I grew up with TOS and Kirk is my favorite character. But how he was handled isn't high on the list of complaints I have about Generations.
Some Nostalgic Thoughts on Generations
- Thread starter angry apple panda
- Start date
I grew up with TOS and Kirk is my favorite character. But how he was handled isn't high on the list of complaints I have about Generations.
The visuals were stunning,
Biggest dissapointing was the destruction of the Ent-D
Biggest dissapointing was the destruction of the Ent-D
I often feel nostalgic for this film (and, more generally, that time of Trek fandom - it was a very exciting time!) and thought it looked terrific. If I could change one thing, it would be the destruction of the Enterprise-D. I'd have preferred it suffered lots of damage so they could "substantially upgrade it" for First Contact, rather than scrap it altogether.
As much as I agree with this sentiment (and I loved seeing the D on the big screen) - the Enterprise D crash, in my opinion, remains to this day one of the most visually stunning sequences in the franchise, reboot films included. I wouldn't have complained if the E had been a revised design of the D and retained the D's interior as the E's interior looked dreadful. I really like the exterior of the E though so it's swings and roundabouts.
There's little nitpicks too that really bother me that have no bearing on the film as a film:
It's easier when you are making TMP and TWOK after a decade of no Trek. You have that freedom of building a universe from near scratch, updating everything, excusing changes as "the passage of time." But this was the first time a film came so quickly after the series, and I feel like the writers panicked a little, having written a de facto Trek film already in "All Good Things," practically back-to-back.
- Riker not knowing anything about trilithium, even though trilithium resin was stolen from the Enterprise in "Starship Mine," and now trilithium has magical star blowing up powers.
- The emotion chip not the same size as before. I kind of just imagine that they had to put a special casing on it to insulate it or something, so this doesn't bother me all that much.
- Kirk is buried in some rocks on a cliff. This is miserable. What if there's a storm? Who does this to a body?
- Why don't all starships randomly modulate their shield frequency?
- Standard practice for LaForge being returned from a hostage situation should always be A.) Remove the VISOR, and B.) confine him to quarters for a 24 hour period while the VISOR is examined. Did they not learn from "The Mind's Eye?" His VISOR is a liability. No wonder he got rid of it for the next film.
It's easier when you are making TMP and TWOK after a decade of no Trek. You have that freedom of building a universe from near scratch, updating everything, excusing changes as "the passage of time." But this was the first time a film came so quickly after the series, and I feel like the writers panicked a little, having written a de facto Trek film already in "All Good Things," practically back-to-back.
At the time, I'm sure Picard didn't know that Starfleet was on their way to rescue him.
I mean, for all Picard knew, the Enterprise was still in orbit, right? He didn't see the starship crash.
But how long was he suppose to wait before burying the body? We have no idea how long he was there, with Kirk's body smelling up the place.
True. I always wondered if he intended to tell Starfleet. "Also, as a minor side note, James T. Kirk's body is totally on the planet, we should probably beam it up before the wolves get to it."
In the Shatnerverse novels, the Romulans snatch the body and the Borg bring Kirk back to life.
I would've preferred if Kirk's death had ramifications that there was a degree of astonishment about meeting Kirk included in the dialogue. Or perhaps a funeral with an honour escort. But it's spot the cat that commands the headlines! This is kind of what I mean when I say they didn't know quite what do with Kirk.
It would've been tough to end the movie with a funeral. They always like to end Trek movies upbeat.
th
Shatner/Kirk being in the movie was the best thing about Generations. I thought he stole the show whenever he was on the screen. I loved the opening scene with Kirk and Scotty on board the Ent-B.
I think having Kirk in the movie worked against the cast of TNG. It reminded me of how colorful and charming the TOS characters were and how the TNG characters were not. Other than that, GEN was an ok movie.
I agree that it was kind of awesome seeing TNG finally on the big screen. I also very much enjoyed the Kirk/Picard interaction. We finally got to see the face off between the two captains. Unfortunately for Picard, Kirk outshined Picard. Oddly enough, Kirk came across as youthful, as well as dynamic and charismatic. Picard looked old in comparison in those scenes.
Maybe one of Kirk's family members could have demanded that Kirk's body be recovered and brought to Earth for a proper burial, somewhat like how Sarek demanded that Kirk bring Spock's body back to Vulcan. Perhaps there could have been a Search for Kirk sequel.
Another thing that bothered me about Kirk's burial on that forsaken planet was how different a send off Kirk got compared to the pomp and circumstance that Spock's body got in TWOK. Kirk's burial scene seemed almost like an afterthought. These were the two main characters of the franchise, but they received vastly different send offs. And the ironic thing was that Spock came back, while GEN was probably really the end for Kirk. Kirk deserved better.
Shatner/Kirk being in the movie was the best thing about Generations. I thought he stole the show whenever he was on the screen. I loved the opening scene with Kirk and Scotty on board the Ent-B.
I think having Kirk in the movie worked against the cast of TNG. It reminded me of how colorful and charming the TOS characters were and how the TNG characters were not. Other than that, GEN was an ok movie.
I agree that it was kind of awesome seeing TNG finally on the big screen. I also very much enjoyed the Kirk/Picard interaction. We finally got to see the face off between the two captains. Unfortunately for Picard, Kirk outshined Picard. Oddly enough, Kirk came across as youthful, as well as dynamic and charismatic. Picard looked old in comparison in those scenes.
Maybe one of Kirk's family members could have demanded that Kirk's body be recovered and brought to Earth for a proper burial, somewhat like how Sarek demanded that Kirk bring Spock's body back to Vulcan. Perhaps there could have been a Search for Kirk sequel.
Another thing that bothered me about Kirk's burial on that forsaken planet was how different a send off Kirk got compared to the pomp and circumstance that Spock's body got in TWOK. Kirk's burial scene seemed almost like an afterthought. These were the two main characters of the franchise, but they received vastly different send offs. And the ironic thing was that Spock came back, while GEN was probably really the end for Kirk. Kirk deserved better.
Well, to be fair, I'd imagine Kirk would have had quite the funeral when he was presumed dead on the Enterprise-B, and everyone would have been there, including many old friends like Sarek, who is dead by Generations. If they had a second funeral in the 24th century, it would probably be a bit lackluster. Spock was probably still on Romulus during Generations. Scotty is essentially at a retirement home, but might have been able to attend. McCoy was a borderline corpse in "Encounter at Farpoint," but might have been able to come also if he survived to Generations. But most people Kirk knew were probably unavailable or dead.
The memorial service was probably done right the first time in the past, but there's no good way to shoehorn that funeral into the movie without blowing the pacing. The launch of the Enterprise-B was already awkward with Kirk, Chekov, and Scotty being the only original crew to show up. Kirk's story ended at the beginning of Generations, and his character was living on borrowed time for the rest of it. It's Picard and the TNG crew's story by the end of the film, which is what the writers intended.
On a side note: I often try to imagine what kind of death for Kirk that would actually have been satisfying. I mean, to me, the death kind of works, since his true death was on the Enterprise-B, and it's rather heroic, although stuffed at the beginning of the movie. It's Kirk's "Spock death." I look at Kirk's death at the end of the film, metaphorically, as the universe sort of equalizing itself. Kirk was unnaturally brought back, so he couldn't stay. His real heroic death was at the beginning.
I'm still of the opinion there should never have been a cross over. It was fan service pure and simple. It didn't help the movie. TUC already had the perfect send off for the original crew, Kirk saving the E-B didn't make any sense (there was really no crew member but a retired Captain and the current captain who could technobable the deflectors to technobabling the nexus?).
I'm not a fan of TNG but the movie should have been theirs alone. The film wouldn't have had to twist itself I to knots to bring Kirk in and the finale wouldn't have had to be three senior citizens having a fist fight.
I'm not a fan of TNG but the movie should have been theirs alone. The film wouldn't have had to twist itself I to knots to bring Kirk in and the finale wouldn't have had to be three senior citizens having a fist fight.
They should have had McCoy show up out of nowhere in a Captain Pike wheelchair and run over Soran.
They should have had McCoy show up out of nowhere in a Captain Pike wheelchair and run over Soran.
Or Betty White....
AAP, I couldn't agree with you more. I LOVE Generations. I was older than you (in Grad School - I've seen every Trek film in the theater) but everything you say rings so true... Your post gave me cause to recall a "review" that I wrote shortly after the film came out:
Star Trek: GENERATIONS is among my favorite of all Trek, and is my second favorite film after THE WRATH OF KHAN.
It took me a long time to appreciate this film. I hated it for years, despised it in the theater. But eventually, after many viewings, I was able to see where the writers were coming from, and the daring, unconventional direction and methods that were behind the story. And while I can understand why so many people didn't like it (my god, they killed Kirk!), I also think that the film deserves MUCH, MUCH more credit and attention that it has received. It truly is an understated masterpiece.
Unlike the vast majority of Trek, "Generations" is a tragedy in the true Shakespearean sense. It is a look at a part of the human condition that other Trek stories have barely even glimpsed, the idea that "Bad Things Can and Do Happen to Good People."
In other Trek, we are treated to "big" concepts, larger than life villains, heroic ideals, and intricate and powerful plotlines--and there's nothing wrong with that. But Generations dares to take a totally different and unique approach to the characters and story. It is a tragic telling of how terrible things can and do exist in the universe, and for no good reason--at least none that any of us can understand. It addresses the penultimate human question of, "If there is a God, why does he allow earthquakes and famine?", and it deals with the simple fact that the universe is not going to give us any easy answers to that question.
Now, let's take a look at the major events of the film, and I'll detail exactly what I mean when I say that it's about "Bad Things that can and do happen to Good People."
The film opens with Kirk being lost in space and presumed dead in the most unlikely of circumstances. Kirk is lost, simply because the Enterprise is being commanded by an incompetent captain. Surely, it doesn't get more ironic than that? I personally couldn't imagine a more tragic death for Kirk than to fall victim to age, red tape, and bureaucracy--evils far greater than a dozen Khan Noonian Singhs.
And this scene is not without other tragedy--Scotty is able to save less than half of the El Aurians (who have already been dealt the dark hand of tragedy, losing their homeworld to the Borg, and are now fleeing for their very lives, homeless and alone--Only to be caught in a "spatial anomaly" which will do in most of the rest of them). Crummy luck--reminds me of the way things sometimes work out in "real life."
And Scotty--the Miracle Worker--to the best of all his abilities and legendary skills, is frustratingly able to save so few of them... and in front of a slew of TV news reporters, no less. This is a reality check, a subtle means of showing that this "legend" is really a person (albeit a very talented one) and subject to all the laws of physics, Murphy, incompetence and bad luck as the rest of us.
Even the absence of Spock and McCoy (though I understand that this was a result of the actors' refusal to be in the film, rather than a predetermined plot point) nevertheless worked very well. Of course Kirk would be alone, without his true friends when the shit hits the fan. All the more tragic, I say.
Then we have Picard (during what should have been one of his happier moments, a celebration with his crew and closest friends) learning that his family has been killed in a house fire. Not murdered at the hands of an arch-enemy, but killed in a stupid, and probably preventable accident. This is the sort of thing that happens in REAL LIFE, not in the stuff of legends! And for that reason, it strikes us on a very terrifying and human level.
The film is chock-full of tragedy--and, at the risk of reiterating myself, I'll clarify that: REAL tragedy, not cinematic tragedy. The fusing of Data's emotion chip is a perfect example:
Data had striven for seven screen years to obtain emotions the hard way, by learning them and growing into a human... But when presented with a "cheap and fast" means of obtaining them, he fell victim to this temptation and went for it. Surely, he knew that Lor's emotion chip was not functioning correctly? Surely he knew that it was a dangerous, even unwise, undertaking to install the chip? But install it he did--with tragic results. While many critics seemed to find Data's humor in the film to be campy, unnecessary, or "bad acting", I beg to differ. I don't believe his humor was meant in any way to be comedic relief for the film--on the contrary, I found it to be nothing short of disturbing and inappropriate. The rashness and fallout of his misguided decision to install that emotion chip is evident in every joke he cracks: Laughing in times of danger, mouthing "Oh shit!" as the Enterprise crashes to the surface of the planet Veridian--this isn't comedy. This is truly unsettling, emotional instability. A tragedy for Data unlike any other I could envision--in his quest to become human, he opted for the "quick fix" and instead turned himself into an emotional cripple. (Note: I'm speaking within the context of Generations, I realize this plotline has been ignored in subsequent films). Data, in short, fell victim to one of humanity's most insidious downfalls: the easy road of temptation and laziness.
Which brings me to another theme of Generations: Temptation and Addiction. Let's take a look at the character of Dr. Soran:
Soran has been critically scorned as being a pretty lame villain--certainly he's no Khan, no Lor, no Q, no Borg Queen, no Gul Dukat... But then, was he ever meant to be?
Dr. Soran has no grandiose plans on taking over the universe, no desire for conquest or power. Indeed, he isn't even bent on any sort of literary revenge...! He only wants to get into the Nexus. Why? Simple, he's a drug addict.
And like a drug addict (who will stop at nothing, even destroying their own families to support their addiction) Soran will stop at nothing to get back into the Nexus. He doesn't care who or what he has to hurt or destroy to get there--he has already given over his sense of self, and his moral code, to his addiction. Surely, this is as tragic and pathetic and REAL a villain as has ever graced the screen of Trek?
Which brings us to the Nexus itself. A lot has been said that if it was so powerful and influential, how did Picard and Kirk so easily escape it's Siren's song? Well, here's my thought on the matter: I don't believe that the Nexus was all that powerful or manipulative. Mostly (like drug or alcohol addiction) I believe that it captured those addictive personalities who were susceptible to its influences. Kirk and Picard are both most assuredly self-realized and strong-willed characters. While they certainly may have been tempted and even tricked by the wiles of the Nexus, they also were both intellectually or psychologically above giving in to it's temptations, once they realized what really going on. Now, it has been established in the film that the Nexus offers, not a life of perfect, wish-come-true illusion, but rather an illusory life of mediocre complacency--something that, IMO, neither Kirk nor Picard would or could EVER settle for.
And the tragedy continues. The Enterprise is destroyed by a old out-of-commission Klingon BoP, commanded by two lame villains, with a petty gripe? And not because of any battle mettle or brilliant strategy (a la TWOK), but rather, because they (after dehumanizing Geordi and "cheating" to get the shield frequencies) score a lucky hit on the warp core. What aterrible, unfair end for the Federation flagship!
And even Geordi cannot prevent the core from going critical. Much like Scotty earlier in the film, Geordi is exposed, not as a miracle worker, but as a real person, bowing down to real physics. A tragedy, through and through.
And seeing the women and children evacuated in a panic to the saucer section--we are struck again by the inappropriateness of having families on a ship such as this. Yes, bad things can and do happen to good people.
And in the end, what is resolved? Nothing. Our heroes do not come out as such. They are not heroes in this particular "human adventure", they are merely survivors. They have learned a powerful lesson--perhaps one of the greatest lessons that there is: That the universe is unrelenting, bad things can and do happen for no good reason, and that God (or Q, the Organians, or the Wormhole aliens, what have you) works in mysterious ways. We can learn more from tragedy, than from high adventure.
And none of this is to say that Generations doesn't have it's share of grand cinematic moments. The scene where Picard releases his pent-up anger and sorrow and frustration and admits to Troi that he fears that the Picard line will die with him is poignant and brilliantly punctuated with the star collapsing in on itself outside his window.
The crash landing of the saucer section is a wonderfully tragic edge-of-your seat sequence.
The shared scenes with Kirk and Picard were wonderfully character-driven and subtle--the chopping off wood, the cooking of breakfast, the captains on horseback. Nothing over the top, but always true to their personalities.
And the opening scene of the champagne bottle floating through space to smash on the hull of the Enterprise-B is a particularly subtle and brilliant moment. After a careful viewing of the film, one must look back and wonder, "What exactly are we celebrating here?" Behind the third wall, we (the audience) are celebrating a Star Trek anniversary. But in the context of the film, given that it is unmistakably a tragedy...? I think we are celebrating our acceptance of, and our willing to go on living, despite our own human mortality.
And a note on the Nexus time-travel: A lot of people have argued that the time travel was merely a gimmick used to cheat the plot. While I would agree with that in many other Trek stories, I don't think that's the case here. What was accomplished with Picard and Kirk's travelling back in time? Was the Enterprise saved? Was Picard's family saved? Was Kirk saved? Were the El Aurians saved? No... none of the tragedy was averted. The Nexus was not a gimmick, but a true, allegorical means of showing the futility and frustration, despite hope, in dealing with tragic circumstances.
So there it is. I LOVED this film. From the stark lighting to the character-driven story to the wonderfully apocalyptic sets. And when taken in it's proper context--as a true tragedy--and as being a VERY different kind of storytelling than most other Trek, I think it deserves a re-appraisal by its critics. There is a lot going on here, and most of it is very subtle.
Let's end with another subtle tragedy. Riker has given up, how many commands, waiting for the Enterprise-D? And in the end, when he finally gets (albeit temporary) command of the Enterprise, HE is accountable for the ship’s destruction.
In the film's final moments he tells Picard that he plans on "living forever." But we all know that he won't--because, if nothing else, this film has shown us that our heroes, like us, are all too human.
Star Trek: GENERATIONS is among my favorite of all Trek, and is my second favorite film after THE WRATH OF KHAN.
It took me a long time to appreciate this film. I hated it for years, despised it in the theater. But eventually, after many viewings, I was able to see where the writers were coming from, and the daring, unconventional direction and methods that were behind the story. And while I can understand why so many people didn't like it (my god, they killed Kirk!), I also think that the film deserves MUCH, MUCH more credit and attention that it has received. It truly is an understated masterpiece.
Unlike the vast majority of Trek, "Generations" is a tragedy in the true Shakespearean sense. It is a look at a part of the human condition that other Trek stories have barely even glimpsed, the idea that "Bad Things Can and Do Happen to Good People."
In other Trek, we are treated to "big" concepts, larger than life villains, heroic ideals, and intricate and powerful plotlines--and there's nothing wrong with that. But Generations dares to take a totally different and unique approach to the characters and story. It is a tragic telling of how terrible things can and do exist in the universe, and for no good reason--at least none that any of us can understand. It addresses the penultimate human question of, "If there is a God, why does he allow earthquakes and famine?", and it deals with the simple fact that the universe is not going to give us any easy answers to that question.
Now, let's take a look at the major events of the film, and I'll detail exactly what I mean when I say that it's about "Bad Things that can and do happen to Good People."
The film opens with Kirk being lost in space and presumed dead in the most unlikely of circumstances. Kirk is lost, simply because the Enterprise is being commanded by an incompetent captain. Surely, it doesn't get more ironic than that? I personally couldn't imagine a more tragic death for Kirk than to fall victim to age, red tape, and bureaucracy--evils far greater than a dozen Khan Noonian Singhs.
And this scene is not without other tragedy--Scotty is able to save less than half of the El Aurians (who have already been dealt the dark hand of tragedy, losing their homeworld to the Borg, and are now fleeing for their very lives, homeless and alone--Only to be caught in a "spatial anomaly" which will do in most of the rest of them). Crummy luck--reminds me of the way things sometimes work out in "real life."
And Scotty--the Miracle Worker--to the best of all his abilities and legendary skills, is frustratingly able to save so few of them... and in front of a slew of TV news reporters, no less. This is a reality check, a subtle means of showing that this "legend" is really a person (albeit a very talented one) and subject to all the laws of physics, Murphy, incompetence and bad luck as the rest of us.
Even the absence of Spock and McCoy (though I understand that this was a result of the actors' refusal to be in the film, rather than a predetermined plot point) nevertheless worked very well. Of course Kirk would be alone, without his true friends when the shit hits the fan. All the more tragic, I say.
Then we have Picard (during what should have been one of his happier moments, a celebration with his crew and closest friends) learning that his family has been killed in a house fire. Not murdered at the hands of an arch-enemy, but killed in a stupid, and probably preventable accident. This is the sort of thing that happens in REAL LIFE, not in the stuff of legends! And for that reason, it strikes us on a very terrifying and human level.
The film is chock-full of tragedy--and, at the risk of reiterating myself, I'll clarify that: REAL tragedy, not cinematic tragedy. The fusing of Data's emotion chip is a perfect example:
Data had striven for seven screen years to obtain emotions the hard way, by learning them and growing into a human... But when presented with a "cheap and fast" means of obtaining them, he fell victim to this temptation and went for it. Surely, he knew that Lor's emotion chip was not functioning correctly? Surely he knew that it was a dangerous, even unwise, undertaking to install the chip? But install it he did--with tragic results. While many critics seemed to find Data's humor in the film to be campy, unnecessary, or "bad acting", I beg to differ. I don't believe his humor was meant in any way to be comedic relief for the film--on the contrary, I found it to be nothing short of disturbing and inappropriate. The rashness and fallout of his misguided decision to install that emotion chip is evident in every joke he cracks: Laughing in times of danger, mouthing "Oh shit!" as the Enterprise crashes to the surface of the planet Veridian--this isn't comedy. This is truly unsettling, emotional instability. A tragedy for Data unlike any other I could envision--in his quest to become human, he opted for the "quick fix" and instead turned himself into an emotional cripple. (Note: I'm speaking within the context of Generations, I realize this plotline has been ignored in subsequent films). Data, in short, fell victim to one of humanity's most insidious downfalls: the easy road of temptation and laziness.
Which brings me to another theme of Generations: Temptation and Addiction. Let's take a look at the character of Dr. Soran:
Soran has been critically scorned as being a pretty lame villain--certainly he's no Khan, no Lor, no Q, no Borg Queen, no Gul Dukat... But then, was he ever meant to be?
Dr. Soran has no grandiose plans on taking over the universe, no desire for conquest or power. Indeed, he isn't even bent on any sort of literary revenge...! He only wants to get into the Nexus. Why? Simple, he's a drug addict.
And like a drug addict (who will stop at nothing, even destroying their own families to support their addiction) Soran will stop at nothing to get back into the Nexus. He doesn't care who or what he has to hurt or destroy to get there--he has already given over his sense of self, and his moral code, to his addiction. Surely, this is as tragic and pathetic and REAL a villain as has ever graced the screen of Trek?
Which brings us to the Nexus itself. A lot has been said that if it was so powerful and influential, how did Picard and Kirk so easily escape it's Siren's song? Well, here's my thought on the matter: I don't believe that the Nexus was all that powerful or manipulative. Mostly (like drug or alcohol addiction) I believe that it captured those addictive personalities who were susceptible to its influences. Kirk and Picard are both most assuredly self-realized and strong-willed characters. While they certainly may have been tempted and even tricked by the wiles of the Nexus, they also were both intellectually or psychologically above giving in to it's temptations, once they realized what really going on. Now, it has been established in the film that the Nexus offers, not a life of perfect, wish-come-true illusion, but rather an illusory life of mediocre complacency--something that, IMO, neither Kirk nor Picard would or could EVER settle for.
And the tragedy continues. The Enterprise is destroyed by a old out-of-commission Klingon BoP, commanded by two lame villains, with a petty gripe? And not because of any battle mettle or brilliant strategy (a la TWOK), but rather, because they (after dehumanizing Geordi and "cheating" to get the shield frequencies) score a lucky hit on the warp core. What aterrible, unfair end for the Federation flagship!
And even Geordi cannot prevent the core from going critical. Much like Scotty earlier in the film, Geordi is exposed, not as a miracle worker, but as a real person, bowing down to real physics. A tragedy, through and through.
And seeing the women and children evacuated in a panic to the saucer section--we are struck again by the inappropriateness of having families on a ship such as this. Yes, bad things can and do happen to good people.
And in the end, what is resolved? Nothing. Our heroes do not come out as such. They are not heroes in this particular "human adventure", they are merely survivors. They have learned a powerful lesson--perhaps one of the greatest lessons that there is: That the universe is unrelenting, bad things can and do happen for no good reason, and that God (or Q, the Organians, or the Wormhole aliens, what have you) works in mysterious ways. We can learn more from tragedy, than from high adventure.
And none of this is to say that Generations doesn't have it's share of grand cinematic moments. The scene where Picard releases his pent-up anger and sorrow and frustration and admits to Troi that he fears that the Picard line will die with him is poignant and brilliantly punctuated with the star collapsing in on itself outside his window.
The crash landing of the saucer section is a wonderfully tragic edge-of-your seat sequence.
The shared scenes with Kirk and Picard were wonderfully character-driven and subtle--the chopping off wood, the cooking of breakfast, the captains on horseback. Nothing over the top, but always true to their personalities.
And the opening scene of the champagne bottle floating through space to smash on the hull of the Enterprise-B is a particularly subtle and brilliant moment. After a careful viewing of the film, one must look back and wonder, "What exactly are we celebrating here?" Behind the third wall, we (the audience) are celebrating a Star Trek anniversary. But in the context of the film, given that it is unmistakably a tragedy...? I think we are celebrating our acceptance of, and our willing to go on living, despite our own human mortality.
And a note on the Nexus time-travel: A lot of people have argued that the time travel was merely a gimmick used to cheat the plot. While I would agree with that in many other Trek stories, I don't think that's the case here. What was accomplished with Picard and Kirk's travelling back in time? Was the Enterprise saved? Was Picard's family saved? Was Kirk saved? Were the El Aurians saved? No... none of the tragedy was averted. The Nexus was not a gimmick, but a true, allegorical means of showing the futility and frustration, despite hope, in dealing with tragic circumstances.
So there it is. I LOVED this film. From the stark lighting to the character-driven story to the wonderfully apocalyptic sets. And when taken in it's proper context--as a true tragedy--and as being a VERY different kind of storytelling than most other Trek, I think it deserves a re-appraisal by its critics. There is a lot going on here, and most of it is very subtle.
Let's end with another subtle tragedy. Riker has given up, how many commands, waiting for the Enterprise-D? And in the end, when he finally gets (albeit temporary) command of the Enterprise, HE is accountable for the ship’s destruction.
In the film's final moments he tells Picard that he plans on "living forever." But we all know that he won't--because, if nothing else, this film has shown us that our heroes, like us, are all too human.
You have to be a bit forgiving in the second half, but overall GEN is a very enjoyable Trek film.
GOOD:
It's a great looking film.
The actors all do good work, and most of them have some great moments.
There's some poignant stuff about death and time.
BAD:
The idea of the Nexus is confused and doesn't really make sense, which makes the resolution seem arbitrary.
Kirk didn't get to do more, and died in a disappointing way.
NITPICKS:
The various continuity issues are no worse than what was seen in the various TV series. It's only a big deal if you decide to let it be one.
The lack of service to all the TNG characters is an inevitable result of TNG having too many characters.
GOOD:
It's a great looking film.
The actors all do good work, and most of them have some great moments.
There's some poignant stuff about death and time.
BAD:
The idea of the Nexus is confused and doesn't really make sense, which makes the resolution seem arbitrary.
Kirk didn't get to do more, and died in a disappointing way.
NITPICKS:
The various continuity issues are no worse than what was seen in the various TV series. It's only a big deal if you decide to let it be one.
The lack of service to all the TNG characters is an inevitable result of TNG having too many characters.
