Do you really like wacky Data? I just thought Data is embarressing here and in GEN. It reduces his dignity as a character to act as a 'portable floatation' device IMO. Or perhaps I have no sense of humour.
On initial viewing I didn't consider the moral implications of the Baku vs Sona and Federation rights. I just took the movie at face value - that Picard was right everyone else was wrong but wondered why Picard would risk everything for the smug Baku. They just really irritated me. I refuse to believe its because he has the hots for Anji. But thats what it seemed at the time.
Also I agree the Baku have every right to keep the radiation rings whatever to themselves. You know as every millionaire has the right to keep their money and not donate it all to charity. That doesn't make them 'noble' though. That doesn't make them worthy of giving up your career for in case they give you a few titbits of immortality when you come to visit.
I wished the film made me like the Baku. Then at least I would have wanted Picard to be on their side. Now I just think of them as the guys who banished their own children to die because they disobeyed them.
Maybe I'm just jealous because I can't do the same thing when my children get out of line. (Only joking).
And I understand that in Star Trek before Picard had no hesitation in moving the American Indians from their spiritual home on orders from the Admiralty. And this was their spiritual home not just any ordinary planet to them. Picard was prepared to move the Indians on just as they had been displaced in America centuries before. In the Baku case these were white settlers with a good looking leader. So is that the difference ? Or was it the prospect of immmortality? How did Picard change so much between the series and the movies when even more was at stake?
I think the mistake with Insurrection (probably all the TNG movies) is that they Kirkified Picard. Swap Kirk for Picard in Insurrection and the actions wouldn't seem so out of character or at least would fit a little better with the character's personality.
Oh, I would love to see a Kirk-Spock-McCoy discussion of this scenario.
Nope. My "slap Picard" is saved for Nemesis. He has this leader, who promises peace, but shows that he wants anything but. He has thalaron Radiation stabilized into a weapon, a ship that is built for war, and Picard is looking through old photos of himself because it happens to be a clone. His hubris that Shinzon is Picard, and therefore he's incapable of the acts that Shinzon is showing he is capable of doing, puts the Enterprise and the Federation in peril. Without that arrogance, the movie goes nowhere and makes no sense.
Furthermore, after Shinzon's death, he hesitates. The Enterprise is about to be destroyed and he waits. Stunned that Shinzon, himself, was so angry and self-destructive and vengeful, that he pulls the spear that will kill him, further into his body to get to his nemesis. If it wasn't for Data, and his insubordination, the Enterprise is destroyed. Time to retire, old man.
Separate names with a comma.