• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

I am a fan of Tom Hardy as Shinzon

Having Picard be retconned as bald in his younger years was just insulting and stupid, though.
Erm...what? Patrick Stewart was bald at 18. This complaint is on par with Chris Pine not having William Shatner's eye colour.
Oh, and Nero from Trek XI is at least ten times more poorly conceived and poorly motivated than Shinzon could be.
Wanting revenge for dead wife, unborn child and destroyed world>whiny kid who wants to destroy earth because he's jealous of Picard.
 
Having Picard be retconned as bald in his younger years was just insulting and stupid, though.
Erm...what? Patrick Stewart was bald at 18. This complaint is on par with Chris Pine not having William Shatner's eye colour.

But we've seen flashbacks of Picard before where he clearly had hair when he was younger.

Now, of course, he may have shaved his head or something. That's fine. It just seemed to me that they made Shinzon bald so the audience would be better able to understand that he was Picard's clone. I would have liked it better if that photo of young Picard had hair, even if Shinzon didn't. Tom Hardy looks AWFUL without hair!
 
Having Picard be retconned as bald in his younger years was just insulting and stupid, though.
Erm...what? Patrick Stewart was bald at 18. This complaint is on par with Chris Pine not having William Shatner's eye colour.

But we've seen flashbacks of Picard before where he clearly had hair when he was younger.

Now, of course, he may have shaved his head or something. That's fine. It just seemed to me that they made Shinzon bald so the audience would be better able to understand that he was Picard's clone. I would have liked it better if that photo of young Picard had hair, even if Shinzon didn't. Tom Hardy looks AWFUL without hair!

Yes, because the audience is so dumb that they can't imagine that a guy who's bald in his 60s had hair in his 20s. ;)

I think "the general audience" is misused a lot for (very) poor excuses. ;)



But to say it was insulting goes too far.
 
Yes, because the audience is so dumb that they can't imagine that a guy who's bald in his 60s had hair in his 20s. ;)

I think "the general audience" is misused a lot for (very) poor excuses. ;)

Well, I'm not saying it was a good idea! I just have a feeling there was some idiot in charge going, "You have to make Shinzon bald because Picard is bald!"
 
Yes, because the audience is so dumb that they can't imagine that a guy who's bald in his 60s had hair in his 20s. ;)

I think "the general audience" is misused a lot for (very) poor excuses. ;)

Well, I'm not saying it was a good idea! I just have a feeling there was some idiot in charge going, "You have to make Shinzon bald because Picard is bald!"


Actually it was Tom Hardy's idea to shave his head. In an interview I read around the time the movie came out he said that he heard a new Trek movie was casting for a young Picard so he shaved his head and sent them in a video audition. Obviously, the Powers that Be thought it was a good idea, so the buck stops with them. I'm sure this interview has to be floating around the internet somewhere.
 
Having Picard be retconned as bald in his younger years was just insulting and stupid, though.
Erm...what? Patrick Stewart was bald at 18. This complaint is on par with Chris Pine not having William Shatner's eye colour.
Oh, and Nero from Trek XI is at least ten times more poorly conceived and poorly motivated than Shinzon could be.
Wanting revenge for dead wife, unborn child and destroyed world>whiny kid who wants to destroy earth because he's jealous of Picard.



Um, you can tell the difference between an ACTOR and a CHARACTER, right? ...right?


As mentioned before, in flashbacks on TNG, Picard(the character, not Stewart, just so were keeping this clear) was shown to have hair as a younger man.


And as for your remarks on Nero...... uh, none of that had ANYTHING to do with Spock, Vulcan, or the Federation, which were the targets of Nero's so-called "revenge," so what was your point in bringing it up?
 
I feel it's fairly obvious Nero was quite deranged. When Pike tells him he's 'confused, he's misinformed' during the interrogation sequence, it's apparent that while Nero is in fact correct in (some) of his assertions, he also is off his rocker.

Just because there isn't a clear-cut path from his circumstances to his targets... really doesn't bother me. It's quite blatant Nero has lost his marbles and maintains only his cunning, and his crew follows him because they're all screwed-up in the head. Given their situation, it's a relative no-brainer as to how that happened.

Take into account a certain scene in the film; I don't really remember where or the gritty details, but Nero tells his subordinate they're going to 'kill everything' or something else fairly vindictive, and his subordinate gives this sick, twisted look that speaks volumes to me. They live to destroy.
 
Yeah, I said it. I don't care if thats not the so-called consensus. I was a fan of him from the first screening in the theater. Clearly one of the best things about Nemesis. I am not at all surprised that his career has continued to rise and work with A-list directors after it.

Just curious how many others feel the same way? Now just liking his acting in the film, does not mean you have to like the film as a whole or even the idea of a clone of Picard or its execution in the script.

Sign me on that list! I found him very convincible, and Shinzon as a character very fascinating!
 
I didn't buy Shinzon's character. I didn't buy his motivation. It was completely convoluted, and could only be explained by madness. The plot of a young Picard gaining ascendancy in the Romulan Empire was far-fetched in the first place. Also, Hardy lacked the gravitas that a great villain requires. Thought he was superb in Inception, though.
 
I feel it's fairly obvious Nero was quite deranged. When Pike tells him he's 'confused, he's misinformed' during the interrogation sequence, it's apparent that while Nero is in fact correct in (some) of his assertions, he also is off his rocker.

Just because there isn't a clear-cut path from his circumstances to his targets... really doesn't bother me. It's quite blatant Nero has lost his marbles and maintains only his cunning, and his crew follows him because they're all screwed-up in the head. Given their situation, it's a relative no-brainer as to how that happened.

Take into account a certain scene in the film; I don't really remember where or the gritty details, but Nero tells his subordinate they're going to 'kill everything' or something else fairly vindictive, and his subordinate gives this sick, twisted look that speaks volumes to me. They live to destroy.


Oh I agree Nero is supposed to come off as a complete psycho, but that's kind of a cop out-"oh, his motivations DON'T HAVE TO MAKE SENSE-he's just a nut." That's weak. A character who's complex and has motivations that make sense is far more interesting to me.
 
To be fair, Eric Bana himself described his role in Star Trek as a cameo. I don't think he was meant to be an interesting or well-developed villain. The story was about the Enterprise crew coming together. Nero's attack was just a means to that end. No, it's not the most intelligent writing, but it gets the job done.
 
I thought he was brilliant. Not as good as Patrick Stewart but definitely good. The part where he and Picard are talking about how Shinzon is exactly like him was wonderful. And the end where he dies. He did a great job.
 
Because he was a clone meant to infiltrate Starfleet, but was instead discarded and enslaved due to a change in government.
 
Because he was a clone meant to infiltrate Starfleet, but was instead discarded and enslaved due to a change in government.

And for some reason he decided it was Earth's fault. That's my main problem with the movie.
 
I don't think Shinzon was going after Earth out of REVENGE per se, but rather because he thought they were a traditional rival/quasi-enemy of the Romulan Empire, and because he felt he was fulfilling what his original purpose was in being cloned, which was to act against the Federation.(Of course this movie took place after the UFP and Romulans were allied against the Dominion, but I doubt Shinzon cared about the changed political situation)


This is still pretty weak as motivation, but I don't think it was meant to be quite as nonsensical as Shinzon seeking revenge against a person or group that hadn't wronged him.
 
Because he was a clone meant to infiltrate Starfleet, but was instead discarded and enslaved due to a change in government.

And for some reason he decided it was Earth's fault. That's my main problem with the movie.

I got the idea that Shinzon was after all trying to destroy the Federation because it was the enemy of the Romulan Empire. He was indoctrinated to hate the Federation.


I felt it made more sense than Nero going after Earth out of nowhere in the new movie. I heard that "amok run" argument a lot, but I just can't see a guy having 25 years to think about all the events to run amok. And even then, it would have made more sense for him to go after Kronos, since he was a prisoner and his hatred would have turned against his torturers in prison.
 
Shinzon was trying to destroy Earth because he was fucked up and jealous of Picard's privilaged life - and, by extension, all the spoiled brats of 24th century Earth. He wanted them all brought down to his level.

Shinzon was psycologically damaged by the life he led where he was abused in the Reman mines for two decades. Insane people tend to do insane things, and they don't have to make sense to rational people (this also applies to why Nero chose to destroy the Federation before preventing the Hobus supernova - he was crazier)
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top