Because he cried and then got his ass kicked by an old man. Twice.
Which Next Generation Movie was the Best?
- Thread starter indycar
- Start date
Indeed, he did.Because he cried and then got his ass kicked by an old man. Twice.
As a result of this he decided to get roided up, hence the later action stuff.Because he cried and then got his ass kicked by an old man. Twice.
One of the issues with Insurrection and Nemesis was that Paramount allowed Stewart and Spiner to have too much say in the story lines. For example the original idea of Insurrection was darker and much more of a personal struggle for Picard having to go on a mission to effectively kill Data and one an old close friend. Stewart didn't want another deep foreboding Picard story and wanted it to be lighter and have a romance.
Stewart also vetoed the use of the Romulans in Insurrection, who were originally planned to be the villains in that movie - which makes twice they were kicked off a Trek film, after TSFS. It's not unusual for stars to have a degree of creative control/input into a movie though, and Patrick Stewart is arguably the biggest star that Trek's ever had.
Though personally I'd have liked to have seen the Romulans be the main villain in a Trek movie, he felt they were stale and dull in TNG, and an anti-climax after the Borg in FC - which I mostly agree with (about their portrayal in TNG, not that they'd have been an anti-climax. I think they'd have made an interesting villain). And when we finally did get to see them play a bigger part in a film, they were victims of Shinzon. Though Donatra did show their nobler side - a bit more like how they were shown in TOS, as opposed to the stereotypical duplicitous, secretive Romulans of TNG.
Last edited:
The thing that got me about Patrick Stewart's list of "demands" for Insurrection was where he talks about downplaying the aspect of the crew being like family, as he felt it was something that had been explored on the TV show and didn't need to be reiterated on the big screen as he felt it could be taken as read. It kind of made me think he was on a bit of a William Shatner-style ego-trip, and also made me question just how fully he really understood how much the appeal of The Next Generation as a TV show lay in that ensemble cast, not necessarily with any one or two members of the cast.
One of my big problems for all the TNG movies was they effectively became Picard/Data adventures at the expensive of all the other characters (Crusher and LaForge suffered the worst from nothing to do) particularly Insurrection and Nemesis which were movies Stewart and Spiner had a lot of creative input rights.
It wasn't always at the scripting stage, either -- McFadden as Dr Crusher has actually got some interesting material in the script for Nemesis, all of it filmed but it got turfed out in editing.
I mean, she couldn't carry a movie. But the character did have a thing going on with Picard that was unique to those two characters, so it was a bit of a shame that all of their 'moments' together were almost entirely removed from the finished film.
I mean, she couldn't carry a movie. But the character did have a thing going on with Picard that was unique to those two characters, so it was a bit of a shame that all of their 'moments' together were almost entirely removed from the finished film.
I really don't get all the love for First Contact, not only here, but everywhere.
It has some good stuff, but it doesn't touch the majority of the original films and it's certainly not a good representation of what the Next Generation series was really all about.
It feels like a TV director tried to make a big bang-bang shoot-'em-up action epic, but it still doesn't feel like a feature film to me. Despite my problems with the Kelvin films, at least Abrams and Lin were good action directors.
It has some good stuff, but it doesn't touch the majority of the original films and it's certainly not a good representation of what the Next Generation series was really all about.
It feels like a TV director tried to make a big bang-bang shoot-'em-up action epic, but it still doesn't feel like a feature film to me. Despite my problems with the Kelvin films, at least Abrams and Lin were good action directors.
I can agree it was out of the norm for that crew, but it was still plenty of fun. Easily better than I, III or V. Personally I prefer it still to II, simply because I tend to think that TWOK has been rather overrated to some extent, itself.
I feel like Insurrection is the only TNG movie where each of the "Magnificent Seven" gets something to do other than stand at a console, though.
The Kelvin films don't look more cinematic than FC because JJAbrams is a better (action) director than Jonathan Frakes. It's because Star Trek '09 had the budget of almost all the four TNG films combined! If the TNG movies sometimes look like TV movies it's because in reality they had a TV budget.
Edit: I looked it up. Here are the exact numbers:
TNG MOVIE BUDGETS:
GEN: $35 million
FC: $45 million
INS: $58 million
NEM: $60 million
JJ MOVIE BUDGETS:
'09: $150 million
STD: $190 million
BEY: $185 million
Last edited:
I think budget is the least of INS and NEM's problems.
I beg to differ, especially in the case of NEM. If Nemesis (with it's epic and ambitious script) had JJ's budget it would be considered one of the best (if not the best) Trek movies. Heck, I would settle for half of STID's budget!
The budget doesn't change how a shot is framed, how the characters are written or how the action is directed.
I think not.
I have to disagree. First Contact not only has some serious character inconsistencies, but it has glaring plot holes. It feels like they were desperately trying to make something that wasn't TNG... or even Star Trek for that matter.
You say it's better than TMP, but I'll repeat what I said in another thread. TMP is one of the best of the films. It's boring (just how I like my sci-fi), but it's pure, unfiltered Star Trek and the only feature that had Gene Roddenberry's full input. It's the only of the films that was really cerebral or high-concept science fiction, it wasn't the Enterprise crew trying to kill some bad guys or it wasn't trying to copy the Wrath of Khan formula like almost every other film that came after it. It was literally just an episode of TOS spread out to 120-minute feature film length (The Changeling, In Thy Image).
Its production values were worthy of a film of its magnitude, its special effects were beautiful, and its visuals were glorious. I can pick out a few shots taken from this movie just from the top of my head that should be kept in a museum. It's philosophical and poetic. It takes some of the pretensions of the original series and kicks it up in a way that speaks more to 2001 and Solaris than to Star Wars. It's probably Goldsmith's best film score, arguably, and that's a high bar. That's why I love it.
The Search for Spock is just a fun, character-driven adventure plot. I don't have a particular hard-on for the Genesis Device MacGuffin plot, nor am I a huge fan of Kruge or Saavik in this film, but it really accentuates the relationship between Kirk, Spock and McCoy... the Enterprise crew as a whole. It doesn't try to beat out the original show, it tries to add to it and build off of it. Christopher Lloyd is great, Leonard Nimoy does a fine job as an actor-director, Horner's score is great, and there's some really memorable scenes (the Enterprise heist, the destruction of the Enterprise, "you Klingon bastard, you killed my son!", Kirk and Spock's resurrection). It's not perfect by any means, but it's an enjoyable 2-hour action/adventure film.
Even TFF has its highlights. It's a mess but a lovable retarded mess. It's the most like the original show, even more than TMP. If it was reduced to a 1-hour third season TOS episode, I think it'd be great.
Last edited:
Oh really? Budget doesn't matter in a sci-fi movie? I would love to see Cameron's Avatar with a $37 million budget. Somehow I think it will be a tad less spectacular than the $237 million version!
That's a great argument. Here's my rebuttal. I think so.
The best TNG movie wasn't a movie. It was "The Best of Both Worlds".
But, of the actual TNG movies, First Contact.
But, of the actual TNG movies, First Contact.
Strawman argument much?Oh really? Budget doesn't matter in a sci-fi movie? I would love to see Cameron's Avatar with a $37 million budget. Somehow I think it will be a tad less spectacular than the $237 million version!
I don't think you know what direction means. All the money in the world couldn't make Michael Bay a better director than Akira Kurosawa or Stanley Kubrick. I'm not even sure what you're arguing.
