If only Starfleet Chief of Staff was logical in TFF?

[Bad Robot]

The irony is that Insurrection had a huge movie budget compared to First Contact ... because of that movie's success, and because that movie was produced on a relative shoestring mostly on the soundstages at Paramount... which led to luxuries like extensive location shooting (a *lot* of location shooting) being possible for Insurrection because it had the money to schlep everyone out to beautiful remote locations in the countryside... but ironically, it ended up looking like it was shot in one of the two of the places a few hours drive away from LA they habitually shot any location footage needed for the TNG series, so the end result was a movie with a bigger budget than its immediate predecessor, and which spent that budget going to pretty mountainscapes they could never have afforded to on TV, but which looked ten times cheaper than even some of the TV episodes, lol... curiously, The Final Frontier 's budget was pitiful by comparison, but Insurrection looked about as cheap as it

It's definitely ironic when shooting on location hurts your production value rather than helps it. I think there's this jerky helicopter shot rising up over the mountains (the crew have been in caves for a while and are coming back out) that really does add scope to the movie. But overall the location work just doesn't give this movie the same boost that it does for The Voyage home.

I would guess Patrick Stewart was also more expensive by this time; that may have also prevented the film's increased budget from benefiting it significantly.

What struck me on reviewing this movie just last week is how much more confident Frakes' directing is than First Contact. He gets a lot more close-up shots of his actors this time. They're not as well balanced as most of the shots in Nemesis, but they're a lot more dynamic than the medium shots he mostly got for First Contact. But then you have this layer of TV-quality post production slathered over everything, and the resulting mix is just weird.

I sometimes wonder how much of that played into Insurrection and Nemesis. Are either one top notch Star Trek films, no. Each had potential but blew it in different ways. But I frankly never understood the hate and animosity both engender among fans.

It's popular to hate on both movies. I sometimes wonder if you sat a Star Trek fan down to watch both movies who had never heard anything about either film (they were in a coma since 1998 maybe) what would they think of the two? That'd be an interesting question.

I can tell you when I came out of Insurrection I sort of wish more was mentioned or made of the Dominion War that was going on (though it was in it's final year). I know that was more of a DS9 thing but I think more could have come from that without requiring DS9 knowledge. But I thought it was an ok movie. I was entertained.

When I came out of Nemesis, the same thing. I thought it was an ok movie. I didn't like the Kolarus scenes. I didn't care for B-4 but I was actually sort of relieve that maybe Data wasn't lost forever. I know that idea gets a lot of flak from fans, but that's what I thought coming out. I actually liked Schinzon and the whole clone-echo idea. I was a bit disappointed that there wasn't more made of the Romulans here but I didn't hate the film. So overall I came out, ok, not a bad film, I ranked it number 2 of the 4 TNG films. When I started reading the hate spewed at it, I was frankly surprised and mystified. I just thought, hmm, ok, it wasn't blockbuster material, but it was OK. So that's why I have my running joke that I'm one of the 10 people that liked Nemesis.

I remember being astonished by the negative reaction to Insurrection as well, though I shared it years later when the special edition DVDs finally caught up with it (2005?). Nemesis I was harsh with immediately, although other people's reaction to Insurrection may have factored into that.

Both movies had poor word-of-mouth for months in advance. And I knew ST was over walking out of Nemesis. ENT started limping immediately after (seems to me they'd had a string of stronger eps at the top of 2nd season), because they were soon planning their 3rd season arc to try and revive the show.

Both TNG movies came roughly about the time of AICN, and around the time of the "Berman and Braga" fan backlash (Braga had nothing to do with either film, and I still don't know what season he rose from showrunner of VOY to co-producer). So the franchise was in pretty bad shape, and I don't think Ru'afo's "blood in the water" speech to the corrupt admiral was coincidence. Although I may have my events mixed up; I was aware that my friends and I didn't like VOY as far back as 2nd season, and the snarky short-lived magazine Sci-Fi Universe (Mark Altman was an editor) was "supposedly" ragging on DS9 even before Generations hit theaters (I didn't think their article 'Deep and Confused' was at all insulting; but they were later absolutely vicious with VOY). I remember being surprised when I liked First Contact as much as I did at the time, and it's hard to say exactly when wider fan opinion started catching up to the feeling that Trek was running out of gas -- because I was already feeling like it needed to go away for awhile.

I never thought Insurrection was weaker than Generations. Nemesis I quickly soured on because it's such a dark, tone-deaf and lifeless viewing experience, and unfortunately it still is for me. And The Final Frontier is just really embarrassing in places. And they're all tied for me right now. They're at a place far enough down the list that I just can't expend the energy to decide on a criteria for ranking them.

And yet I can't dismiss them. Show me a really bad ST episode (Spock's Brain, Threshold) and I'll wipe it as having never happened. I can't do that with a ST movie. Something about the title fonts, the music and the 2.35 aspect ratio makes every ST movie (even a bad one) worth revisiting.

 

[Bad Robot]

Beyond, too. I seen with my own eyes how the 'accepted opinion' about that movie changed as its box office failed to meet expectations, and fans who'd been perfectly fine with the movie suddenly decided it had been one of the failures and started turning on it. This is a phenomena I've rarely seen in any other fandom than ours and I don't totally understand it

FWIW I must be one of the other 10 who like Nemesis

I think I'm part of that phenomenon, unfortunately. On that Friday during the midday news I told my co-workers over headsets that Beyond was the best of the Abrams movies. It quickly slipped to second place following my second viewing. Within a half-year it was at third. I think it's inevitable though that we talk about these films, reflect on them and re-evaluate them.

Or looked at another way, the 2009 movie is mostly good all the way through. Into Darkness has a weak final act (the movie really falls apart when the ship suddenly and abruptly starts going down) on top of its other problems. And Beyond mostly has a really good first act.

You've mentioned The Final Frontier and Insurrection as being the two films that best represent their respective series. I think I likewise made that observation in another thread. However to a large degree I think they represent what was average or less than complimentary about those series. Beyond was widely praised as being that movie for the Kelvin series, the one that's most like a classic episode. Only it's the "They've clunked us over the head and now we've gotta get our communicator's back" episode.

An Entertainment Weekly reviewer did an article around the time of Beyond in which he talked about the ST imagery in Rihanna's music video (I never saw it). And he noted with irony that the most lackluster installments in ST (such as movies like The Motion Picture or The Final Frontier) tended to me the most visually referenced.

 

[Damian]

And yet I can't dismiss them. Show me a really bad ST episode (Spock's Brain, Threshold) and I'll wipe it as having never happened. I can't do that with a ST movie. Something about the title fonts, the music and the 2.35 aspect ratio makes every ST movie (even a bad one) worth revisiting.

I guess that's probably because movies are more epic in scope compared to TV episodes. You have 13 movies whereas you have anywhere from 79 to almost 200 episodes of each series. It's a lot easier to forget about 1 episode out of 79 then a 2 hour movie among 13.

It's funny, I sort of have a soft spot for "Spock's Brain". As crazy an episode as it was and basically unreaslistic, I still find it fun to watch. Sometimes you just have to go with the crazy. "Threshold", yeah, pretty bad. I'll watch it when I'm going through a Voyager run, but it has very few redeeming qualities. I give Brannon Braga credit though, he doesn't slink away from it or try to explain it away. He admits, yeah, it was bad and it's on him. I think if he could he would have it deleted from Voyager altogether for all time.

I remember being astonished by the negative reaction to Insurrection as well, though I shared it years later when the special edition DVDs finally caught up with it (2005?). Nemesis I was harsh with immediately, although other people's reaction to Insurrection may have factored into that.

Some people have valid reasons for not liking either film. And I don't automatically dismiss peoples dislike, or outright hatred of either film (though I notice Nemesis gets more hate, whereas Insurrection is a more 'this would have been a better episode' lines). I was just surprised at the amount of vitriol that it gets, even all these years later.

Personally TFF ranks 13th on my list, though that doesn't mean I hate it. And Trekkies are an odd lot in some respects. I've heard it stated that TFF is probably the worse of all the Trek films. The story wasn't well executed, poor use of humor, really bad special effects (at least Nemesis did ok in that department). Really the only positives I've seen by critics is Laurence Luckinbill (while I didn't like the character so much, he did a good job with what he was given) and of course the music score was a huge positive. Yet, I don't read a lot of hatred about that film. I've heard people at the time say it almost killed the franchise. But fans have a soft spot for it. Now I liked the character moments with Kirk-Spock-McCoy. That sort of saved it for me. But by all accounts it is basically the worse Star Trek film in numerous categories, yet most don't vilify it.

 

[Bad Robot]

I guess that's probably because movies are more epic in scope compared to TV episodes. You have 13 movies whereas you have anywhere from 79 to almost 200 episodes of each series. It's a lot easier to forget about 1 episode out of 79 then a 2 hour movie among 13.

I think. I also just love the scope of the movies, the title sequences, the close-up shots. They spend so much more time and money on these things, and it's just harder to admit when they don't work out.

It's funny, I sort of have a soft spot for "Spock's Brain". As crazy an episode as it was and basically unreaslistic, I still find it fun to watch. Sometimes you just have to go with the crazy.

I can see that. I'm fond of the music of ST, and unfortunately 'Spock's Brain' is among the 25 percent of TOS episodes that has an original or partial score (as opposed to being tracked with TOS recycled/library music like the majority of eps). 'Mudd's Women' also. Two episodes that I would otherwise dismiss... except for their music.

Some people have valid reasons for not liking either film. And I don't automatically dismiss peoples dislike, or outright hatred of either film (though I notice Nemesis gets more hate, whereas Insurrection is a more 'this would have been a better episode' lines). I was just surprised at the amount of vitriol that it gets, even all these years later.

Personally TFF ranks 13th on my list, though that doesn't mean I hate it. And Trekkies are an odd lot in some respects. I've heard it stated that TFF is probably the worse of all the Trek films. The story wasn't well executed, poor use of humor, really bad special effects (at least Nemesis did ok in that department). Really the only positives I've seen by critics is Laurence Luckinbill (while I didn't like the character so much, he did a good job with what he was given) and of course the music score was a huge positive. Yet, I don't read a lot of hatred about that film. I've heard people at the time say it almost killed the franchise. But fans have a soft spot for it. Now I liked the character moments with Kirk-Spock-McCoy. That sort of saved it for me. But by all accounts it is basically the worse Star Trek film in numerous categories, yet most don't vilify it.

I think it was more popular to bag on The Final Frontier back when TNG was going strong. Bashing Shatner has since become kind of passe (so naturally I catch myself doing it now whereas I used to defend him).

TFF I think also has more energy and character charisma. People love to quote Kirk asking "what does god need with a starship?" It's probably also why Generations doesn't get bashed as heavily as the last two. Yet it's got structural problems that you would think should make Insurrection look better by comparison. But I just don't have the energy to sort the Bottom Four anymore. I'll probably revisit Generations next.

 

[Damian]

But I just don't have the energy to sort the Bottom Four anymore. I'll probably revisit Generations next.

For me first and last are pretty easy. TMP is in 1st place while TFF is in last. My 2nd to last would be Insurrection. Then after that it sort of get muddy. I generally put TWOK in 2nd place, then First Contact in 3rd place (I loved the Borg portrayal there...as creepy as they were on TV somehow they were even creepier in FC). But after that they can be interchangeable. Nemesis is in the lower half somewhere though I liked it more then Generations (I do like the Nexus plot device in Generations but Kirk's final death doesn't really work for me). Of the Abramsverse movies I actually liked Beyond the most--I think partly because it has nothing, absolutely nothing to do with Earth finally. The whole Earth is at risk was getting old. I give Insurrection credit for not putting Earth at risk either. And Beyond's villain had different motives then typical revenge. Nemesis, Star Trek (2009) and STID all went to TWOK well a bit too much for me and seemed to borrow heavily from some of the themes there. Just a few included Data's sacrifice mirroring Spock's, Red Matter mirroring the Genesis device and Nero's blind revenge mirroring Khan, and STID basically redoing the ending of TWOK in reverse, and reusing Khan in the first place.

And I don't hate TFF or Insurrection. I have them in my collection and feel the need to watch them from time to time.

 

[Tenacity]

the ST imagery in Rihanna's music video (I never saw it)

[yt]

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

[/yt]

 

[Smellmet]

Great song and great video.

 

[Lance]

I'd never seen that before. It's pretty cool

 

[Commishsleer]

Never thought they needed to have the Enterprise-A in bad shape just that they needed the great Captain Kirk to head negotiations (not that tool Styles).

Never bought the way Sybok's band of bumbling baboons took over the Enterprise anyway.
I thought Shatner wanted to play up how everyone betrayed him and he was the only one who could resist Sybok.
That doesn't make Kirk look superior - just make everyone in his crew look bad and by implication Kirk's command look bad.

 

[Dukhat]

I believe Styles would have been a far better candidate for the mission than Kirk.

 

[Bad Robot]

I believe Styles would have been a far better candidate for the mission than Kirk.

He wouldn't have a lot of patience for Sybok, that's for sure. Probably start firing from orbit just to gloat about the new weapon systems of his "incredible machine."