But if had been Kirk, could it have worked better than using Riker and Troi-speaking of TAT and not GEN. But in GEN might it have worked had Kirk been a hologram and not been alive to be killed off Veridian III? Either way I do not think the Shat would have done a cameo as a hologram. Too short an appearance and all.
Is Generations REALLY That Bad???
- Thread starter AdmiralScreed
- Start date
I dunno... I still believe GEN could've been good, if the studio hadn't pressured in their ideas, and if Moore-Bragga had more time to flesh out a better story that didn't feel like a passing-of-the-torch-for-the-sake-of-it. I mean, it doesn't try to showcase why the show was so well-known and beloved, but rather tries to shortchange its own strengths for something else.
In the end, the film isn't REALLY that bad. Its even worse.
In the end, the film isn't REALLY that bad. Its even worse.
One thing I never understood is: why did someone (Kirk) have to die in order for it to be a passing of the torch storyline? Other so called torch-passings have not required such sacrifice. ie Unification, Star Trek (2009)
To be fair, they probably knew that, whatever they did, they could never top Spock's sacrifice in TWOK. Nothing would.
And, evidently, nothing will.
And, evidently, nothing will.
Shatner said at the time that he agreed to Kirk's death for two inter-related reasons. If Paramount intended to move away from his cast to the Next Generation cast, then he saw no future for himself in subsequent movies, so giving Kirk an heroic death would be a good way to close his era and leave the board clear for the NextGen era. By the time filming finished, Shatner had regrets about agreeing to putting a final end on Kirk's story; he had a good time making the film and he enjoyed working with Patrick Stewart.
Kirk's death in Generations left me feeling disappointed. It wasn't just the end, it was an unspectacular end. It was "Kirk's dead, but we already pretty much knew that"
Old Spock living on at the end of STXI left me elated. Yeah, we're never gonna see him again (seemingly not even in the novels), but it was a new beginning for the character. It was "Goodbye, I'm off to help the surviving Vulcans now"
Then again, can anyone think of a new cause Kirk could have gone off to at the end of GENS? One that wouldn't turn every subsequent adventure into "Why don't they just go and ask Kirk for help?"
Old Spock living on at the end of STXI left me elated. Yeah, we're never gonna see him again (seemingly not even in the novels), but it was a new beginning for the character. It was "Goodbye, I'm off to help the surviving Vulcans now"
Then again, can anyone think of a new cause Kirk could have gone off to at the end of GENS? One that wouldn't turn every subsequent adventure into "Why don't they just go and ask Kirk for help?"
In that case, my mistake.
Yeah, basically Berman set up a "competition" between Hurley and Moore & Braga for the best story. It was going to be Piller vs. Hurley, but Piller objected to having a competition in the first place and so declined to be involved.
I suspect that the reason that Hurley's script has never surfaced is that it was never finished.
In some of the accounts of the development of the film and the script "competition," Berman was quoted as saying that when it came time to make a decision on which story to use, it was Moore and Braga's story that was further advanced than Hurley's. Reading between the lines, it sounds as if Hurley's script wasn't finished when decision time came.
Well..It was not epic but I did enjoy watching it in the cinema anyway.
Something epic? Wow. A fistfight with Malcolm McDowell has to be about as far as possible from what you were expecting. 
I’m not upset that Kirk dies in the film, but so much is wrong with the way it’s handled:
In short: Kirk dies in a boring fight. The viewer has little reason to care about the people they’re fighting for. Picard has to act very un-Picard-like to put Kirk into the fatal situation. Kirk has no reason at all to put himself in it.
Maybe Tasha can rest a little more at peace with her empty deaths now. If it can happen to James T. Kirk, it can happen to anybody.
I’m not upset that Kirk dies in the film, but so much is wrong with the way it’s handled:
- As an action scene, it’s about as dull as they come. Shatner, Stewart, and McDowell are in their 50’s and 60’s, and not suited to this kind of material. The fight is not interestingly choreographed or shot. It is devoid of suspense or excitement. It’s just three old men going through the motions of a fight, perfunctorily put on film.
- The viewer isn’t emotionally invested in the mission. Two deaths is a tragedy. Two hundred million is a statistic. We never see any of the Veridian IV population and know practically nothing about them.
(TPTB remembered this effect by the time them made INS, in which it is made explicit: “It’s too easy to turn a blind eye to the suffering of a people you don't know.” This is why INS spends lots of time with the Ba’ku and never treats us to a shot of a hospital ward full of sick children awaiting the medical treatment that will be made possible with the metagenic particles.)
- In the TNG folder recently we’ve been talking about how the series begins with a concept of Picard as the diplomat and Riker as the fighter, but changes to where Picard is both diplomat and fighter. In GEN Picard forgets the diplomat thing, setting up the fight that kills Kirk by resorting to violence before diplomatic options are exhausted.
On Veridian III, Picard tries to talk Soran out of his plan, and fails. Why not try again inside the Nexus? What is there to lose? Is Soran going to follow Picard and Kirk out of the Nexus and interfere with their attempt to interfere with his attempt to enter the Nexus? If he’s capable of tearing himself away from the Nexus, maybe he’s capable of realizing it wasn’t worth killing two hundred million people to get into the Nexus in the first place. TV Picard sure as hell would give it a try. Movie Picard wants to hurry and skip ahead to the fight so Kirk can get killed.
- Picard’s decision to leave the Nexus and fight Soran on Veridian III reflects horrible judgment and is a betrayal of the character we know from the TV series. Kirk’s decision to do the same is downright nonsensical.
Why would Kirk travel to the future and fight Soran on Veridian III instead of staying in his own time and nipping the Soran problem in the bud? From Kirk’s perspective, this isn’t changing history. Time has no meaning in the Nexus. He doesn’t travel to the 24th century until he leaves the Nexus. What possible reason can he have for doing so?
In short: Kirk dies in a boring fight. The viewer has little reason to care about the people they’re fighting for. Picard has to act very un-Picard-like to put Kirk into the fatal situation. Kirk has no reason at all to put himself in it.
Maybe Tasha can rest a little more at peace with her empty deaths now. If it can happen to James T. Kirk, it can happen to anybody.
One of the big problems I have with the movie is how mechanical the plot is.
"we need kirk and Picard to meet.
"time travel?"
"no, it has to be different."
"how about there's this place that exists through all space and time? They could meet there!"
"great idea. Now we need a reason they are there and work backwards."
Etc
The other problem is how the audience is two steps ahead of the script. You're walking into the cinema past the poster of kirk and Picard, and you've seen the clip on tv of them togeather on horses. So when kirk "dies" at the start of the movie on the enterprise B Scotty and Chekhov are sad but the audience is looking at their watch. Later Picard finally goes in the nexus and is surprised to meet kirk. The audience isn't. Kirk needs to be convinced to go and help picard. The audience knows he will help because he's captain kirk!
The DVD commentary is interesting because they admit they came up with this great idea for the nexus but didn't use it to its full potential.
I have other problems with the movie but I'll stop there.
"we need kirk and Picard to meet.
"time travel?"
"no, it has to be different."
"how about there's this place that exists through all space and time? They could meet there!"
"great idea. Now we need a reason they are there and work backwards."
Etc
The other problem is how the audience is two steps ahead of the script. You're walking into the cinema past the poster of kirk and Picard, and you've seen the clip on tv of them togeather on horses. So when kirk "dies" at the start of the movie on the enterprise B Scotty and Chekhov are sad but the audience is looking at their watch. Later Picard finally goes in the nexus and is surprised to meet kirk. The audience isn't. Kirk needs to be convinced to go and help picard. The audience knows he will help because he's captain kirk!
The DVD commentary is interesting because they admit they came up with this great idea for the nexus but didn't use it to its full potential.
I have other problems with the movie but I'll stop there.
All four of the TNG films have that in common, and some of the contortions they go through to get to their desired plot point are ridiculous.
Something epic? Wow. A fistfight with Malcolm McDowell has to be about as far as possible from what you were expecting.
I’m not upset that Kirk dies in the film, but so much is wrong with the way it’s handled:
In short: Kirk dies in a boring fight. The viewer has little reason to care about the people they’re fighting for. Picard has to act very un-Picard-like to put Kirk into the fatal situation. Kirk has no reason at all to put himself in it.
- As an action scene, it’s about as dull as they come. Shatner, Stewart, and McDowell are in their 50’s and 60’s, and not suited to this kind of material. The fight is not interestingly choreographed or shot. It is devoid of suspense or excitement. It’s just three old men going through the motions of a fight, perfunctorily put on film.
- The viewer isn’t emotionally invested in the mission. Two deaths is a tragedy. Two hundred million is a statistic. We never see any of the Veridian IV population and know practically nothing about them.
(TPTB remembered this effect by the time them made INS, in which it is made explicit: “It’s too easy to turn a blind eye to the suffering of a people you don't know.” This is why INS spends lots of time with the Ba’ku and never treats us to a shot of a hospital ward full of sick children awaiting the medical treatment that will be made possible with the metagenic particles.)
- In the TNG folder recently we’ve been talking about how the series begins with a concept of Picard as the diplomat and Riker as the fighter, but changes to where Picard is both diplomat and fighter. In GEN Picard forgets the diplomat thing, setting up the fight that kills Kirk by resorting to violence before diplomatic options are exhausted.
On Veridian III, Picard tries to talk Soran out of his plan, and fails. Why not try again inside the Nexus? What is there to lose? Is Soran going to follow Picard and Kirk out of the Nexus and interfere with their attempt to interfere with his attempt to enter the Nexus? If he’s capable of tearing himself away from the Nexus, maybe he’s capable of realizing it wasn’t worth killing two hundred million people to get into the Nexus in the first place. TV Picard sure as hell would give it a try. Movie Picard wants to hurry and skip ahead to the fight so Kirk can get killed.
- Picard’s decision to leave the Nexus and fight Soran on Veridian III reflects horrible judgment and is a betrayal of the character we know from the TV series. Kirk’s decision to do the same is downright nonsensical.
Why would Kirk travel to the future and fight Soran on Veridian III instead of staying in his own time and nipping the Soran problem in the bud? From Kirk’s perspective, this isn’t changing history. Time has no meaning in the Nexus. He doesn’t travel to the 24th century until he leaves the Nexus. What possible reason can he have for doing so?
Maybe Tasha can rest a little more at peace with her empty deaths now. If it can happen to James T. Kirk, it can happen to anybody.
the criticism that Picard doesn't succeed by persuading Soran in the Nexus isn't fair to Gen. No Trek movie ends with Kirk or Picard using diplomacy or negotation to win.
It's because they're trying to be action movies. Try picturing Nemesis with the ending being that Shinzon willingly gives up and surrenders because he was persuaded by Picard's appeal.
doesn't work.
The criticism isn’t that he doesn’t succeed. The criticism is that he doesn’t try.
TMP and TVH both end with the Enterprise learning to communicate with the aggressor and sending it on its way with good wishes. Kirk’s diplomatic decision to surrender to Chang instead of fighting may have prevented a war. Spock saves the day in TFF by convincing Korrd to convince Klaa to call off his attack. I’d say those are all diplomatic triumphs.
Movie Picard has no diplomatic achievements to speak of, unless you count fomenting mutiny on the Son’a ship.
I understand the goal, but look at how they went about it. chevron’s description of the process is apt.
First they decide where they want the story to go. In this case, they decided they wanted Shatner, Stewart, and McDowell fighting on that mountaintop.
Then they went about contriving a story to make that happen. So they give us a line about the Veridian IV population to create a reason that Soran has to be stopped. And they have Picard and Kirk act out of character and nonsensically in order to get them on that mountaintop with Soran.
In a well-crafted story, developments emerge naturally from the characters and situations, and emotional hooks give the viewer a reason to care about the hero’s mission. GEN doesn’t do that, and doesn’t even appear to be trying.
If you’re going to commit all those cardinal sins, having characters acting out of character, unwisely, and downright nonsensically, and make the mission about an irrelevant MacGuffin, all in the name of having your action movie end with an action sequence, it better be a good action sequence. If Shatner and Stewart were scaling the Burj Khalifa in spectacular IMAX, I’d have an easier time forgiving the film for whatever contrivances the screenplay needs to get them there, but GEN’s climactic action sequence is pathetic.
I would never suggest such a thing. Just because it’s possible to write a dumb story involving diplomacy doesn’t mean they shouldn’t use TV Picard’s most defining character trait in the movies, it just means they shouldn’t write a dumb story.
On second thought, maybe I would suggest such a thing. I wouldn’t make the same movie except with Shinzon surrendering at the end, but I think a very good story could have been crafted with such an ending.
First Blood was an excellent action movie, yet it ends with diplomacy. Rambo and Teasle speak to each other in only one language, violence. Once the shit hits the fan in the first act, the violence is almost non-stop. Then Trautman comes in and talks to Rambo, and listens. Mostly listens. For the first time in a very long time, maybe since the war, Rambo has someone who is listening to him, who cares, and who understands. And after a cathartic release, he surrenders. It’s a satisfying ending to an enjoyable action film. I think a good story could have been written that ends with Picard playing Trautman to Shinzon’s Rambo. It would open up some interesting dramatic and thematic possibilities.
NEM likes to pretend it’s exploring the question of nature-vs-nature. It doesn’t explore crap. It has nothing to say about the issue except, “There’s this nature-vs-nurture question you’ve heard of before, and we cast our vote with nurture.”
So imagine this: Romulans create this Picard clone and mold him to their purposes. When they no longer find him useful, they cast him into the mines, and he emerges consumed by hate and evil. Picard, using his diplomatic skills and his unique insight into Shinzon’s psyche, finds a way to reach him, and to resolve the situation without killing him. The message has a little more meat: “We cast our vote with nurture. Evil Romulans can turn a Picard clone into something evil... but that doesn’t mean it’s too late for good people to reach him and influence him in the other direction.” It’s not stunningly original — George Lucas went there 20 years earlier with the redemption of Darth Vader — but it’s a more interesting and mature theme than we get in the actual film.
And what a great way to return to TNG’s roots. In the pilot, Q encourages Picard to use the ship’s weapons against a poorly-understood threat. Picard rejects that option, choosing to handle the situation with brains instead of brawn, and in so doing saves humanity from conviction on the charge of being a grievously savage race, paving the way for seven great seasons of TNG adventures.
The film could echo that scene, with Starfleet Admirals or Romulans advocating a violent solution, and Picard finding a better, diplomatic solution. He saves the Federation, not by killing his enemy, but by understanding, helping, even loving his enemy. That is the kind of story TNG was created to tell. It would be a fitting way to wrap up the TNG story. And you could still have some high-octane action scenes along the way.
Preferably something better than the dune buggies.
This point really gets to bottom of why Generations just didn't work as a movie. Nothing happening in the main plot line is an unexpected surprise to the audience ... except for Kirk's crappy death scene. The only real gotcha moment was the Ent-D saucer crash-landing.
Perhaps because Nimbus III is a wasteland of a planet, and no one goes there really by choice.
as for Chekov and Kahn. Crew COmpliment of a Constitution Class vessel ~430. Crew seen in episode ~20. Do the Maths jjst because we didn' see Checkov in the episode doesn't mean he wasn't onbaord the ship
Perhaps because it didn't register/consider or care that anything other than the whales could be consider life. It's transmissions affecting ships etc... could be an unintended side effect.
There is an even bigger plt hole in FC, if the Borg have a transwarp conduit so close to Earth why not use it, so Starfleet can't mobilise a deence as quickly.
As for GEN it was an OK movie, it loses points for Killing Kirk in the way that they did.
Something revisited when Pricline recently killed off their Negotiator (William Shatner) in a similair manner.
Similar threads
- Poll
