First Contact & Insurrection

[CaptainMatt]

Is it considered a wise thing for a fan to watch these two feature films back to back? Does Insurrection work as a stand-alone after the events of FC? I still count it as a Trek adventure a little higher on the scale than Nemesis.

 

[Therin of Andor]

Is it considered a wise thing for a fan to watch these wto feature films back to back? Does Insurrection work as a stand-alone after the events of FC? I still count it as a Trek adventure a little higher on the scale than Nemesis.

You could do an Enterprise-E trilogy screening? FC, INS and NEM. It's really the only way they are linked. The revitalized Riker/Troi thing bridges INS and NEM.

 

[BillJ]

Insurrection is the dumbest fucking movie I've ever seen. Did anyone actually read the script before green-lighting it?

 

[Harvey]

If Star Trek: Insurrection is the dumbest movie you've ever seen, you need to see more movies. It's certainly not the best Star Trek movie, though.

 

[Methos]

insurrection wasn't the worst star trek movie... it did have some funny points...

Data and Picard singing at each other in shuttles did make me laugh for some reason lol

M

 

[BriGuy]

Is it considered a wise thing for a fan to watch these wto feature films back to back? Does Insurrection work as a stand-alone after the events of FC? I still count it as a Trek adventure a little higher on the scale than Nemesis.

To answer your question, I think the answer is "no."

There's really nothing linking these two movies together. None of the TNG movies really play into each other to any significant degree, and certainly not to any extensive degree as do II-III-IV.

All three TNG movies are really standalones. As mentioned, there's something of a rekindling of the Riker-Troi thing in INS, but it's really not necessary to see that before Nemesis, as the viewer may already know they had a prior relationship anyway.

I happen to find Insurrection enjoyable. It offered a change of pace and tone after FC.

 

[Broccoli]

Insurrection is the dumbest fucking movie I've ever seen. Did anyone actually read the script before green-lighting it?

They did and requested changes. That's why it turned out the way it did.

 

[Kadratis]

Insurrection is the dumbest fucking movie I've ever seen. Did anyone actually read the script before green-lighting it?

They did and requested changes. That's why it turned out the way it did.

Cue the most infamous and most repetitiousness Berman quote: "We're all very pleased." In reality, "we" is "he." And some people still protect this megalomaniac? Uggg.

 

[Skywalker]

Insurrection is the dumbest fucking movie I've ever seen. Did anyone actually read the script before green-lighting it?

They did and requested changes. That's why it turned out the way it did.

Cue the most infamous and most repetitiousness Berman quote: "We're all very pleased." In reality, "we" is "he." And some people still protect this megalomaniac? Uggg.

Patrick Stewart was the driving force behind the changes.

 

[Sci]

Insurrection is the dumbest fucking movie I've ever seen. Did anyone actually read the script before green-lighting it?

They did and requested changes. That's why it turned out the way it did.

Cue the most infamous and most repetitiousness Berman quote: "We're all very pleased." In reality, "we" is "he." And some people still protect this megalomaniac? Uggg.

I think it's a bit of a stretch to call a film/TV producer with bad taste a "megalomaniac."

And for the record, Berman's spent his post-Trek career using his money and connections to help an impoverished rural South American community in the mountains develop their own hospital and ambulance service. Whatever you may think of his work as a producer, I happen to think he deserves credit for taking the message of Star Trek to heart and committing his time and wealth to helping make the world a better place.

 

[CaptainMatt]

And for the record, Berman's spent his post-Trek career using his money and connections to help an impoverished rural South American community in the mountains develop their own hospital and ambulance service. Whatever you may think of his work as a producer, I happen to think he deserves credit for taking the message of Star Trek to heart and committing his time and wealth to helping make the world a better place.

Wow that is very commendable. Berman has my vote. More so than JJ anyway. And a big thank you to all the people who posted in my thread about the topic at hand. I may just rewatch FC again and worry about INS at a later date or something.

 

[Balrog]

Always glad to hear those who have made $$$ use it to help others.

I still don't think Rick Berman should have been in charge of both Star Trek's movie and tv franchises.

 

[Sci]

Wow that is very commendable. Berman has my vote. More so than JJ anyway.

It's very commendable, yeah. But I see no reason to make a "Berman vs. JJ" fuss. JJ's as engrossed in doing his job as Berman was back in his day, and there's no reason to make it a competition.

Always glad to hear those who have made $$$ use it to help others.

I still don't think Rick Berman should have been in charge of both Star Trek's movie and tv franchises.

That's fair. I tend to agree that at a certain point, he got burnt out and just wasn't really producing good stuff anymore, or hiring the right people. I just object to calling him a megalomaniac for the sin of making a bad movie.

 

[CaptainMatt]

I don't know it's like JJ being given charge of the TV renewal when and if that happens, all the while being in control of the film series as well.

Why do people tend to forget that the movie franchise was NOT controlled by Roddenberry when they consider he gave the Trek mantle over to Berman before death. A man named Harve Bennett was in charge of Treks II-V and then his right hand Ralph Winter came in for VI only to subsequentlybow out afterwards as Berman rose to even more prominence with the movie franchise and later TV spinfoffs.

 

[Sci]

I don't know it's like JJ being given charge of the TV renewal when and if that happens, all the while being in control of the film series as well.

What makes you think Abrams will be given or even pursue a Trek TV series?

And what makes you think a Trek TV series is even being considered by anyone other than freelancers trying to talk the studio into making one?

Remember, the STAR TREK movies and TV shows are owned by different companies now. Paramount has the movies, and CBS has the TV shows. So the fact that Paramount has Abrams running the film series doesn't mean that CBS will put him in charge of any hypothetical TV series -- which is fine, because there IS no TV series in the works.

 

[CaptainMatt]

Which to me is a great thing. We do not need a repeat of Berman overkill. I did not realise the film and TV franchises were now run by completely seperate entities. Thanks for the information. Never understood how CBS got in charge of the TV aspect of Trek anyway...

 

[Captaindemotion]

They did and requested changes. That's why it turned out the way it did.

Cue the most infamous and most repetitiousness Berman quote: "We're all very pleased." In reality, "we" is "he." And some people still protect this megalomaniac? Uggg.

I think it's a bit of a stretch to call a film/TV producer with bad taste a "megalomaniac."

And for the record, Berman's spent his post-Trek career using his money and connections to help an impoverished rural South American community in the mountains develop their own hospital and ambulance service. Whatever you may think of his work as a producer, I happen to think he deserves credit for taking the message of Star Trek to heart and committing his time and wealth to helping make the world a better place.

That doesn't matter. He made creative decisions that some people happen to disagree with. Ergo, he is an irredeemable monster.

 

[CaptainMatt]

Oh I do not think of him as a monster, just someone who got too much control and ran with it as no one else could do the job as Paramount no doubt saw it.

 

[Sci]

Which to me is a great thing. We do not need a repeat of Berman overkill. I did not realise the film and TV franchises were now run by completely seperate entities. Thanks for the information. Never understood how CBS got in charge of the TV aspect of Trek anyway...

It's fairly straightforward. TL;DR version: CBS and Viacom merged in 2000 and split in 2006. CBS got the TV shows, and Viacom (Paramount) got the movies.

Longer version: Viacom (the corporation that owned Paramount Pictures) merged with CBS Corporation in 2000, creating one giant company called Viacom. On the last day of 2005, Viacom renamed itself CBS Corporation, and a new company called Viacom was spun off. The new CBS Corporation retained ownership of CBS Television (the former Paramount Television) and all of the TV shows that the old Paramount Television subdivision had produced or owned (including the STAR TREK TV series and the STAR TREK brand name), while the new Viacom retained ownership of Paramount Pictures and all of the movies Paramount Pictures had produced (including all of the STAR TREK films). Paramount Pictures also retained the exclusive license to produce movies based upon STAR TREK.

As a result, STAR TREK is now owned by the CBS Corporation through CBS Studios, and the STAR TREK films are now owned by Viacom through Paramount Pictures. Any future STAR TREK film will be produced by Paramount Pictures under exclusive license from CBS, as ST2009 was. (Previously, Paramount Pictures had gotten the license to produce STAR TREK movies from Paramount Television; now it gets it from CBS Television.) It's akin to how the movie SERENITY was produced by and owned by Universal Studios, under exclusive license from 20th Century Fox to produce a movie based upon the TV series FIREFLY, which Fox owns.

ETA:

Oh I do not think of him as a monster, just someone who got too much control and ran with it as no one else could do the job as Paramount no doubt saw it.

Oh, it's not even that. It's just that he spent twenty years trying to live up to his understanding of Gene Roddenberry's "vision" (having been mentored by Roddenberry) and trying to keep TREK successful, without being willing to take creative risks and thus allow the franchise to continue to grow creatively -- not until it was too late. He was, in essence, a TV producer mentally trapped in the late 80s, even though he was producing throughout the 1990s and early-to-mid 00s.

 

[CaptainMatt]

I thought Berman took too many chances with the Roddenberry legacy but that is just my opinion. I thought of it being something like Dr Who, where Producer John Nathan-Turner was kept on because no one else wanted to produce the series, and JN-T was seen to have done "too good" a job of it to be replaced easily. Berman had been running things for so long TPTB probably did not know what to do or where to go after him. Heck, they even kept him on after the last Trek series ended in 05 till his contract ran out and they then finally decided to go on without him.