Vlogger's Proposed Changes to "Insurrection"

[Trelane_Squire_of_Gothos]

This is an interesting take. Would this have made a better or worse "Insurrection" film?

https://www.bitchute.com/video/Qrt16SaoODc/?list=notifications&randomize=false

 

[ChallengerHK]

Just about anything would be an improvement. But I think his version is only an incremental improvement.

 

[Vger23]

It would have needed a significant overhaul for me to consider it a "better" film. Even at this point in the franchise's life cycle...a full 23 years after the film was released...this is still the only Trek movie that I actively dislike.

 

[Trelane_Squire_of_Gothos]

It would have needed a significant overhaul for me to consider it a "better" film. Even at this point in the franchise's life cycle...a full 23 years after the film was released...this is still the only Trek movie that I actively dislike.

It wasn't Jonathan Frakes' best showing (or the writers').

 

[ChallengerHK]

Michael Piller's book FADE IN is a pretty good review of how the process failed during Insurrection. I view it as an indictment of writing by committee; YMMV.

 

[Vger23]

It wasn't Jonathan Frakes' best showing (or the writers').

I actually think Frakes did a nice job as the director. It was the story that was really bad

 

[ChallengerHK]

I actually think Frakes did a nice job as the director. It was the story that was really bad

It's hard to tell in such situations. I tend to think the actors give earnest, convincing performances most of the time and that the crap was indeed in the script.

 

[Trelane_Squire_of_Gothos]

I actually think Frakes did a nice job as the director. It was the story that was really bad

The editing was not good. Also, Frakes probably could have improvised better on the lack of explanation for Worf (noted in the video).

 

[Vger23]

The editing was not good. Also, Frakes probably could have improvised better on the lack of explanation for Worf (noted in the video).

Of all the problems with the film, the “explanation for Worf” is definitely not one I care about or one that would have moved the needle for me either way.

 

[FederationHistorian]

His suggestions make the film better, but ignores a key thread that had been built up in TNG that wasn’t referenced: how the Federation had developed a behaviour to forcefully relocate those that had already settled on a planet not indigenous to it. The colonists that lived on Dorvan V in the Demilitarized Zone in particular, who chose to leave the Federation and be under Cardassian rule after Picard himself almost forcefully relocated the settlers on Federation orders after the settlers refused to evacuate. While the other colonists on other planets in the DMZ took up arms and formed the Maquis to protect themselves from the Cardassians.

Now there is the Baku, who are living within Federation space, but aren’t treated as Federation citizens. The secrecy taken by the Federation through the duck blinds and other tech shows how they are aware that the Baku have no interest in offworlder life and are resistant to it. And like those in the DMZ had to deal with both the Cardassian Union and the Federation, the Baku are being forced to leave by the Son’a – developers of ketracel-white for the Dominion - and the Federation are willing participants.

It would have been apt for the film to explore why the Federation are content in giving into the demands of other powers to relocate their own Federation citizens. It would have given extra weight to the actions of Picard and the rest of the crew in the film.

 

[Trelane_Squire_of_Gothos]

Of all the problems with the film, the “explanation for Worf” is definitely not one I care about or one that would have moved the needle for me either way.

Sure. It's still lazy work though.

His suggestions make the film better, but ignores a key thread that had been built up in TNG that wasn’t referenced: how the Federation had developed a behaviour to forcefully relocate those that had already settled on a planet not indigenous to it. The colonists that lived on Dorvan V in the Demilitarized Zone in particular, who chose to leave the Federation and be under Cardassian rule after Picard himself almost forcefully relocated the settlers on Federation orders after the settlers refused to evacuate. While the other colonists on other planets in the DMZ took up arms and formed the Maquis to protect themselves from the Cardassians.

Now there is the Baku, who are living within Federation space, but aren’t treated as Federation citizens. The secrecy taken by the Federation through the duck blinds and other tech shows how they are aware that the Baku have no interest in offworlder life and are resistant to it. And like those in the DMZ had to deal with both the Cardassian Union and the Federation, the Baku are being forced to leave by the Son’a – developers of ketracel-white for the Dominion - and the Federation are willing participants.

It would have been apt for the film to explore why the Federation are content in giving into the demands of other powers to relocate their own Federation citizens. It would have given extra weight to the actions of Picard and the rest of the crew in the film.

I think the "insurrection" itself kind of served as a rebuttal to the Federation's "developed behavior."

 

[suarezguy]

*Shrug* A lot of both the complaints and suggested improvements seem nitpicky.

I think with the Ba'ku being on the planet for only (?) 300 years, before the Federation existed (that could have been made clearer), the Federation still come off as invaders much more than the Ba'ku come off as squatters (with a whole uninhabited planet/region, let alone before the territory owner did own the territory, the analogy seems really silly). In the film the Federation still seem like owning the planet only in the sense that it's within their territory because they defeated some other entity for vast amounts of territory including it later. Although I also don't see how with just one village of 600 the Ba'ku should have, or even really do claim, the whole planet.

Deep Space Nine crossovers could or could not work better than what we did get (although the opening diplomacy scene is pretty bad, overly goofy even just in terms of the film itself). Directly dealing with the Dominion War, and wanting to get advanced weapons for it, could be fine, better, but it could also make it feel too much like plot and themes of another series. The film does already believably somewhat reflect the Dominion War, a reason why the Federation needs the medicine improvement, without focusing on it a lot (and a lot of viewers do still sympathize more and side with the Dougherty over Enterprise crew view anyway which is OK).

Edit: I think the film could have used less humor, and/or less broad slapstick humor (although I usually like slapstick humor) without going as grim dark intense war drama, or even intense war drama all around the main plot, as some people seem to want it to have gone. And I do like that the Federation wanting to use the resource to help a lot more people is still a compelling, tempting dilemma rather than more clearly in the wrong like wanting better weapons even if you do need them.

 

[Trelane_Squire_of_Gothos]

*Shrug* A lot of both the complaints and suggested improvements seem nitpicky.

I think with the Ba'ku being on the planet for only (?) 300 years, before the Federation existed (that could have been made clearer), the Federation still come off as invaders much more than the Ba'ku come off as squatters (with a whole uninhabited planet/region, let alone before the territory owner did own the territory, the analogy seems really silly). In the film the Federation still seem like owning the planet only in the sense that it's within their territory because they defeated some other entity for vast amounts of territory including it later. Although I also don't see how with just one village of 600 the Ba'ku should have, or even really do claim, the whole planet.

In current times, we refer to it as "eminent domain" (I didn't particularly care for that ruling either). Apparently, the filmmakers were projecting that this would still be practiced in the future. If it matters in the future, then it should certainly matter now.

Deep Space Nine

crossovers could or could not work better than what we did get (although the opening diplomacy scene is pretty bad, overly goofy even just in terms of the film itself). Directly dealing with the Dominion War, and wanting to get advanced weapons for it, could be fine, better, but it could also make it feel too much like plot and themes of another series. The film does already believably somewhat reflect the Dominion War, a reason why the Federation needs the medicine improvement, without focusing on it a lot (and a lot of viewers do still sympathize more and side with the Dougherty over Enterprise crew view anyway which is OK).

They arbitrarily used Janeway in one of the TNG movies (I think it was Nemesis). I think this would have been a practical way of tying the DS9 crew into a film. In retrospect, that series was good enough to deserve at least that.

Edit: I think the film could have used less humor, and/or less broad slapstick humor (although I usually like slapstick humor) without going as grim dark intense war drama, or even intense war drama all around the main plot, as some people seem to want it to have gone. And I do like that the Federation wanting to use the resource to help a lot more people is still a compelling, tempting dilemma rather than more clearly in the wrong like wanting better weapons even if you do need them.

I think he was making a valid point though in pointing out that it creates a conflict of identifying who the bad guys really are in that situation (and why the deception was necessary).

 

[publiusr]

Kilo vs New London writ large

 

[Ssosmcin]

I don't think the film is THAT bad. It's just bland. Another Star Trek attempt to "lighten up" after a couple of heavy films. I just didn't care about the B'aku, a group of white Vegans from America's heartland growing and smoking their own weed. This is a classic example of not letting your lead actors have story approval.

Now, had this been a real story about a truly less advanced society being disregarded by the Federation because they got too up in their own perfection and Picard takes their side because it's right, not because he has a boner for the female lead, then sure. I'd have gotten behind it. If these people were indigenous, barely able to communicate, so far behind them that the Federation felt they wouldn't even realize they were being relocated, instead of a nefarious plot by a bunch of ugly aliens - to truly question the nature of the Federation and make a difference in Star Trek as a whole, you could have had a really strong story.

But nope, it was about Picard having a romance, Data learning how to be a kid and jokes about puberty and boobs. This would have made a great two part episode in the early first season.

At least Jerry Goldsmith showed up with the goods.

 

[suarezguy]

^Agreed that the Picard romance plot really shouldn't have been there but would it have really made a big difference if the aliens had had alien makeup, not really looked human, and hadn't been revealed to be warp-capable?

 

[Ssosmcin]

^Agreed that the Picard romance plot really shouldn't have been there but would it have really made a big difference if the aliens had had alien makeup, not really looked human, and hadn't been revealed to be warp-capable?

Well, imagine the aliens from the start of Into Darkness were the B'aku. No speaking, no romance, not settlers getting back to nature but native primitives. However the Federation decides to move them for the greater good. On their own, not because some "evil alien" black hat villain has parental issues. It would be a genuine clash of ideals between the Federation's needs and Picard upholding what the Federation is supposed to stand for. Pitting Picard against another starship or a Federation task force would be more exciting to me than what we got and have much broader implications.

 

[FederationHistorian]

Directly dealing with the Dominion War, and wanting to get advanced weapons for it, could be fine, better, but it could also make it feel too much like plot and themes of another series. The film does already believably somewhat reflect the Dominion War, a reason why the Federation needs the medicine improvement, without focusing on it a lot (and a lot of viewers do still sympathize more and side with the Dougherty over Enterprise crew view anyway which is OK).

Or it helps to tie into the thematic feel of the Ent-E films.

It makes sense for the audience to expect the Dominion to be involved in the plot i.e. annexing a forgotten planet on the edge of Federation space for its regenerative properties, and the Son’a working with the Dominion, while the Ba'ku work with the Federation. A Vorta makes more sense in place of another evil admiral. Would probably make the twist of the Son’a and the Ba'ku being the same species mean more.

Trying to go back to the days when TNG was on tv did not work when the effort was already made to move past that with the destruction of the Ent-D and change in uniform. It does not take away from Picard’s romance, and would have answered what the Ent-E was doing during the war. It would give Worf a reason for being on the ship too, being familiar with the Dominion.

 

[dupersuper]

This is an interesting take. Would this have made a better or worse "Insurrection" film?

https://www.bitchute.com/video/Qrt16SaoODc/?list=notifications&randomize=false

This link's not working for me.

 

[publiusr]

There was a significant improvement:
It was called AVATAR