Learning to love "Insurrection"

Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies I-X' started by Trek Survivor, Jul 21, 2011.

  1. MrPointy

    MrPointy Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2006
    I think Insurrection is the most indefensible of what I believe most people consider the 'bad' group of Trek movies (TSFS, TFF, GEN, this, NEM).

    The plot and the moral dilemma are so fucking stupid. It's "Journey's End", except Picard does a 180 in terms of his stance.
     
  2. Psion

    Psion Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2001
    Location:
    Lat: 40.1630936 Lon: -75.1183777
    Maybe that's why Wesley was back (albeit nearly off-screen) in Nemesis. After Picard showed greater understanding of the local's predicament, young Mr. Crusher renewed relations with both him and Starfleet.
     
  3. sonak

    sonak Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2007
    Location:
    in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination

    I agree with your grouping of what are commonly considered the "bad" Trek movies, except for TSFS, which I think is more considered average, not really bad. I'd substitute TMP for that choice. This BBS skews really weirdly on TMP, which is pretty unpopular among Trek fans, but for some reason, is often well regarded here.
     
  4. MrPointy

    MrPointy Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2006
    I forgot to mention TMP - I can watch Zardoz, but I can't stand TMP.

    And I get the impression, that despite it being average, TSFS sort of confirmed the odd number rule.
     
  5. Grant

    Grant Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2006
    I like Nemesis and Insurrection--I guess I am an oddball. But I find TMP boring but for nostalgic reasons I can't hate it.

    Except for TFF I think all are well made movies

    TMP--boring and unlike TOS
    TSFS--a big drop in quality and lots of little flaws
    TFF---poorly made and unfocused
    Generations---terrible concept
    Insurrection---too thin a story
    Nemesis---editing problem was this the final next gen movie or not they couldn't decide so edited as if it wasn't, but it had been written as if it was and the dune buggy chase :scream:
     
  6. Tiberius

    Tiberius Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2005
    Agreed.

    That's the difference between a good Trek film and a bad one. It needs an epic plot.

    TMP: Is it epic? Well, it's got the fate of the world and an uinstoppable invader, so that lends it some epicness. But then it has two main characters who we've never seen before (and given that we want to see Kirk and Co, the movie never has a chance to develop the new characters enough for us to actually care about them), so it loses epic points there. it has awesome music and the visuals look spectacular, so while the movie has some epicness, it doesn't have enough to make it anything more than a "good" movie.

    TWOK: Is it epic? It's got a quest for revenge, and a villain with backstory. It's got a new character, yes, but she's a sterotypical vulcan and basically a copy of spock, so we don't need much character development to learn about her. And the opening scene develops her character pretty well anyway. Plus it's got an emotional end and some kick ass action sequences. So it has lots of what it needs to be epic, and not much of the stuff that loses epic points. It's an epic movie, with enough grandeur and scope for the big screen.

    TSFS: Not quite as epic, but it has a good bad guy whose motives are explained simply. No new characters, and there's a nice sense of justice with everyone who died. It's also got the emotional scene of the enterprise being destroyed. It's going a long way towards being as big and bold as the previous movie, but doesn't get as far as TWOK.

    TVH: The old culture shock movie, but it has the benefit that we are familiar with both cultures. Each group has a specific thing to do, so the plot is easy to follow. Great use of humour as well. It's not trying to be big and bold, it's trying to be a comedy, and it suceeds perfectly.

    TFF: It's trying to be a comedy, but the humour comes at the cost of the character's dignity. It's trying to be an action movie, but a lot of the action does nothing to further the plot. As a movie, it has very little to redeem it. it's not epic, it just looks like it's trying too hard to be.

    TUC: A strong plot that drives forwards and a script that treats the characters properly make this a solid movie. It's not trying to be something that it isn't. it's building on what has come before. And the plot revolves around peace with the Klingons, so that raises the stakes, giving this movie a boost into the realm of epicness.

    GEN: A stock standard bad guy and the use of time travel as just a gimmick bring this film down. It could have been so much better.

    FC: A memorable guest character in Cochrane and the use of a viullain that is closely tied to the hero of the story give this movie a boost into epic territory. And the end of the film ties beautifully into the already-established fabric of trek, making this movie a great one.

    INS: Bad guys with no connection to the main cast reduce them to stock characters. The fountain of youth aspect could have been an important story point, but it serves only as an excuse for jokes about perky boobs.

    NEM: An attempt to tie the bad guy to the hero by making him a clone, but it fails because they never actually use this to advance the plot. Add a subplot that is barely tied to the main plot and you have a movie full of things that it didn't really need. Trying to be epic but failing.

    So you can see that a good trek film has two things. A problem that has some kind of connection to the hero and a plot in which everything seres to advance the story.

    TWOk had both. TSFS had both (the problem was saving Spock, not Kruge). TVH didn't have it, but that movie was never trying to be epic. TUC had it (the problem being Kirk trying to make peace with the Klingons despite his prejudice). FC had it.

    The other films didn't. And that's why they're bad.

    And don't give me that old line about the movies not having the feel established by the episodes. They're not meant to. Because they're bloody movies, not episodes. It's a different medium. If I want something with the feel of an episode, I'll go and watch an episode.
     
  7. Elder Knight

    Elder Knight Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Location:
    SE USA
    Excellent, succinct analysis.
     
  8. Mark 2000

    Mark 2000 Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    San Francisco
    Here's one problem that I see - as an Insurrection hater - with the "village vs billions" welfare scenario. If you move a village of people on Earth to make a damn that will power the region that seems to be ok if you pay them off. They're benefiting from loosing their land. There is nothing you could pay the Baku to make up for not being immortal anymore. In other words, your killing them. They found those particles, they colonized the planet, they are reaping the benefits. It isn't quit fair to take that from them.
     
  9. JarodRussell

    JarodRussell Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2009
    That, and the Federation wanted to secretly relocate them. That's ugly. And then it would have killed all of the older Ba'ku. Why? In the movie, it is only hinted at: Geordi says that it's possible he could lose his eye-sight again when they leave. The effects reverse. Which means that all those 300 year old Ba'ku would have died after being relocated.
     
  10. CaptainStoner

    CaptainStoner Knuckle-dragging TNZ Denizen Admiral

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2007
    Location:
    Hill dweller
    My impression was that Dougherty didn't represent Starfleet. He represented a small group of upper brass that was operating without Starfleet's knowledge. I could see no reason to remove the Ba'ku at all, and no reason to harvest the planetary rings, which would have reduced them to a temporary treatment. Dougherty and the So'na were circumventing all proper diplomacy.
    Even if diplomacy failed completely, Starfleet could still have simply said fuck it, and claimed 3/4 of the planet.
    It was the forced relocation, and murder, and the circumventing of Starfleet's total knowledge, that Picard was opposing. I'm not defending this film for fanboy reasons. It falls short in many areas, but I've never felt that stopping the relocation was indefensible.
     
  11. Sisko4Life

    Sisko4Life Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2008
    I liked the movie entertainment wise, but I try really hard not to thing about the moral stupidity of it all. Again, its the expense of 600 people for the ability to help billions of Federation citizens... how silly can you get? "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.." Starfleet had no problem relocating the Maquis after the treaty and that was undoubtedly more people and a less noble reason.. Personally, I think Picard would have LOST the court martial in this instance (at least he should have). And I think it was said that Dougherty was part of Section 31
     
  12. BillJ

    BillJ Canon Warrior Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Escaped from Trumpistan
    See... I'm not so sure about the murder part. Obviously the S'ona spent a lot of time and effort on this collector and it had to have long-term implications for curing (or at least extending) the S'ona lifespan (or else it's not worth the trouble). If that's the case for the S'ona, then there's no reason to believe that the same treatments wouldn't continue to extend the Ba'ku lifespan (since their the same race).

    If this was simply the blood feud Picard thought it was, the S'ona could've simply snuck in and eradicated the Ba'ku from orbit.

    So I don't buy that Starfleet was simply murdering the Ba'ku. Nor do I buy into the fact that this was some secret mission. If it was, why bring in the unknown element (Data)?

    This was a sloppy attempt by the Federation to increase lifespans for billions of people. But then again, the issue would've never arisen if the Ba'ku hadn't evicted the S'ona from the planet to begin with.
     
  13. sonak

    sonak Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2007
    Location:
    in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination

    Exactly, as I've written before, there is really NO reasonable argument you can make for not removing the Baku for the vastly greater good it would do. These kinds of relocations for a greater good happen FREQUENTLY in the real world! Picard's "arguments" are so weak Dougherty should have laughed him out of the room and WELCOMED a debate in the UFP council.


    The Son'a are the GOOD GUYS here, folks-they're willing to share their technology and these resources for the benefits of the galaxy, while the Ba'ku, sit and stagnate as isolationist luddites, refusing to let the galaxy know of the resources on their planet.

    Further, for all the concern about the effects of removing the Baku and what it would cost them, what about the Sona'? We're given dialogue that confirms that NOT bringing them the resources of the planet would mean a bunch of them would die soon.



    Oh, but they don't count because they're ugly.
     
  14. BillJ

    BillJ Canon Warrior Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Escaped from Trumpistan
    The moral of the story: ugly people are evil. :lol:
     
  15. SiorX

    SiorX Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2007
    Location:
    Aporia
    For me, it's not that I think relocating the Ba'ku is a perfect solution. Maybe it's not even an acceptable one. The problem is that the necessary questions never even get asked. With the facts we are given about the planet and its colonists, Picard's dilemma ought to be that he's stuck defending and protecting a couple of hundred contemptible wankers. Because of Dougherty's subterfuge he's forced to side with a colony who are selfish, indolent and privileged. Let that be the conflict of the movie.
     
  16. JarodRussell

    JarodRussell Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2009
    Genocide happens frequently in the real world, too. Is it good or normal just because it happens to often?
     
  17. Vasquez Rocks

    Vasquez Rocks Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2002
    Location:
    Vasquez Rocks
    No the Son'a are evil, because they worked with The Dominion and enslaved the Tarlac and the Ellora. Like Troi said "Why would we be working with these people?"

    The Federation really must have been desperate to trust that their tech was going to work on the rings of the planet. There really was no guarantee it would. The only real guarantee was living on the planet which Picard offers as a solution and Dougherty flatly rejects.
     
  18. sonak

    sonak Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2007
    Location:
    in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination

    Ah, so the Son'a, who were EXILED TO DIE, despite there being a huge empty planet they could have gone to, are the "bad guys" for doing what they had to to survive after their exile, but the Baku, who exiled the Son'a in the first place, and show no interest in bringing the discovery of what they stumbled onto to the rest of the galaxy to benefit others, are the "good guys."


    Oh, and there are plenty of other empires that oppress groups within them in Star Trek that the UFP has allied with, like the Klingons and the Romulans. Yet suddenly Troi, Riker(and the audience) are supposed to hold their noses at the thought of working with the Son'a. More ridiculousness from a ridiculous script.
     
    Last edited: Aug 7, 2011
  19. BillJ

    BillJ Canon Warrior Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Escaped from Trumpistan
    Poor Micheal Piller, so much of his Star Trek legacy is tied up in this one poorly-executed film. One that bears little resemblance to his original pitch. :(
     
  20. Vasquez Rocks

    Vasquez Rocks Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2002
    Location:
    Vasquez Rocks
    The Son'a claimed they were exiled to die, but earlier in the film Dougherty tells Picard that they don't want to live on the planet or any where in the Briar Patch for that matter. The Baku say a group wanted to follow the ways of the offlanders and tried to take over the colony by force. The Son'a were given what they wanted. They got to follow the ways of the offlanders by exploring space. The price for that is you don't get to be eternally young. Still, they lived a long life. They were well into their three hundreds.