Improving Some of the Weaker Movie Villains

[The Overlord]

I sort of like all the TOS villains as they stand, sit or tapdance.

Certainly Rua'fo doesn't deserve to be sympathetic. The very idea is that Starfleet has mistaken him for a mere sleazebag when in fact he's Mengele disguising as a sleazebag. But I agree that his sympathetic sidekick could have been given a tad more airtime; it's just that too much exposure would ruin the final surprise in which we learn how villainous Rua'fo really is - the fact that they are relatives of the Ba'ku. The whole movie is about being in the dark about facts and making hasty decisions; exposure would backfire by default.



Timo Saloniemi

The problem is, the plot twist in Insurrection was stupid and made no sense, so sacrificing potentially compelling villains for the sake of a dumb plot twist. This plot twist brings up a million questions that never get answered: how the Ba'ku force the Son'a off the planet if they are pacifists, after being defeated by the Ba'ku? Why didn't the Son'a just create their own city on the planet? Why didn't the Son'a just go the Federation and lay claim to the planet considering the Prime Directive would theoretically let the Son'a practically do what they want with the planet, etc?

In the problem with the villains is part of the bigger problem with the film, Insurrection doesn't know if it is silly light hearted film or a serious film with a heart wrenching moral dilemma. If it is just supposed to be light hearted film, Rua'fo should have a just a pure evil invader who had no justified claim to the planet (as it stands now, in the film the Son'a had as much as a valid claim to the planet as the Ba'ku did) and simply wanted to become immortal. He would be just a clear evil that needs defeating.

If this film was supposed to be a real moral dilemma, Rua'fo should have been made into a more sympathetic character and his claim to the planet should have been addressed in more detail or failing that they should have ditched Rua'fo and made the admiral the main villain, both the admiral and the Ba'ku both having valid points that are both given weight. As it stands now, Rua'fo is the main villain and he is one dimensional cartoon villain who is made unintentionally sympathetic due to a last minute plot twist, its the worst of both worlds.

Also I think Kruge is a decent villain, but I wouldn't put him up there among the best cinematic villains ever. We know his immediate motives, but we really know his deeper motives? Is he a justified Klingon patriot who seeks to protect his weapon from a potential Federation super weapon or is he some sinister social climber who merely wishes to improve position within the empire and thinks stealing Genesis is the best way to do it? Does he merely want to destroy Genesis to protect his people or does he want to use Genesis for his own purposes and use it against planets that could defy him? In my opinion, he is a decent villain, but not quite a great one.

 

[FormerLurker]

Christopher Lloyd has never had an easy time with being accepted as Kruge. At the time SFS came out, BTTF hadn't been released yet (probably hadn't been made yet), and audiences still came out of the theater questioning his casting. Why? Reverend Jim Ignatowski. They couldn't believe the stoner from TAXI was a Klingon. One possible reason was the downplaying of the Klingon makeup so the actors could be more recognizable*. Another is that his voice is just too obvious. But it took Doc Brown for many to realize that Christopher Lloyd could play someone other than Reverend Jim. They just couldn't also see he could do more than comedy.


*Not that it worked for all of them. I didn't recognize Maltz as that smarmy defense attorney on Night Court for almost twenty years.

 

[Memory Alpha]

My opinion of Lloyd as Kruge is that he was a great villain. Kruge is not on the same scale as Khan, which he makes work, and he makes it clear that he is acting for the best interest of the Klingon empire. Not himself or anyone else, but the empire. When I was a kid and watched TWOK, I got the sense that Montalban was playing it up as the villain, arrogant and smug, and would get his. He did. A few months later when I watched TSFS on tape, I thought "Uh-oh, this guy is going to give Kirk all he can handle." He did. The exchange and battle between Kirk and Kruge before the Enterprise is destroyed I think is some of the best writing in the Trek movies.

I don't have a strong opinion on the Borg Queen. I always thought it might be an adaption to deal with humans, but it was an interesting wrinkle and importantly made the suggestion that within the Borg there is a hierarchy after all. But if it had stayed the "group presence" of Q Who and BoBW, I would have been okay with that.

 

[eyeresist]

Kruge - I'm one of those who don't think he was that awesome. I found the Klingons generally unimpressive in that film. His best moment was killing the coffin creature and then saying "Nothing to report."

Sybok was fine. It was the rest of the script that was the problem. What we really needed was to see him actually in communication with his "god" at some point during the film, to show what was motivating him.

Chang - "I'd give real money if he'd shut up." Exactly - enough with the goddam quotes!!!!

Soran was a weak villain, though it's not really the actor's fault. The script should have gone more into WHY he wanted to go the Nexus.

I liked the Borg Queen and don't think it weakened the Borg as villain. It makes sense they would need drones who could function as avatars in dealing with other species. There is no suggestion in FC that she is "in charge" of the Borg, or has individual motivations for her actions.

Instead of being about Shinzon and how his elevation to power affects the rest of the galaxy, the story instead becomes simply about Shinzon and Picard.

I disagree - the basis of the conflict in the 2nd half of the film is that Shinzon is going to annihilate Earth in order to fatally weaken the Federation. (Whether the Federation is really so dependent on Earth is another matter.) And whatever Shinzon feels about Picard, he only contacted him in the first place in order to save his own life, so he could get on with the galaxy-wrecking.

It would make for a more intriguing villain to make him analogous to Kim Jong-un; somebody who comes into power as an unknown quantity, and therefore the story becomes about how this could shift the balances of power in galactic politics. Who is this Reman guy? What's his story? What are his intentions towards the other galactic powers? How does his coming into power unexpectedly change the Romulan Empire?

That's what he is at the start of the movie, but he couldn't remain an absolute mystery forever.

Or make him more evil by turning him into a ambitious Romulan commander who wants to destroy the Federation in his first step of making a new Romulan Empire that would dominate the galaxy

But that's what he was, and that's what his plan was. Admittedly they could have made it clearer.

The fact that Shinzon doesn't look like Picard is a significant stumbling block. When he explains that his face is the result of a hard life in the dilithium mines, you can buy that his mouth (with fake scar) is the result of a beating. But this is undermined when Picard looks at a picture of his younger self, i.e. Tom Hardy, and they haven't made the lips thinner in the photo.

 

[The Overlord]

Or make him more evil by turning him into a ambitious Romulan commander who wants to destroy the Federation in his first step of making a new Romulan Empire that would dominate the galaxy

But that's what he was, and that's what his plan was.

The fact that Shinzon doesn't look like Picard is a significant stumbling block. When he explains that his face is the result of a hard life in the dilithium mines, you can buy that his mouth (with fake scar) is the result of a beating. But this is undermined when Picard looks at a picture of his younger self, i.e. Tom Hardy, and they haven't made the lips thinner in the photo.

But that plan didn't make sense for Shinzon the way he was presented in the movie, he had no reason to further the Romulan Empire's interests or give a flying fig about Earth and had every reason to destroy Romulus instead, because the Romulans are ones who ruined life, not the Federation. The Federation had nothing to do with his crappy, so its just odd he picks them as a target instead of the people who actually did ruin his life, the Romulan military. The Enterprise trying to save Romulus would have made more sense given Shinzon's character and would have been an exciting change of pace, compared to the typical "save the Earth" type plots.

If Shinzon was Romulan, his plan to attack the Federation would have made far more sense. Maybe he lost his family in a battle with the Federation or maybe he is a just power mad psychopath that wants to create a new, more aggressive Romulan Empire. Either way, Shinzon being a Romulan would have made the evil plan in question make a little more sense.

 

[Nebusj]

If Shinzon was Romulan, his plan to attack the Federation would have made far more sense. Maybe he lost his family in a battle with the Federation or maybe he is a just power mad psychopath that wants to create a new, more aggressive Romulan Empire. Either way, Shinzon being a Romulan would have made the evil plan in question make a little more sense.

Or they could have played up the idea that Shinzon didn't care about attacking Earth one way or another, but that his backers were hot for the idea and he had to at least credibly feint towards it so he didn't get overthrown himself. But that would require establishing who was backing him (and maybe why), and why they wanted to attack Earth rather than some easier target [*], and it would run the risk of confusing just who the antagonist was. But that might also make it harder to tell whether Shinzon is heroic or villainous exactly, and that might make him a more interesting character. Certainly it'd have given Hardy more to play.


[*] One hates to throw time travel into the only Next Generation movie that did without temporal anomalies, but, perhaps a meddling agent from the future aware Romulus was doomed and trying to level the post-Romulus-catastrophe playing field picked Shinzon as the best way to save the Romulan Empire from the apparent dissolution glimpsed in ``All Good Things''? Which is a terribly confusing muddle of temporal manipulation and timeline pollution, but that's all right, because Janeway is available.

 

[eyeresist]

But that plan didn't make sense for Shinzon the way he was presented in the movie, he had no reason to further the Romulan Empire's interesting or give a flying fig about Earth and had every reason to destroy Romulus instead, because the Romulans are ones who ruined life, not the Federation. The Federation had nothing to do with his crappy, so its just odd he picks them as a target instead of the people who actually did ruin his life, the Romulan military.

Shinzon rose to power via the Romulan military, which is now at his command. Whatever his feelings about Romulans, Shinzon had served their imperial ambitions in battle, and when he found himself at the top of their military machine, those ambitions became his own. Besides, he can't declare war on himself, can he?

Also, I think the Reman attitude to Romulus is based on resentment at being subjugated by those who should regard them as brothers. They may want a little payback along the way, but what they really want is equality.

 

[Smellmet]

Agreed, I can never understand why people think Shizon's motives are muddled, he had become the top of the food chain in Romulus, with the might of their military behind him, why would he turn on them and sacrifice that? Yes they wronged him when he was younger, but he kind of made up for that by threatening to kill anyone who wasn't loyal, dictator-style. Like you said the Romulans goals became his goals - to become the dominant power in the quadrant. If he turned on them I'm sure the entire Romulan fleet could take out the Scimitar. I enjoyed Hardy's performance, but as others have said, I would still much rather they ditched the clone stuff altogether or at least have Stewart play the role, after all he was on a big salary.

Kruge I always thought was an excellent villain. The moustache-twirling was kept to a minimum, and he gave Kirk a serious run for his money with big consequences, you always got the feeling he wouldn't hesitate and was fully ruthless, the hallmark of a good baddie. Plus he was just so damn entertaining to watch too. I put him right behind the 2 Khans.

Chang was pretty good also, but I could have done without the Shakespeare. He wasn't particularly murderous or psychotic, but came across more as a sneaky, slimy backstabbing prick.

Soran I liked - but that was mainly just McDowells presence and performance that carried it, the material he was given was a bit weak. Ditto Ru'afo, another good actor wasted in a poor role.

Sybok I don't really consider a baddie in the conventional sense, but Luckinbill's performance was solid enough. I thought him suddenly being Spocks long lost brother was contrived, his powers unexplained, and would have much rather his character have been just another Vulcan with more of an axe to grind than he did.

The Borg were hands down TNG's greatest foe, and though I didn't like the idea of a Queen, I thought Krige played it well, but I would much rather them be the unstoppable plague of locusts they were in earlier TNG. By the time First Contact came out and what they did with them, their threat seemed somewhat diminished.

 

[Maurice]

Kruge was kinda stupid. First, they know there are Grissom crew on the planet, but they don't try to beam them up (do Klingons not have "lifeform" scanners?). He tells his henchman to "Kill one of them. I don't care which," after Torg earlier cautioned him that one of those people on the planet might be one of the Genesis scientists they seek. And then he stands around with Kirk playing who's tougher instead of capturing him and making tracks for Klingon space with "the Genesis commander himself".

Dumb dumb dumb.

 

[eyeresist]

Agreed, I can never understand why people think Shizon's motives are muddled

I think for a lot of people NEM is just a vague unpleasant memory, and they don't recall any of the details. I on the other hand have watched it twice in recent weeks and come to regard it as "not terrible". I've even ordered the Special Edition! They call me mad - mad! But now who's laughing?!?

I would still much rather they ditched the clone stuff altogether or at least have Stewart play the role, after all he was on a big salary.

Maybe they considered that, but Stewart insisted on being paid per part. Still, imagine the poster, two Stewart heads facing each other, one with Beard...

 

[Smellmet]

Whats the special edition of Nemesis? Is it a different cut of the film?

 

[Smellmet]

Kruge was kinda stupid. First, they know there are Grissom crew on the planet, but they don't try to beam them up (do Klingons not have "lifeform" scanners?). He tells his henchman to "Kill one of them. I don't care which," after Torg earlier cautioned him that one of those people on the planet might be one of the Genesis scientists they seek. And then he stands around with Kirk playing who's tougher instead of capturing him and making tracks for Klingon space with "the Genesis commander himself".

Dumb dumb dumb.

These are nitpicks that I can level at every trek villain, or any movie baddie for that matter. My point is that he was an entertaining one to watch and Lloyd brought a lot of life to the character, unlike Klaa in TFF.

 

[ChristopherPike]

Whats the special edition of Nemesis? Is it a different cut of the film?

No such beast exists, but it could only be an improvement really. From a fan of TNG's point of view. Not Stuart Baird's obviously! His cut is what we saw in cinemas.

Special Edition in this case, is just DVD release terminology. To differentiate the original one disc put out in 2003, from a two disc packed with more extras some time later.

All of which eventually got onto the Blu ray disc, together with the film in HD, such is the format's capacity.

 

[The Overlord]

But that plan didn't make sense for Shinzon the way he was presented in the movie, he had no reason to further the Romulan Empire's interesting or give a flying fig about Earth and had every reason to destroy Romulus instead, because the Romulans are ones who ruined life, not the Federation. The Federation had nothing to do with his crappy, so its just odd he picks them as a target instead of the people who actually did ruin his life, the Romulan military.

Shinzon rose to power via the Romulan military, which is now at his command. Whatever his feelings about Romulans, Shinzon had served their imperial ambitions in battle, and when he found himself at the top of their military machine, those ambitions became his own. Besides, he can't declare war on himself, can he?

He has a ship with a planet killing weapon, a perfect cloak and a ship with a crew loyal to him (seriously Romulan military placed no agents of their own that ship, which makes them look stupid). Shinzon could have promised to destroy Earth, head out, double back and then tried to destroy Romulus instead. I think that would have made for a more entertaining movie. Picard having to defend one of his greatest enemies would have more exciting then another "stop the villain from destroying Earth" style plot.

Also, I think the Reman attitude to Romulus is based on resentment at being subjugated by those who should regard them as brothers. They may want a little payback along the way, but what they really want is equality.

Except the Remans have no reason to want to destroy Earth, but for the fact they are one dimensional Space Orcs. Its hard to care about the Remans when they have on culture beyond "lets do random evil things for no good reason". The Remans have no reason to care about the Federation and their genocidal hatred of the Federation is not explained at all, considering many of the Romulans thought that was going too far.

Agreed, I can never understand why people think Shizon's motives are muddled, he had become the top of the food chain in Romulus, with the might of their military behind him, why would he turn on them and sacrifice that? Yes they wronged him when he was younger, but he kind of made up for that by threatening to kill anyone who wasn't loyal, dictator-style. Like you said the Romulans goals became his goals - to become the dominant power in the quadrant. If he turned on them I'm sure the entire Romulan fleet could take out the Scimitar. I enjoyed Hardy's performance, but as others have said, I would still much rather they ditched the clone stuff altogether or at least have Stewart play the role, after all he was on a big salary.

Except Shinzon is going to die soon, why would he care about being a dictator when he is going die in a matter of days (heck if he was dying and needed Picard to save himself, so why did he make the Enterprise wait around for 17 hours)? He has no good reason to want to destroy Earth, considering many of the Romulans thought that was a step too far. Shinzon having a grudge against Romulus makes far more sense then the random hatred for the Federation. He has no reason to serve Romulan goals and every reason to work against them.

In Wrath of Khan, Khan blamed Kirk for his exile and the death of his wife. If Khan had been written like Shinzon, Khan would have blamed some random planet that had nothing to do with his exile and want to kill them for no reason and he would have been a weaker villain.

 

[Marsden]

Poor old Earth has just got this humongous bullseye painted on it. It's been the target of 4 different movies. 5 if you count that other one, which I don't. That's 4 out of 10 or 5 out of 11. What is there only like 6 planets in the galaxy?

 

[Smellmet]

Except Shinzon is going to die soon, why would he care about being a dictator when he is going die in a matter of days (heck if he was dying and needed Picard to save himself, so why did he make the Enterprise wait around for 17 hours)? He has no good reason to want to destroy Earth, considering many of the Romulans thought that was a step too far. Shinzon having a grudge against Romulus makes far more sense then the random hatred for the Federation. He has no reason to serve Romulan goals and every reason to work against them.

In Wrath of Khan, Khan blamed Kirk for his exile and the death of his wife. If Khan had been written like Shinzon, Khan would have blamed some random planet that had nothing to do with his exile and want to kill them for no reason and he would have been a weaker villain.

Hey I never mentioned the terminal illness part or the 17 hours bit, those bit's were in fact, crap that didn't need including. I guess you can look at it both ways then.

I admit my argument is flaky, but Nemesis is my favorite TNG movie. I know it has many, many faults, but I just find it so damn entertaining.

To be honest I also agree that it would have been better if Picard had to step in to stop him attacking Romulus, it would have added an Insurrection-style moral dilemma to the story.

 

[Timo]

I can't make heads or tails of Shinzon's putative plans, which IMHO is a serious shortcoming. Khan in his wrathful return had no plans, but that was great because it showed how he had degenerated into a madman - even his followers finally came to despise him for his utter stupidity. But Shinzon doesn't gain anything from being portrayed as a lunatic.

In contrast, I think the great forte of ST:INS is its multi-layered plot. The gradual revelation of lies within lies, false assumptions upon false assumptions, is the real story there: the moral is that one shouldn't assume before judging.

Simplifying all this into some sort of a "moral dilemma" about the right to relocate people would take all the intelligence out of the story. There's nothing interesting about back-and-forth bickering on that subject - but the subject, much like Genesis in ST2, is a worthy McGuffin that allows the interesting story of nested lies to be told. Without those lies, it would be a nonsensically simple story with black and white characters, this fact undermining the very premise because basically everybody would have to be pitch black to get the story going.

What is there only like 6 planets in the galaxy?

It's more like we follow the adventures of Earthmen. Of course they defend Earth! But it doesn't follow that other planets wouldn't have their own perils and defenders. We simply miss those stories because they run in Klingon, Andorian and Ferengi theaters.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[The Overlord]

I can't make heads or tails of Shinzon's putative plans, which IMHO is a serious shortcoming. Khan in his wrathful return had no plans, but that was great because it showed how he had degenerated into a madman - even his followers finally came to despise him for his utter stupidity. But Shinzon doesn't gain anything from being portrayed as a lunatic.

In contrast, I think the great forte of ST:INS is its multi-layered plot. The gradual revelation of lies within lies, false assumptions upon false assumptions, is the real story there: the moral is that one shouldn't assume before judging.

Simplifying all this into some sort of a "moral dilemma" about the right to relocate people would take all the intelligence out of the story. There's nothing interesting about back-and-forth bickering on that subject - but the subject, much like Genesis in ST2, is a worthy McGuffin that allows the interesting story of nested lies to be told. Without those lies, it would be a nonsensically simple story with black and white characters, this fact undermining the very premise because basically everybody would have to be pitch black to get the story going.

I think you are giving the story in Insurrection too much credit and I don't see how Insurrection didn't develop into a black and white situation, when Ru'afo was presented as having almost no redeeming qualities through out most of the story and being just a one dimensional bad guy who is only made unintentionally sympathetic due to a plot twist near the end of the film.

And again this plot twist just brings up more questions that never get answered: How did the pacifist Luddite Ba'ku, defeat the violent tech loving Son'a? After the Ba'ku banished the Son'a, why didn't the Son'a simply set up another community else where on the planet, so they can retain their immortality and live anyway they want? Why didn't the Son'a go up the Federation, lay claim to the planet (they have as valid a claim to it as the Ba'ku do) and then use the Prime Directive to argue that the Federation should stay out of an internal affair?

Like I said Insurrection doesn't know whether it wants to silly light hearted action flick or a serious morally complex story with a problem that doesn't have an obvious right answer.

If it is supposed to a silly action flick, Ru'afo should have been a random evil alien invader who just wanted to murder people to become immortal. If it is supposed to be an actual morally complex movie, either Ru'afo should have been made more sympathetic or he should have been ditched and the admiral should been made into the main villain and something of an anti villain. The movie choose a middle ground that would make almost no one happy.

What is there only like 6 planets in the galaxy?

It's more like we follow the adventures of Earthmen. Of course they defend Earth! But it doesn't follow that other planets wouldn't have their own perils and defenders. We simply miss those stories because they run in Klingon, Andorian and Ferengi theaters.

Timo Saloniemi

Star Wars made us care about the Empire blowing up random planets in a fictional galaxy, I don't see why Star Trek could not have done the same, with a little skilled writing we could have cared about the fate of Romulus almost as much as Earth.

 

[enterprisecvn65]

Kruge was kinda stupid. First, they know there are Grissom crew on the planet, but they don't try to beam them up (do Klingons not have "lifeform" scanners?). He tells his henchman to "Kill one of them. I don't care which," after Torg earlier cautioned him that one of those people on the planet might be one of the Genesis scientists they seek. And then he stands around with Kirk playing who's tougher instead of capturing him and making tracks for Klingon space with "the Genesis commander himself".

Dumb dumb dumb.

These are nitpicks that I can level at every trek villain, or any movie baddie for that matter. My point is that he was an entertaining one to watch and Lloyd brought a lot of life to the character, unlike Klaa in TFF.

Even though he was the villian in TSFS Kruge was the template for the "Noble Klingon Warrior" character that became a staple starting in TNG.
Yes he was ruthless and brutal, but what he was doing he believed was vital to the safety and survival of the Klingon Empire and he wasn't doing it for personal gain or a vendetta. After they watch the tape and John Laroquette says impressive they can create a whole planet, Kruge's response is yes charming thinking of living there with your wife and so on and the flag of the Federation fluttering in the breeze. That indicates to me he is more concerned about the Federation using this weapon against the Klingons than he is about wanting to get it to use on earth (Although I'm sure he wouldn't have minded that as a bonus if necessary). So he is acting in the best interest of the Empire.
He also has a hint of honor in him, especially when he kind of salutes the Enterprise's fighting spirit by giving 2 minutes to Kirk and his gallant crew instead of the one Kirk asked for. He also showed the fearless Klingon spirit of battle when he told Torg "We are Klingons" when they thought they'd be outnumbered something like 300 to 6 when they boarded the Enterprise (True he didn't go himself, but I think it wasn't out of fear).

This is much more in line with the noble warrior most Klingons became in TNG tha Klaa, who wanted to pick a fight with the Enterprise for the hell of it and risk the Empire going to war over his personal ambition. Also Chang didn't seemed particularly concerned with the Klingon empire, he just didn't want to make peace with the Federation on general principle, even though it was probably needed for the Empire to survive, so he was putting his own feelings ahead of what was best for his race. Plus he wasn't particularly noble, Kruge was all business when fighting the Enterprise where Chang just ranted like a drunk for much of the battle. Also I think a Klingon like Worf would say Chang's attacking while cloaked would be a dishonorable way to fight by not showing your enemy your face (I do understand why he would use that advantage though) not to mention his betrayal of the Empire. He was actually more like Duras in that he really didn't give a shit about the empire, he just wanted to fulfill his agenda which was to go out guns blazing.

Because of this and the fact I think Lloyd played it well /kruge was the most true to the Klingon way and the best Klingon villian. Yes he was stupid in some of the actions he took to get Genesis, but his intentions were true to his people.

I will always believe he got short shrift because he came right after Khan and the fact he was Christopher Lloyd as a not very heavily disguised Klingon and too many people knew him as Reverend Jim or retroactively saw him as Doc Brown being a Klingon when BTTF came out and they had a hard time accepting him as a true villian when his most popular roles were comedic.

 

[enterprisecvn65]

Except Shinzon is going to die soon, why would he care about being a dictator when he is going die in a matter of days (heck if he was dying and needed Picard to save himself, so why did he make the Enterprise wait around for 17 hours)? He has no good reason to want to destroy Earth, considering many of the Romulans thought that was a step too far. Shinzon having a grudge against Romulus makes far more sense then the random hatred for the Federation. He has no reason to serve Romulan goals and every reason to work against them.

In Wrath of Khan, Khan blamed Kirk for his exile and the death of his wife. If Khan had been written like Shinzon, Khan would have blamed some random planet that had nothing to do with his exile and want to kill them for no reason and he would have been a weaker villain.

Hey I never mentioned the terminal illness part or the 17 hours bit, those bit's were in fact, crap that didn't need including. I guess you can look at it both ways then.

I admit my argument is flaky, but Nemesis is my favorite TNG movie. I know it has many, many faults, but I just find it so damn entertaining.

To be honest I also agree that it would have been better if Picard had to step in to stop him attacking Romulus, it would have added an Insurrection-style moral dilemma to the story.

I think Nemesis isn't a bad film despite it's many holes. It was a good sci-fi film, just not a particularly good Star Trek IMHO. It was entertaining at least, although by this point I was sick of 4 films of the Jean Luc "Rambo" Picard character he had morphed into since the last episode of TNG.

Insurrection was just weak. If it had been a 2 part episode of TNG it wouldn't have been up there with the best episodes, it would have been an average one at best. As a full blown film it was just lame and it really seemed like the one that everyone just most mailed it in, including TFF. I think Shatner worked his ass to make TFF work, but he just didn't do a good job and the film sucked. Insurrection just seems like noone's heart was really in it. I think they tried to save things with Nemesis by having it have a more Khan and First Contact style to it, but by this point the die had been cast and the public was obviously ready to move on from Star Trek films at that time.