Honestly, Insurrection isn't that bad...

[Qonundrum]

Because, IMO, they ignore the actual storyline and view the dilemma as a 'one or the other' situation. It wasn't one. They could leave the Ba'ku alone and still benefit without strip-mining the planet.

^^this

Stripmining not the planet, but the magical ringtoss surrounding it that allegedly gave the magic anti-aging power. Plus, is it just the rings as claimed in dialogue but the Briar patch also being a catalyst as that seems more likely, (Or I'm overthinking it all.)

Considering the "we researched it all" was a throwaway one-liner and Geordi needed optic implants again, never mind that if the Sona were residing on the planet until their tussle with their parents and then leaving in a fit of pique and now aging and getting sick, that this magical radiation maguffin was temporary unless you live on the planet and how painless was it that the eyes would begin to work and then not again, etc, etc, now extrapolating onto how many people. The movie spent more time trying to claim it was "one shot and you're immortal" or, if nothing else, an extreme measure for something so temporary. How many people, unaware of the Baku/Sona Jerry Springerfest, might hear about it and still say "not worth the effort.

Then again, with the Dominion war, anything to prop up the fleet-- just how effective is it and, given the Sona already knew the Federation were weak, was Admiral Milton Krest there** really thinking that the Sona, in their much smaller grouping of ships or otherwise, would keep their end?

** same actor as the guy in "Licence to Kill" who gets offed in that one surprisingly similarly in terms of the superficial visual effect


At the end of the day, 'The Omega Glory" did the immortality tale so much better.

 

[Detached Nacelle]

Picard famously took precisely the opposite view in TNG on a couple of occasions, notably Journey's End. This entire aspect, on which the plot hinges, just doesn't work strongly enough.

He did object to those colonists being moved too but ultimately followed his orders because their safety was at risk if they stayed. Opposed to the Ba'ku who would be removed for other people's benefits including literal war criminals (supplying the army the Federation are currently fighting against no less) who just don't want to live there.

 

[Tomalak]

He did object to those colonists being moved too but ultimately followed his orders because their safety was at risk if they stayed. Opposed to the Ba'ku who would be removed for other people's benefits including literal war criminals (supplying the army the Federation are currently fighting against no less) who just don't want to live there.

But the risk here is exactly the same. The Son'a will just do it anyway and kill everyone. Which is exactly what they try to do. Starfleet doesn't have the resources to stop it - they are busy fighting the Dominion and Dougherty only had the tiny scout ship.

This is explicit in the story. The Son'a are nasty people who practise slavery, supply the Federation's enemies and equip their ships with banned weapons of mass destruction, but with whom the Federation has decided to form an uneasy alliance out of desperation, because they can't afford yet another powerful enemy. The same desperation is true of the new alliance with the Evora at the start of the film, who surely can't bring much to the table.

The Federation is attempting to do the "right" thing in a scenario where they mistakenly believe the Ba'ku are an unrelated group who can be transplanted to safeguard them from what the Son'a will do anyway. In return, they get a magical treatment that could save their wearied population and millions maimed by war.

I guess the central point is that the planet is impacting Picard's decision-making. Normally he would have reluctantly gone along with orders, but the Fountain of Youth aspect makes him revert to a more idealistic version of himself, and he decides to take a stand. A stand which is vindicated when he eventually uncovers the complicated truth about the Ba'ku and the Son'a.

All of this could have been better developed and more clearly translated to the final film. It's also not really clear what will happen to the Ba'ku if they are removed. Will they die? I guess this is the case, but I don't think it's explicit.

 

[Detached Nacelle]

But the risk here is exactly the same. The Son'a will just do it anyway and kill everyone. Which is exactly what they try to do. Starfleet doesn't have the resources to stop it - they are busy fighting the Dominion and Dougherty only had the tiny scout ship.

They did play nice at first, they only go all murder happy once Picard starts interfering with their plans. If he hadn't have gotten involved they would have been evacuated on the holobrick and that would have as they say been that.

This is explicit in the story. The Son'a are nasty people who practise slavery, supply the Federation's enemies and equip their ships with banned weapons of mass destruction, but with whom the Federation has decided to form an uneasy alliance out of desperation. The same is true of the new alliance with the Evora at the start of the film.

The Federation is attempting to do the "right" thing in a scenario where they mistakenly believe the Ba'ku are an unrelated group who can be transplanted to safeguard them from what the Son'a will do anyway.

There should definitely have been more calling out the Federation upaboves for allying with the Son'a in the first place.

I guess the central point is that the planet is impacting Picard's decision-making. Normally he would have reluctantly gone along with orders, but the Fountain of Youth aspect makes him revert to a more idealistic version of himself, and he decides to take a stand. A stand which is vindicated when he eventually uncovers the complicated truth about the Ba'ku and the Son'a.

All of this could have been better developed and more clearly translated to the final film.

Indeed that is the legacy of this odd little duck

 

[Ssosmcin]

** same actor as the guy in "Licence to Kill" who gets offed in that one surprisingly similarly in terms of the superficial visual effect

Didn't use a Zerbe balloon this time though.

At the end of the day, 'The Omega Glory" did the immortality tale so much better.

Considering how "well regarded" that episode is ( /s ) - not a high bar for a lot of people (I love the episode but I'm one of two - Roddenberry was the other).

 

[BillJ]

All of this could have been better developed and more clearly translated to the final film. It's also not really clear what will happen to the Ba'ku if they are removed. Will they die? I guess this is the case, but I don't think it's explicit.

I think the bigger problem for the Ba’ku is if the Federation recuses themselves from the situation because of the Prime Directive.

 

[Paul Weaver]

Didn't use a Zerbe balloon this time though.


Considering how "well regarded" that episode is ( /s ) - not a high bar for a lot of people (I love the episode but I'm one of two - Roddenberry was the other).

I had Ultimate Computer and Omega Glory on VHS as a kid, only TOS episodes I had, so I have fondness for those episodes (also for The Battle/Hide and Q and Datalore/Angel One

I note that Kids Today® don't watch the same episodes dozens of times, paradox of choice I guess.

 

[Tomalak]

I think the bigger problem for the Ba’ku is if the Federation recuses themselves from the situation because of the Prime Directive.

The Prime Directive is so hilariously inconsistent depending on who knows what at which point in the movie

• Data reveals himself and duckblind to "primative" Ba'ku " = violation
• Turns out Ba'ku are warp capable = all good
• Starfleet is planning to kidnap them = violation
• It's to save them from the Son'a = Fed Council approves
• But they're the same race = internal affair
• Enterprise intervenes = Fed Council approves

If the Ba'ku were a pre-warp people at risk of a natural disaster instead of the Son'a, Picard would let them all die without a second thought.

 

[Paul Weaver]

If the Ba'ku were a pre-warp people at risk of a natural disaster instead of the Son'a, Picard would let them all die without a second thought.

He had second and third thoughts in Pen Pals and eventually agreed to intervene

 

[Detached Nacelle]

Starfleet has a policy of some interference - Carol Freeman

 

[Tomalak]

He had second and third thoughts in Pen Pals and eventually agreed to intervene

But only because Data had been violating the Prime Directive by communicating with the planet for weeks, and guilt-trips Picard with a message from Sarjenka.

He accepts the Prime Directive says that they cannot help the Boraalans, and is really not happy when Worf’s brother intervenes.

 

[Detached Nacelle]

I wonder if part of why Insurrection feels like an episode is because it's a composite of so many things we've seen before.

Removal of a society - Journey's End
Riker/Troi reconciliation - Menage a Troi (in which she did kiss him with a beard)
Data goes rogue and has to be hunted down - Brothers
Regeneration/age reversion - All Good Things
Badmirals aren't a trope for nothing

 

[DonIago]

I think the bigger problem for the Ba’ku is if the Federation recuses themselves from the situation because of the Prime Directive.

I mean, that's (another) one of the problems of this ill-conceived story... If the Ba'ku exiled the Son'a before, why can't they just do so again? Is it because they destroyed the tech that they used to do so? How did this exile occur? Did the Ba'ku give the Son'a ships?

I wanted to say that one consideration is that if the Ba'ku were deprived of the rings then they would presumably follow the same degradation that the Son'a did...but we don't even know whether that's true, or whether the Son'as' (that's awkward!) condition is based on things that occurred after they were exiled. They might have continued to look like Ba'ku and simply lost their immortality.

And this is why I feel like as non-natives the Ba'ku shouldn't necessarily have much of a say...because if the worst thing that happens if they relocate is that they live the natural lives that they would have lived if they hadn't been lucky enough to stumble across the planet, then it's really hard for me to feel sympathetic about them hogging a planet with the ability to relieve the suffering of thousands or millions...even if it was only temporary, isn't temporary better than nothing at all?

...and, again, this is all the kinds of shit that a single scene of the three parties actually sitting down and talking would have done a great deal to help with.

 

[Allyn Gibson]

...and, again, this is all the kinds of shit that a single scene of the three parties actually sitting down and talking would have done a great deal to help with.

That's what Television Picard would do. Stewart didn't want that. This is what he wrote in one of his vehement memos against the story Berman and Piller pitched him:

That is the background to the unease that I feel with this new story. It seems to reflect the series much more than where we were at the end of First Contact. This compounded by Michael referring back several times to aspects of the series you want to see in this film. That is what I see as retrograde and dangerous and, ultimately, dull.

I think it is retrograde to emphases ‘family’ so strongly. I think that is sentimental and uninteresting and eventually leads to space heroes sitting round a camp fire singing “Row, row, row your boat...” The family building aspect of TNG is passed. Not dead, but the work is done. Most of our audience know who these people are and how they feel about each other and our new audience - the audience the studio are so eager for us to win and hold - don’t need to be told that. They will pick it up. What our new movie family need to be is individual, charismatic, intense, opinionated, brave, funny, intolerant, sexy. Larger than life.

I agree that we must tell personal stories on a very large canvas but they must be huge personal stories. I don’t agree that Generations and First Contact failed to fully define Picard as a hero. Michael’s definition of a hero as a man willing to sacrifice everything, stand alone and fight for his principles characterizes Picard’s behavior in facing Saran alone and most particularly in staying on the doomed Enterprise to try and save Data. There Picard offered himself in the supreme sacrifice.

I don’t agree about our being explorers again. I think that is series material but not movie material. Heresy though this may be, I do not think our movie duty is “to seek out new life and new civilizations...” though it still is “to boldly go...”

Gee, thanks, Pat.

Also, because this makes go WTF?

And lastly - though far from leastly - sex and comedy. Two elements of life that I have come to think as critical in the TNG movies. I tell you I think our stories have got to be sexy. I don’t mean ‘sex scenes,’ God forbid, but a certain eroticism, a certain sexiness about our characters and situations is really helpful and fun. Let’s be honest, there is an inclination to stuffiness about our crew. For the same reason humor is vital and again I don’t mean set-piece scenes - though as I have said, Picard with the mariners could be a great sequence. I think our crew are adorable when they are witty, ironic, self deprecating, teasing, cheeky.

One of the great strengths of First Contact was the creation of three marvelous guest roles - and three terrific performances. James Cromwell was perfect but what really appealed to audiences and critics were the Borg Queen and Lily. Both of them sexy, provocative, dangerous, funny. There is no female role like that, or really of any significance in this story. I think that is a mistake. Lily and the Queen - yes, and even Cochran - challenged our people, challenged their actions, their beliefs - their virtue. Isn’t that good?

Okie-day, Pat.

 

[Ovation]

Didn't use a Zerbe balloon this time though.


Considering how "well regarded" that episode is ( /s ) - not a high bar for a lot of people (I love the episode but I'm one of two - Roddenberry was the other).

Three. There are three of us.

 

[Tomalak]

That's what Television Picard would do. Stewart didn't want that. This is what he wrote in one of his vehement memos against the story Berman and Piller pitched him:

Which is the fundamental problem with the whole endeavour. Piller wants to tell a TNG story that Stewart has no interest in being a part of.

And FWIW, Stewart is saying little more than most fans have over the years - that it feels too much like the show and not enough like a movie. He's right that the characters don't need to be introduced in a long-running movie series spun off from a long-running show.

He's also right that the film doesn't need to be about seeking out new life - none of the TOS films were.

I can take or leave his long-running obsession with "getting the captain laid". Insurrection is the only time it actually happens in a Star Trek movie, so I'm not too concerned about that indulgence.

His broader point is that the film has to be "sexy" as in broadly appealing and provocative. Insurrection fails on that metric and feels very tame and PG.

Great, now I'm finding Patrick Stewart's objections quite reasonable and considered.

 

[BillJ]

Three. There are three of us.

Four! I wonder what we'd be called in Germany!

 

[Ovation]

Four! I wonder what we'd be called in Germany!

Dumbkopfs?

 

[Rebel Scum]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[CoveTom]

How/why does that complicate things?

Because, at least according to the admiral, it means that the prime directive does not apply.