lulz
Is Nemesis unfairly criticized?
- Thread starter Shinzon4u
- Start date
ST: Nemesis, that bargain-basement, ham-fisted attempt at using Sir Thomas Malory's Le Morte d'Arthur as inspiration for its central plot? That nauseatingly banal waste of film that can induce me to change channels only marginally faster than ST:TFF would?
I guess you could say it gets a bum rap.
I guess you could say it gets a bum rap.
If we're going with box office results, does that mean ST 09 wins?
Nemesis is a steaming pile of shite.
I see "Nemesis" as being like a big ol' block of marble. It has all of the ingredients to be a good movie, but the wrong guy was given a hammer 'n' chisel and asked to make a statue out of it. The end result has got one too many arms, and at least three too many legs, while forgetting to include eyes, nose and mouth. 
The idea for Nemesis is there... and the direction, set design, and effects are there... but the resulting product leaves a lot to be desired.
One of its biggest weaknesses is how boring it is - Trekkies in 2002 criticized it for being "too action-oriented" when in fact it's one of the slowest of the movie series. It doesn't pick up momentum until the (admittedly fantastic) battle sequence.
Another problem is how bored the actors are. Tom Hardy is out-acting Patrick Stewart, who yawns through his lines, Jonathan Frakes shifts around uncomfortably, and LeVar Burton delivers lines such as "cascading Thaloran pulse" as if he wants to lay down somewhere and die.
One of its biggest weaknesses is how boring it is - Trekkies in 2002 criticized it for being "too action-oriented" when in fact it's one of the slowest of the movie series. It doesn't pick up momentum until the (admittedly fantastic) battle sequence.
Another problem is how bored the actors are. Tom Hardy is out-acting Patrick Stewart, who yawns through his lines, Jonathan Frakes shifts around uncomfortably, and LeVar Burton delivers lines such as "cascading Thaloran pulse" as if he wants to lay down somewhere and die.
This is what I find the most disappointing. Clearly none of them are enthused by the script, but more to the point they all look so tired. Roughly the same amount of in-universe time passes between 'Generations' and 'Nemesis' as passes between 'The Wrath of Khan' and 'The Undiscovered Country', but while the original series crew never seemed less than 100% full-energy even in their movies that failed to hit the mark, it's like everyone involved in the TNG cast has simply given up.
In Insurrection, the cast was clearly having fun jumping around rocks on location filming and being thrown back by explosions on the Enterprise-E sets.
In Nemesis? It's as if the life were sucked out of everyone. Gee.
Nemesis is the classic example of good ideas being thrown together to create an unruly mess. There's plenty of good acting, writing and action in it, but also bad editing and bad directing, creating something that was definatly less than the sum of its parts.
I still really like it, and like Insurrection, it gives me more of TNG vibe than First Contact did, but on the whole, it's not a really good movie.
I still really like it, and like Insurrection, it gives me more of TNG vibe than First Contact did, but on the whole, it's not a really good movie.
Something that I think speaks volumes is that director Stuart Baird has, publically, said that he hated having to pick up on something which had an established cast with established history, and that he'd much rather have been working from a clean slate. Unfortunately, this attitude flies in the face of the (mostly good natured) attempts in the script to throw in continuity with the TV show and to somehow give the movie a feeling of being 'the final adventure' and tie things up. The telling thing is the deleted scenes reel, where there are umpteen sequences that Baird obviously cut from the movie in his attempts to shake it down into being what he wanted it to be, but which are mostly cute little character scenes that throwback to things we loved on the TV show. I have no doubt that a director more in synch with the script (I'll suggest Jonathan Frakes, inevitably) would've made very different decisions about what stayed in the movie and what would go.
I wouldn't call it that bad, but you can tell that the mood on set wasn't like the olden days, and the cast has said so I believe.
I think the more damning comparison is that Nemesis is about as long after "Farpoint" as TWOK is after "Corbomite." And TWOK is about everyone feeling old and tired!
The biggest problem with Nemesis, ultimately, is that it ended there. It wasn't supposed to (a Generations final journey BEGINS) and it's just the wrong note to end on. It's astonishingly obvious that it's basically part one of a two parter, which would have fixed a lot of the perceptions of it overall.
This is not to disagree with its other problems...the director is crap, knew nothing, the story needed to remove or explain some of its choices better, the executive meddling powers of a fed up Spiner and Stewart needing serious reining in, and the marketing department needed to be lined up against a wall and shot (with phaser BB guns, since they were a thing, and I am not a fascist or Stalinist.) for so many bad choices. Tom Hardy was good casting, but allegedly had a few...problems, which should have been dealt with.
Ultimately, most fans could have lived with that, if it hadn't been where it ended. I accept my part in that (belatedly) because I didn't pay to see it in cinemas..I did t even rent it or buy it first hand...because the marketing meant I barely knew it came out, and once it had, the bad news about it also got out...having confirmed Datas death by reading the last few pages in the novelisation in a bookshop, I neither bought the book nor saw the movie until I bought an ex rental copy years later. So add enough people like me together, and you see why it didn't make any money and not get its planned sequel. Sorry Marina. (Sirtis, who is on record as saying it was to have a sequel but basically us fans didn't turn out for it. Not that she blames us...mostly the cat blame Baird.)
This is not to disagree with its other problems...the director is crap, knew nothing, the story needed to remove or explain some of its choices better, the executive meddling powers of a fed up Spiner and Stewart needing serious reining in, and the marketing department needed to be lined up against a wall and shot (with phaser BB guns, since they were a thing, and I am not a fascist or Stalinist.) for so many bad choices. Tom Hardy was good casting, but allegedly had a few...problems, which should have been dealt with.
Ultimately, most fans could have lived with that, if it hadn't been where it ended. I accept my part in that (belatedly) because I didn't pay to see it in cinemas..I did t even rent it or buy it first hand...because the marketing meant I barely knew it came out, and once it had, the bad news about it also got out...having confirmed Datas death by reading the last few pages in the novelisation in a bookshop, I neither bought the book nor saw the movie until I bought an ex rental copy years later. So add enough people like me together, and you see why it didn't make any money and not get its planned sequel. Sorry Marina. (Sirtis, who is on record as saying it was to have a sequel but basically us fans didn't turn out for it. Not that she blames us...mostly the cat blame Baird.)
For me Nemesis is a mixed bag. I like it but it is my least favorite film. I liked the dune buggy scene! I didn't like the sudden apperence of the Remans, the Troi violation and Data's death. I liked the concepts of these twins, B4 and Shinzon, and the themes they explored. Shinzon was too creepy and it would have been better if he had struggled more with his dark side against trying to live up to the Picard standards. He never had any intention of being good.
I was 13 years old when I begged my parents to take me to see Nemesis at the theater. I had never seen a Star Trek movie at the theater before, was a huge trekkie already, and somehow knew that this was gonna be the end of Trek as I knew it. I was intrigued by the premise and remember reading the opening to the leaked script online the day before the release date, and being very excited by what I read, but leaving the ending a surprise.
I shouldn't have.
Nemesis was not only my first trek film at the theater, it was the first movie I ever saw in the theater that I HATED. It literally gave me a sick feeling and a bad taste in my mouth, and the ending made me so angry. I was like, "That's it!? They're just gonna end the entire 24th Century story like THAT?"
It figures, given my luck, that Nemesis of all films would be my theatrical introduction to Star Trek. Thank GOD for JJ Abrams for saving Star trek at the movies for me.
I shouldn't have.
Nemesis was not only my first trek film at the theater, it was the first movie I ever saw in the theater that I HATED. It literally gave me a sick feeling and a bad taste in my mouth, and the ending made me so angry. I was like, "That's it!? They're just gonna end the entire 24th Century story like THAT?"
It figures, given my luck, that Nemesis of all films would be my theatrical introduction to Star Trek. Thank GOD for JJ Abrams for saving Star trek at the movies for me.
I'd rather watch Nemesis than be made to suffer through any of the NuTrek films.Funny how Nemesis is criticized for the same elements that the first two JJ films are praised for - giant OP black-colored villain ships, gratuitous action sequences, TWOK callbacks - all that's different are the characters, direction and production values.
I'll never get fans.
I'm baffled by any recommendation that says adding Crosby to the mix will increase box office draw.
The best Romulan stories in Trek had no Sela. The worst Romulan stories in Trek did.
Why do we want to fight those odds?
Can anyone out there truthfully say Unification or Redemption were Trek's greatest use of the Romulans ever? And that Sela even added anything except getting Crosbt back with the family for a few scenes?
The best Romulan stories in Trek had no Sela. The worst Romulan stories in Trek did.
Why do we want to fight those odds?
Can anyone out there truthfully say Unification or Redemption were Trek's greatest use of the Romulans ever? And that Sela even added anything except getting Crosbt back with the family for a few scenes?
Last edited:
I am no Sela fan, but she pops up in these discussions for good reason I think....Nemesis is predicated on characters in the Romulan diaspora who have ties to the leads (b4 and Shinzon) and one of them (b4) is already a character than basically already existed (lore is already datas evil twin...now he has a 'misguided' twin too..) so why not have something with more actual grounding rather than magic wand backstory? At the very least, she may as well have been the female senator...established characters come with a history that adds depth to a story that needed it. Though it would only marginally improve some aspects of the film, assuming it wasn't changed massively (the clone plot now has a logical reason, even an inferred plausible start point, if you include Sela. That's a fair chunk of the stuff that seemed a bit hand wavy in Nemesis. Shinzons existence, motivation etc, becomes logical. It also ties into the Tennyson Morte d'arthure stuff they were riffing on....Tasha/Sela becomes an echo of both Morgaine and Mordred. Sela would actually make the film thematically more complete. Ironically, so would actually using Beverly and Wesley a bit more. Though nothing can make the Remans make sense.
Similar threads
