Star Trek: Insurrection said:
Doesn't sound like the Son'a were offered much of a choice.
Insurrection not a bad film
- Thread starter MattyWelli
- Start date
Doesn't sound like the Son'a were offered much of a choice.
I love it...
I don't think that Insurrection is especially bad, but neither is it especially good. It's just disappointingly average, the cinematic equivalent of a rather forgetable episode. If I'm waiting 2-3 years to get a Star Trek story, I want it to blow me away when it finally arrives.
Worst ethical dilemma ever presented in Star Trek, "yuppies fight eminent domain". Tough to take the film seriously.
Avatar. Same story.
And ironically, the first draft of the script would have been very much like Avatar, with a very strange alien world, and very strange aliens.
I get what you guys are saying, but it's still funny to hear the Baku and Navi described as "urban professionals."
Is it really all that hard to visualize the Baku buying all their clothes and furniture down at "The Pottery Barn?"
Is it really all that hard to visualize the Baku buying all their clothes and furniture down at "The Pottery Barn?"
Frakes and Sirtis on the dvd commentary both have a lot of fun ripping on perfection/wholemilk blandness of Baku. I've said elsewhere but I get impression Frakes didn't take script very seriously; feel was just another directing gig to him, and on those grounds he didn't do that bad a job. What makes Insurrection a bad film is the final script Frakes shot. But from what I've read, Piller's original script was way more interesting, but got watered down. It seems Stewart had some useful things to say in development process, but considering Piller was as familiar (if not more so) than Stewart was with Trek (Stewart always said he was only vaguely familiar as something his kids watched), I think could safely have ignored him. Ah...hindsight is such a great thing. Could have been so much better...
I liked it a lot, very utopian, loved the feel good factor, not sure being better than nemesis though, i liked nemesis too.
Sorry but the film losses at least half a star for what has to be one of the most gringe worthy lines "Engage the manual steering column"
Never mind the fact that you need two columns to naviage ina 3 dimensioanl way foward, back, left right can all be controlled by 1. but what about up and down?
Never mind the fact that you need two columns to naviage ina 3 dimensioanl way foward, back, left right can all be controlled by 1. but what about up and down?
You seriously have never ever played a flight sim with a joystick, have you?
Yes I have, but I still needed a second control to determine thrust.
^Then how do you engage reverse thrust?
Even in the Trekverse things have to make sense. As previously mentioned if you are flying the ship manually (aside from the fact that the CONN station can do this already) you need a control for controlling direction and one for speed. So the scene doesn't make logic sense.
Whilst VOY did have some good stories, there is no way the ship should have looked like it had just departed Utopia Planitia Construction Yards. It just doesn't make sense they had limited access to materials in which to repair the ship. You can try and hand-wave it saying they had an industrial replicator onbaord to fabricate new hull plating.
Star Wars leans more towards Fantasy so I don't need to know how Hyperdrives work, they just do. Star Trek on the otherhand has always leaned more science. We're told something about how Warp Drives work etc.. So when you start to break from your own established laws of science(or science in general) you have a problem
Even in the Trekverse things have to make sense. As previously mentioned if you are flying the ship manually (aside from the fact that the CONN station can do this already) you need a control for controlling direction and one for speed. So the scene doesn't make logic sense.
Whilst VOY did have some good stories, there is no way the ship should have looked like it had just departed Utopia Planitia Construction Yards. It just doesn't make sense they had limited access to materials in which to repair the ship. You can try and hand-wave it saying they had an industrial replicator onbaord to fabricate new hull plating.
Star Wars leans more towards Fantasy so I don't need to know how Hyperdrives work, they just do. Star Trek on the otherhand has always leaned more science. We're told something about how Warp Drives work etc.. So when you start to break from your own established laws of science(or science in general) you have a problem
To be fair I was being quite facetious. There really is no way to adequately explain how that one joystick controlled the whole ship, but it's such a minor quibble for me that it's easy to overlook.
Compared to the rest of Insurrection, the joystick looks well thought out.
I agree the manual steering column was ridiculous.
The bit about it not working for three-dimensional movements isn't quite so.
The space shuttle uses a stick as well. It enables the orbiter full movement through all axes, rotational and transitional, roll pitch yaw.
The stick not only moves side to side and back and forth, there is also twisting action and up/down action on the stick. So it works for all degrees of movement.
(Speed and thrust and delta-v require additional controls on the DAP on the center console)
The bit about it not working for three-dimensional movements isn't quite so.
The space shuttle uses a stick as well. It enables the orbiter full movement through all axes, rotational and transitional, roll pitch yaw.
The stick not only moves side to side and back and forth, there is also twisting action and up/down action on the stick. So it works for all degrees of movement.
(Speed and thrust and delta-v require additional controls on the DAP on the center console)
The other guy does that. It's a manual steering column, not a manual thrust column.
