FIRST CONTACT IS THE WORST STAR TREK MOVIE

[shakov]

Here is the problem. Up to this point there was still an emphasis on character as well as plot in each of the trek outings. Even Generations, which has it's flaws, still felt like TNG.
First Contact ushered in the Action Picard and Data show. This was a formula that continued, and eventually led to the failure of the TNG movie series. To a lesser extent, these problems continued on Voyager and Enterprise.
Though somewhat entertaining, this movie is the one that drove the initial stake into the heart of trek.
Comments?

 

[Fedaykin]

Hmm. Don't know if I can agree with you there...the thing is, FC was made to be a movie experience, and not a TV show. I agree with you that is may have been less "character" based than the show, but that's gonna happen. You only have 2 hours or so to tell your story, and with 7 main characters, it's a bit rough to get it all in.

As far as FC goes, it has its flaws, but it's the most well made of the NG films, but I feel that GEN is the movie that is most like the TV show in tone.

 

[shakov]

Maybe I should have said that First Contact marked the beginning of the end for modern trek. The feel of this movie is just off for me. When viewed in quick sucession, the rapid spiral downward becomes obvious. I wish they had ended TNG with All Good Things.

 

[Eddie Roth]

After my most recent viewing of all Trek films, I have to agree with this. This is where the movies became formulaic. The first one without Kirk, they decided to turn Picard into a Kirk clone. Which is only one of many problems the last three TNG films have, but one that's indicative of how they seemed to sense that this cast of characters was not one that would attract audiences. So they tried to bend them into a version of what the original cast represented. Unsuccessfully, I might add.

 

[Fedaykin]

After my most recent viewing of all Trek films, I have to agree with this. This is where the movies became formulaic. The first one without Kirk, they decided to turn Picard into a Kirk clone. Which is only one of many problems the last three TNG films have, but one that's indicative of how they seemed to sense that this cast of characters was not one that would attract audiences. So they tried to bend them into a version of what the original cast represented. Unsuccessfully, I might add.

Yeah, but wasn't that just a reaction to the portayal of Picard in Generations as a weakish crybaby? It wasn't a smart way to introduce Picard to the movie audience. The Captain should not be seen whimpering and blubbering, and getting his ass rolled down the hill by Soran. Making Picard stronger in FC was like, "Hey our Captain can kick ass if he wants to..."

 

[Nerdius Maximus]

FC had no buildup or subtelty. It starts out like this:"The borg are coming! The fleet has engaged the Borg! Starfleet says we can't go! Fuck them, we're going anyway!" That's like, the first 2 minutes of the film! From then on it gets even more ridiculous.

 

[CaptainCanada]

Picard in First Contact made sense because a huge part of the movie was how he wasn't normally like that; that was a demonstration that it was personal.

It could have worked in the subsequent films, had those films generally been better; but Picard taking a more active role was the least of their problems.

FC had no buildup or subtelty. It starts out like this:"The borg are coming! The fleet has engaged the Borg! Starfleet says we can't go! Fuck them, we're going anyway!" That's like, the first 2 minutes of the film! From then on it gets even more ridiculous.

The opening is fast-paced, intentionally; once they go into the past, it settles into a more measured pace. Heck, the whole style of the film (the shipboard segments, anyway) is the slow, inexorable takeover of the Enterprise.

 

[Too Much Fun]

More like "THIS THREAD IS THE WORST STAR TREK MOVIE THREAD". You can nitpick the characterizations and plot construction of "Star Trek: First Contact" all you want (as many people here seem to enjoy doing), but it's undeniably the only TNG movie that doesn't have major problems (that are obvious to anyone watching the movie, not just people being overanalytical and looking for things to put down) with the way it handles story and characters. People who put down this this movie almost always seem to do it because they get off on putting it down. It's usually because they have a grudge against TNG or want to insult it for not being what they think it should have been, regardless of the fact that even if it wasn't what you wanted, it doesn't mean there was anything objectively wrong with how it was conceived. Did it have the lame retread story elements and character-assissinating awful comedy of the other TNG movies? No.

So it influenced the subsequent movies into focusing on Picard and Data more? So what? Evaluate it for what it is by itself, not for how it influenced the others. "Star Trek VI" was the last movie with the original Star Trek cast. The movie made it obvious to audiences that the crew was getting too old to continue doing Star Trek movies, and therefore lead to "Star Trek: Generations", which was bad. Does that mean "Star Trek VI" was a bad movie? Hell no. Same flimsy logic. "Star Trek: First Contact" is the only TNG movie that is well-made and deservedly argued as the best Star Trek movie by many. I don't believe someone who has seen all the Star Trek movies can call it the worst unless they're just being mean-spirited. I mean, come on, look at Star Trek V. Whatever this movie's problems may be, it still has state-of-the-art special effects and a clear, accessible story compared to that movie's shambling mess of a plot and woefully underdeveloped technical aspects.

 

[Nerdius Maximus]

More like "THIS THREAD IS THE WORST STAR TREK MOVIE THREAD". You can nitpick the characterizations and plot construction of "Star Trek: First Contact" all you want (as many people here seem to enjoy doing), but it's undeniably the only TNG movie that doesn't have major problems (that are obvious to anyone watching the movie, not just people being overanalytical and looking for things to put down) with the way it handles story and characters. People who put down this this movie almost always seem to do it because they get off on putting it down. It's usually because they have a grudge against TNG or want to insult it for not being what they think it should have been, regardless of the fact that even if it wasn't what you wanted, it doesn't mean there was anything objectively wrong with how it was conceived. Did it have the lame retread story elements and character-assissinating awful comedy of the other TNG movies? No.

So it influenced the subsequent movies into focusing on Picard and Data more? So what? Evaluate it for what it is by itself, not for how it influenced the others. "Star Trek VI" was the last movie with the original Star Trek cast. The movie made it obvious to audiences that the crew was getting too old to continue doing Star Trek movies, and therefore lead to "Star Trek: Generations", which was bad. Does that mean "Star Trek VI" was a bad movie? Hell no. Same flimsy logic. "Star Trek: First Contact" is the only TNG movie that is well-made and deservedly argued as the best Star Trek movie by many. I don't believe someone who has seen all the Star Trek movies can call it the worst unless they're just being mean-spirited. I mean, come on, look at Star Trek V. Whatever this movie's problems may be, it still has state-of-the-art special effects and a clear, accessible story compared to that movie's shambling mess of a plot and woefully underdeveloped technical aspects.

I thought it was a dumb movie. So what? The whole thing was just stupid to me. That's my opinion. Who cares?

 

[Too Much Fun]

You know, looking at your previous post, I actually agree with what you say about the beginning. It is WAY too rushed at the start. I also think it settles into a very natural and consistently entertaining pace later, though. And if you think it's dumb that still doesn't change the fact that it was better made than many of the other Star Trek movies. Calling it the worst is just being petty, dismissing all the superficial qualities like SFX, production design, and music that place it clearly above some of the others.

 

[Maurice]

Typing it in all caps doesn't make it so.

90% of writing is editing. If you didn't mean to categorically state that FC was the worst Star Trek film, then you should've taken the time to write what you actually meant.

 

[Cartoonist]

You know, looking at your previous post, I actually agree with what you say about the beginning. It is WAY too rushed at the start. I also think it settles into a very natural and consistently entertaining pace later, though. And if you think it's dumb that still doesn't change the fact that it was better made than many of the other Star Trek movies. Calling it the worst is just being petty, dismissing all the superficial qualities like SFX, production design, and music that place it clearly above some of the others.

I don't think it was rushed at the start at all. Jumping right into the action was an exciting way to begin. For TNG viewers, we didn't need any preamble to that action. We knew everything that led up to that, from Q thrusting them into an encounter with the Borg to Locutus, to Wolf 359, etc... Non TNG-fans didn't need any exposition, either. It's a film about cyborgs going back through time to assimilate Earth. It's basically a high-tech zombie movie, and nobody complains when zombies start chomping in the first five minutes.

I grew up on TNG, loved everything about it (except some of the season eps), but I think FC was the most exciting Trek movie to date and felt it was true to the characters. The subsequent films sucked, but that's not FC's fault.

 

[captcalhoun]

First Contact was the last decent movie. and one of the four best.

 

[Eddie Roth]

You know, looking at your previous post, I actually agree with what you say about the beginning. It is WAY too rushed at the start. I also think it settles into a very natural and consistently entertaining pace later, though. And if you think it's dumb that still doesn't change the fact that it was better made than many of the other Star Trek movies. Calling it the worst is just being petty, dismissing all the superficial qualities like SFX, production design, and music that place it clearly above some of the others.

"The fact it was better made"... Is it a fact? It's solid in the way it's made, but so is every other ST film. In fact, in my personal opinion, it's less solidly made because

1. as pointed out, the beginning especially is rushed, doesn't establish the Borg firmly enough as the formidable foe they are supposed to be. It lacks scope. For comparison, the new film shows how you can do an opening that's both fast and grand and a space battle that has human content. FC does not. It's garbled audio, then it's a series of FX shots and a deleted scene from Deep Space Nine and then the battle is over. No casualties, no damage, no emotion. It falls flat. I blame the writers.

2. awkward subplots. Three plot threads go through the film that never really intersect and vary wildly in tone. There is no dramatic urgency when fighting the Borg on the Enterprise is constantly interrupted by the lighthearted time-travel hijinx on Earth (or Dixon Hill holodeck time, for that matter, or Fun with the EMH Program). Again, I blame the writers.

3. the pacing is leaden. As far as I'm concerned, Jonathan Frakes did a much better job directing action in INS than he did here.

4. the plot holes, concerning time-travel and the Borg, are no better here than they are in NEM - a film widely trashed for precisely that: Action!Picard, the villain's forced personal fixation on a crewmember (Shinzon - Picard, Borg Queen - Data) that's eventually their undoing, lack of logic on part of said villain regarding their Diabolical Plan of Doom, etc....

5. I personally don't like the music. The main theme is too soft, too "Barbra Streisand in a geriatric romantic comedy"

Again, people's opinions differ on these films. There are, after all, those folks, who think TWOK is the worst ST film... Yes!

 

[Nerdius Maximus]

You know, looking at your previous post, I actually agree with what you say about the beginning. It is WAY too rushed at the start. I also think it settles into a very natural and consistently entertaining pace later, though. And if you think it's dumb that still doesn't change the fact that it was better made than many of the other Star Trek movies. Calling it the worst is just being petty, dismissing all the superficial qualities like SFX, production design, and music that place it clearly above some of the others.

My first post in the thread clearly stated that I thought it wasn't the worst one. I was just really disappointed by TNG movies in general. I don't think any of them really did the crew justice. Which saddens me, because I loved TNG, and I hated to see it go out like that. Even the last couple seasons of the show were a little sub-par, except for the excellent finale.

 

[Whoa Nellie]

First Contact ushered in the Action Picard

I consider your premise to be faulty. For some reason on this board Kirk is seen as the action hero and Picard as the erudite. However, in canon Kirk and Picard contain both of these aspects to their character. If you actually watch the TNG series, Picard is the erudite who easily rises to the role of action hero when necessary. Canon has given us a rich, multi-faceted character in Picard; one who reads ancient Greek and Latin classics and Shakespeare as well as hard-boiled detective novels. He plays the flute as well as rides horses, fences, and does a little rock climbing. He drinks tea as well as Aldebaran whiskey. He is a diplomat who appears to have a certain degree of special ops training. Like the TOS episode "The Enemy Within" did for Kirk's character, TNG's episode "Tapestry" does a beautiful job of showing that it takes both the erudite and well as the "Hell bent for leather" ensign who was stabbed through the heart in a barroom brawl (Picard admits he started the fight) facets to make Picard the flagship captain.

IMO Star Trek First Contact is equal to Star Trek Wrath of Khan for the all time best Star Trek movie. (This includes the new Trek movie, which I've seen and really liked but it does not compare to these two films.)

Warmest Wishes,
Whoa Nellie

 

[Nerdius Maximus]

First Contact ushered in the Action Picard

I consider your premise to be faulty. For some reason on this board Kirk is seen as the action hero and Picard as the erudite. However, in canon Kirk and Picard contain both of these aspects to their character. If you actually watch the TNG series, Picard is the erudite who easily rises to the role of action hero when necessary. Canon has given us a rich, multi-faceted character in Picard; one who reads ancient Greek and Latin classics and Shakespeare as well as hard-boiled detective novels. He plays the flute as well as rides horses, fences, and does a little rock climbing. He drinks tea as well as Aldebaran whiskey. He is a diplomat who appears to have a certain degree of special ops training. Like the TOS episode "The Enemy Within" did for Kirk's character, TNG's episode "Tapestry" does a beautiful job of showing that it takes both the erudite and well as the "Hell bent for leather" ensign who was stabbed through the heart in a barroom brawl (Picard admits he started the fight) facets to make Picard the flagship captain.

IMO Star Trek First Contact is equal to Star Trek Wrath of Khan for the all time best Star Trek movie. (This includes the new Trek movie, which I've seen and really liked but it does not compare to these two films.)

Warmest Wishes,
Whoa Nellie

Yeah, Picard could always throw down when the situation called for it. I mean, the Klingons respect him, for crying out loud. What more proof do you need? He kicked a lot of ass on the series. It didn't seem far-fetched to me that he was such a badass in FC. It was a very chilling moment, though, when he killed that ensign.

 

[shakov]

First Contact ushered in the Action Picard

I consider your premise to be faulty. For some reason on this board Kirk is seen as the action hero and Picard as the erudite. However, in canon Kirk and Picard contain both of these aspects to their character. If you actually watch the TNG series, Picard is the erudite who easily rises to the role of action hero when necessary. Canon has given us a rich, multi-faceted character in Picard; one who reads ancient Greek and Latin classics and Shakespeare as well as hard-boiled detective novels. He plays the flute as well as rides horses, fences, and does a little rock climbing. He drinks tea as well as Aldebaran whiskey. He is a diplomat who appears to have a certain degree of special ops training. Like the TOS episode "The Enemy Within" did for Kirk's character, TNG's episode "Tapestry" does a beautiful job of showing that it takes both the erudite and well as the "Hell bent for leather" ensign who was stabbed through the heart in a barroom brawl (Picard admits he started the fight) facets to make Picard the flagship captain.

IMO Star Trek First Contact is equal to Star Trek Wrath of Khan for the all time best Star Trek movie. (This includes the new Trek movie, which I've seen and really liked but it does not compare to these two films.)

Warmest Wishes,
Whoa Nellie

Though I agree with much of what you wrote, it is my belief that this movie marked a change in direction for the series. Much like after Star Trek IV where humor was felt to be necessary in order for a good trek movie. The movies that followed First Contact became pale imitations of the formula that took over the TNG era movies. However, I do realize that many people think highly of this film.

 

[spaceballone]

Here is the problem. Up to this point there was still an emphasis on character as well as plot in each of the trek outings. Even Generations, which has it's flaws, still felt like TNG.
First Contact ushered in the Action Picard and Data show. This was a formula that continued, and eventually led to the failure of the TNG movie series. To a lesser extent, these problems continued on Voyager and Enterprise.
Though somewhat entertaining, this movie is the one that drove the initial stake into the heart of trek.
Comments?

'


How can a movie that was such a huge success critically and at the box office drive a stake into the heart of Trek. For myself I think First Contact is not only the best TNG film but also the best of all the films.

As far as focusing on Picard and Data, Generations did that as well. TNG made a good use of its cast on the tv show where everyone had episodes that featured them. Remember though that each episode generally focused on one ore two characters not the whole cast. The two most popular and most used characters in the show overall were Picard and Data. It was an ensemble show but those were your two main characters and in a two hour movie you've got to focus on the main characters, you can't have 7 subplots going on.
I also think that although First Contact is an action flick it was heavily focused on Character. I thought The Borg queen's seduction of Data was fantastic and Picards ahab turn was also great.
You are free to have your own opinion but this movie was a huge success and not the start of the end for trek.

 

[Michael]

NO, IT ISN'T!