True, but it couldn't even beat "Maid in Manhattan," much less "The Two Towers." I remember seeing almost nothing about Nemesis until it came out. The previous three, in contrast, had been all over the place before their releases.
Nemesis - I Just Couldn't Be Bothered
- Thread starter Transwarp Drive
- Start date
True, but it couldn't even beat "Maid in Manhattan," much less "The Two Towers." I remember seeing almost nothing about Nemesis until it came out. The previous three, in contrast, had been all over the place before their releases.
A
Amaris
Guest
My enjoyment of a movie is not based on it's box office take. Whether it made a billion dollars or a hundred dollars, if I like it, I like it, if I don't, I don't. Profit has nothing to do with it.
All excuses.
IMO, Nemesis is simply not a good movie. I don't care what the box office returns were - it's non-sequitor - the movie is still crap, and utterly ridiculous on so many levels. To be honest, I would rather watch ST:V and Insurrection back to back FOREVER than sit through Nemesis all the way through again.
I also need to clarify something: I believe I missunderstood "last movie" as being last TNG movie. With regards to THAT, yes, I would rather pretend Nemesis did NOT exist.
With regards to JJTrek, I'm fine with it. It was a Trek-based popcorn flick that entertained me, and for a guy who wasn't a Trek fan, Abrams was able to do what Logan and Co. could not - make Romulans deadly, the PRIMARY antagonists, and succeed in doing what no other hostile race had done in past shows and movies - completely obliterate a key Federation planet.
To be honest, I would rather watch ST:V and Insurrection back to back FOREVER than sit through Nemesis all the way through again.
I'd rather sit through Maid in Manhatten on an eternal loop than be subjected to Insurrection again.
I really hate that argument. Self sacrifice isn't a complex human quality; it's a basic mathematical function that a toaster could work out. It's only complex for us because of that silly self-preservation thing, but for a robot it's a dozen computer cycles at most.
If (NumLivesSaved > LivesLost) { Perform Action; }
Else { Don't sacrifice yourself; }
If Data had said "Fuck you all. I am not dying here!" and then abandoned ship on a shuttlecraft while leaving his friends to die, now that would have been the more complex human quality.
All excuses.
IMO, Nemesis is simply not a good movie. I don't care what the box office returns were - it's non-sequitor - the movie is still crap, and utterly ridiculous on so many levels. To be honest, I would rather watch ST:V and Insurrection back to back FOREVER than sit through Nemesis all the way through again.
Why would I be making excuses for the movie? I had no part in making it at any level, and it's certainly not up there with my favorite Trek movies. I'm just expressing my views and trying to be fair.
And I don't think that the box office performance is a non-sequitir. NEM has a very bad reputation among Trek fans, and the box office results are a big part of that.
To be honest, I would rather watch ST:V and Insurrection back to back FOREVER than sit through Nemesis all the way through again.
I'd rather sit through Maid in Manhatten on an eternal loop than be subjected to Insurrection again.
The best part about Insurrection is when they mentioned Ketracel White.
I keep telling INS-hatrz (of which I am one) - watch it only with the Frakes/Sirtis commentary. It's a much funnier/better movie. Like a sozzled TNG rifftrax. NEM is dumb, but it least it has action and shit and battle scenes and blowing up stuff
Eh, I can't even do that, as I have the older version without that commentary.
You tell me.
Which you are absolutely entitled to do. I have done so in the past as well, as there are some decent aspects of the movie, but IMO some of the things you site for it's failure are basically excusing the primary problem - the writer's poor execution of a story, hence my label. You personally having nothing to do with making the movie is non-sequitor.
It doesn't matter to me. There have been movies I like which bombed, and neither box office returns nor people's negative opinions effect my overall opinion. Furthermore, the problems most people have with Nemesis are nearly EXACTLY the same as to my own. Poor box office returns or lack of popularity don't mean squat when people like something that's, overall, a quality production, otherwise TOS would have faded into obscurity and this message board would probably have something like "New here! I remember Star Trek! Last new post: 2004"
You tell me.
Which you are absolutely entitled to do. I have done so in the past as well, as there are some decent aspects of the movie, but IMO some of the things you site for it's failure are basically excusing the primary problem - the writer's poor execution of a story, hence my label. You personally having nothing to do with making the movie is non-sequitor.
It doesn't matter to me. There have been movies I like which bombed, and neither box office returns nor people's negative opinions effect my overall opinion. Furthermore, the problems most people have with Nemesis are nearly EXACTLY the same as to my own. Poor box office returns or lack of popularity don't mean squat when people like something that's, overall, a quality production, otherwise TOS would have faded into obscurity and this message board would probably have something like "New here! I remember Star Trek! Last new post: 2004"
You or I may not care about box office numbers, but I think it colors perceptions about this film, and it's well-known that it bombed badly and ended the film franchise for a long time. There's no way to prove a counter-factual, but I think that had NEM performed more like INS or GEN, then it would not have quite the reputation it does now.
I saw it at the cinema, and at first, I even liked it...however, an hour later, I experienced the greatest moment of fridge logic ever. And it really was fridge logic - I was at home, went to the fridge, and started to think "wait a minute, why....."
A lot of things didn't make much sense, and this annoyed me terribly.
I still watch it, though, occasionally, even though it isn't a good film. It has its moments.
It could have been a better film and still bombed. Keep in mind that it never had an opening weekend (even the OP - a fan - couldn't be bothered). Even the worst of the prior films would have a boffo opening weekend and then drop off. Didn't matter if Nemesis sucked or not, nobody was interested in finding out. There's no reason Maid in Manhattan should have made more money opening weekend and it wouldn't have if fans and the public cared. They didn't. They were done with Trek as it was ("YAWN, another Star Trek movie?"). Audience apathy kept them from trying it, and bad word of mouth compounded the problem.
I think this is a good point. Even previous films that had eventually bombed(TFF and INS) had at least opened up strong, showing there was initial enthusiasm from the fan base before word of mouth had its effects.
With NEM there was no initial enthusiasm and no interest. More was going on there with box office performance than just the film's quality.
Maid in Manhattan didn't make that much more than Nemesis. Sure it beat it, but only by a couple hundred thousand dollars...
Maid in Manhattan $18,711,407 (USA) (15 December 2002) (2838 Screens)
Star Trek Nemesis $18,513,305 (USA) (15 December 2002) (2711 Screens)
Also, Nemesis was on less screens.
Maid in Manhattan $18,711,407 (USA) (15 December 2002) (2838 Screens)
Star Trek Nemesis $18,513,305 (USA) (15 December 2002) (2711 Screens)
Also, Nemesis was on less screens.
Both FC and INS opened up at somewhere around $30 million. NEM's opening box office take was significantly lower no matter whether it was technically first or second.
Which is why I think that it would still not have done that welll even if word of mouth was better. There was just no interest there to tap into at that point.
Similar threads
