Let's Talk About Insurrection:

[Lance]

One problem with the Star Trek movies at Paramount during the 80s and 90s was that they had become a sort of "cottage industry" within themselves, always pottering along, having become seen as these kind of cheap(ish), easy to produce flicks that could just kind of be churned out of the factory. So they were never really given the budget considerations they deserved, and the one or two that were "breakout hits" were treated with a kind of surprise by the hierarchy. I'm not saying they didn't appreciate the Star Trek brand, that's certainly not the case, but I suspect to them the movies were always a kind of..... 'product'. Produced quickly, effortlessly, and more importantly ON THE CHEAP. And if my suspicion on this is true, then I think it's undeniable that the TNG movies in particular suffered from this deeply ingrained mindset within the Paramount executive branch (of which Berman was also a member).

The new post-2009 movies are the first time Star Trek at the cinema has been treated legitimately since 1979. They've been given budgets the original Trek and TNG movies could only have dreamed of.

 

[Smellmet]

I think it's a crying shame. The ambition and scope they showed with The Motion Picture just wasn't sustained with the rest of the series. We're lucky with how many of them were half decent as it went.

 

[Bisz]

I saw Insurrection three times in the theatre when it came out. I thoroughly enjoy it watching it, it's a good time. By no means the best Trek or TNG movie, but enjoyable, mostly for the reasons the OP mentions, there is a lot of character "development".

Nemesis on the other hand I despise.

 

[2takesfrakes]

I'm not saying they didn't appreciate the Star Trek brand, that's certainly not the case, but I suspect to them the movies were always a kind of..... 'product'. Produced quickly, effortlessly, and more importantly ON THE CHEAP.

It seems like when Paramount brought Harve onboard to make "Wrath of Khan" as cheap as a Roger Coreman movie, they already had a pretty good idea of what the profit potential for STAR TREK, at that time, was going to be. STAR WARS was new then and unparallelled in its money-making potential. So, I guess Paramount just said, "screw it, we're never going to compete against that" and just kept doing TREK on the cheap largely for that reason. But after STAR WARS had run its course, the TOS cast just kept getting even older. Critics certainly, were starting to kind of bust on these movies with their "STAR TREK: The Search for Geritol" cracks and all of that, though the fanbase's loyalty seemed to keep the sequels all at - roughly - the same level of income.

 

[Lance]

^ I do think that's very true. TMP was something of a blow-out, but for the rest of the series it was like they had a 'Star Trek Formula' where they knew exactly how far they could set the budget and still make a modest return. So, while never "cheap" as such, the movies were created with budgetary considerations in mind, and a kind of bottom line that frequently butted heads with the good intentions of the scripts.

The TOS movies almost got away with it. But I think it hit the TNG movies head-on, because they kind of inherited this notion that Star Trek movies are this middle-of-the-road-product that can be made for $ and make $$$. The Abrams movies, for better or worse, were approached much more healthily, because divorced of that earlier mind-set they were able to fully benefit from a studio that said "Make the biggest God-damn blockbuster you can". If only Harve and Rick had ever been given that much freedom.....

 

[2takesfrakes]

That's an interesting thought ... would the specific story of INSURRECTION have been committed to, if they'd had a quarter of a billion dollars to make it with? I would think not, actually. When you're dealing with that kind of money, the studio's going to take a much greater, active interest. FIRST CONTACT probably would've been more or less the same story, I should think, with that kind of a budget. INSURRECTION would've copied that kind of format more closely, I suspect. The Dominion would've most definitely factored into it, maybe even becoming a featured part.

In the end, the kind of system you've been talking about is the only one that would've really allowed for a story like what we see here in INS. It's not like a story about a government's forced relocation of whole groups of people is bad or inappropriate, at all ... it just couldn't be the entire story, as it was here. I'm sure that with a STAR TREK '09 budget that INSURRECTION would've been a fairly successful picture, with Frakes at the helm. Now, whether NEMESIS would've still had the trio of Stewart, Spiner & Logan running amok with the script is hard to say, but I wouldn't have been surprised if it ended up being a turkey. But big budget TNG movies and their successes might've actually given us DS9: the movie. Can you imagine that? VOYAGER: the motion picture. It makes me wonder. Maybe it's best that PARAMOUNT was tight with a buck in the early STAR TREK film days ...

 

[Lance]

It's a genie in a bottle that I think has definitely been well and truly uncorked. While they could still get away with saying "But we've always made our Star Trek movies this way!" in 1999 or 2002 and knowing what they get from that same formula factory, I don't think going forward there will ever again be a Star Trek film that doesn't have the big spondoolah splashed out for it. And, as you say, that tends to be taken into consideration at every stage in the movie making process, whether it be the story in the script, the director in the chair, or the expected return at the box office. It's a very different world now.

On some level they had more creative freedom back then, but on other levels they had less. I really think Star Trek movies had become an industry unto themselves, to the point where they weren't being given the care and attention they deserved..... Paramount's brass just kind of took them for granted. Until that same lack of care and attention brought the Star Trek Film Factory machine crashing down.

 

[lewisniven]

They had Data saying 'Let's lock...and load' as if it was going to be a rousing, tightly written, action-packed extravaganza. However, I remember renting this and falling asleep half-way through and getting up to see F. Murray Abraham's Rufio* yelling for some reason.

Man I hated that line. There's a part of me which is like, it was so clearly a 'trailer bait' line. Like Carol taking off her clothes in STID, it's just one of those things where you know it's only in the script to give them something to put in the trailers.

That scene is SO out of place in ITD, as if you'd strip down in front of your commanding officer, its a really silly moment. Granted, the least of that films issues though...

 

[Memory Alpha]

Formula dominated in the 1980s and 1990s generally, so that that would be applied to the Trek films should be of no surprise - especially with a very mainstream company (Paramount) financing them. Movies were consciously made for the mainstream. There is a straight forward plot that unfolds with clear good vs. evil.

I think with INS they were trying to make an environmentally conscious movie, but with some emphasis still on action and humor. If it falls flat, I think they were trying to make it appealing to too many different people, Trek fans included. I think it's vastly superior to Nemesis, which goes the other way and tries to appeal to people who like action, explosions, etc.

 

[lewisniven]

Formula dominated in the 1980s and 1990s generally, so that that would be applied to the Trek films should be of no surprise - especially with a very mainstream company (Paramount) financing them. Movies were consciously made for the mainstream. There is a straight forward plot that unfolds with clear good vs. evil.

I think with INS they were trying to make an environmentally conscious movie, but with some emphasis still on action and humor. If it falls flat, I think they were trying to make it appealing to too many different people, Trek fans included. I think it's vastly superior to Nemesis, which goes the other way and tries to appeal to people who like action, explosions, etc.

I would watch INS all day before even thinking about Nemesis. I don't personally consider Nemesis to be canon, it's that bad.

 

[2takesfrakes]

What was with Anij and her Ways of Magic™? Specifically, the Hummingbird sequence. It had nothing to do with anything and was completely useless, as far as I could tell. And if it was only just about her ability to warp Picard's perception of reality, that's compelling to me, but absolutely nothing comes of it. And besides, we're meant to like her. To side with her. So, again ... I just find this baffling even being a part of the story at all. Unless this is some kind of shorthand to metaphorically show that Picard has fallen under Anij's "spell." An idea which I find to be so corny and yet ... so innocently charming, at the same time, that such appeal seems to be the only possible meaning.

 

[lewisniven]

What was with Anij and her Ways of Magic™? Specifically, the Hummingbird sequence. It had nothing to do with anything and was completely useless, as far as I could tell. And if it was only just about her ability to warp Picard's perception of reality, that's compelling to me, but absolutely nothing comes of it. And besides, we're meant to like her. To side with her. So, again ... I just find this baffling even being a part of the story at all. Unless this is some kind of shorthand to metaphorically show that Picard has fallen under Anij's "spell." An idea which I find to be so corny and yet ... so innocently charming, at the same time, that such appeal seems to be the only possible meaning.

Yeah that stuff is weird, I have no idea what purpose it serves (other than so that she doesn't die in the rock fall), but that ability is never explained.

Oh hai, i can slow time down btw

 

[Smellmet]

What was with Anij and her Ways of Magic™? Specifically, the Hummingbird sequence. It had nothing to do with anything and was completely useless, as far as I could tell. And if it was only just about her ability to warp Picard's perception of reality, that's compelling to me, but absolutely nothing comes of it. And besides, we're meant to like her. To side with her. So, again ... I just find this baffling even being a part of the story at all. Unless this is some kind of shorthand to metaphorically show that Picard has fallen under Anij's "spell." An idea which I find to be so corny and yet ... so innocently charming, at the same time, that such appeal seems to be the only possible meaning.

That irritated the hell out of me too - no explanation, no reason for it to be in the film, and the effects on it were ropey to boot.

 

[SantaTom]

Formula dominated in the 1980s and 1990s generally, so that that would be applied to the Trek films should be of no surprise - especially with a very mainstream company (Paramount) financing them. Movies were consciously made for the mainstream. There is a straight forward plot that unfolds with clear good vs. evil.

I think with INS they were trying to make an environmentally conscious movie, but with some emphasis still on action and humor. If it falls flat, I think they were trying to make it appealing to too many different people, Trek fans included. I think it's vastly superior to Nemesis, which goes the other way and tries to appeal to people who like action, explosions, etc.

Interesting. You don't think formula dominates Hollywood films today more than it did in the 1980's and 1990's? I think all the big, $200+ million summer blockbuster films made in the last decade or so are pretty much interchangeable. There hasn't been a new idea to come out of Hollywood, at least in terms of blockbuster films, for quite some time.

 

[Smellmet]

The last really good one was probably Inception. High hopes for the forthcoming Interstellar...

 

[Memory Alpha]

What was with Anij and her Ways of Magic™? Specifically, the Hummingbird sequence. It had nothing to do with anything and was completely useless, as far as I could tell. And if it was only just about her ability to warp Picard's perception of reality, that's compelling to me, but absolutely nothing comes of it.

I didn't really read it that way. There's a hummingbird earlier in the movie right after they all beam down, and I thought it represented equilibrium and harmony. I thought the flower, its pollen, and the hummingbird were natural. Anij said something earlier to Picard about how a perfect moment in time can seem to stand still. I just thought they were sharing something very platonic in that scene.

Interesting. You don't think formula dominates Hollywood films today more than it did in the 1980's and 1990's? I think all the big, $200+ million summer blockbuster films made in the last decade or so are pretty much interchangeable. There hasn't been a new idea to come out of Hollywood, at least in terms of blockbuster films, for quite some time.

Formula still definitely dominates, although the rise of independent movie-making and the fact that it's cheaper to go make a film now challenged it a little bit, but yeah, the big commercial movies are interchangeable, sure. I guess the Trek movies fit an '80s formula is what I meant.

 

[Hober Mallow]

What was with Anij and her Ways of Magic™? Specifically, the Hummingbird sequence. It had nothing to do with anything and was completely useless, as far as I could tell. And if it was only just about her ability to warp Picard's perception of reality, that's compelling to me, but absolutely nothing comes of it. And besides, we're meant to like her. To side with her. So, again ... I just find this baffling even being a part of the story at all. Unless this is some kind of shorthand to metaphorically show that Picard has fallen under Anij's "spell." An idea which I find to be so corny and yet ... so innocently charming, at the same time, that such appeal seems to be the only possible meaning.

Wasn't the point -- at least in part -- to set up the scene with the cave-in where Anij and Picard are trapped?

 

[Nebusj]

What was with Anij and her Ways of Magic™? Specifically, the Hummingbird sequence. It had nothing to do with anything and was completely useless, as far as I could tell. And if it was only just about her ability to warp Picard's perception of reality, that's compelling to me, but absolutely nothing comes of it. And besides, we're meant to like her. To side with her. So, again ... I just find this baffling even being a part of the story at all. Unless this is some kind of shorthand to metaphorically show that Picard has fallen under Anij's "spell." An idea which I find to be so corny and yet ... so innocently charming, at the same time, that such appeal seems to be the only possible meaning.

Wasn't the point -- at least in part -- to set up the scene with the cave-in where Anij and Picard are trapped?

Sure, but that just shifts the question to why did 'stopping this moment' have anything to do with the cave-in scene? That is, it would be a reasonably dramatically satisfying scene if it was just, Picard has to keep Anij alive during the cave-in.

The time-stopping thing makes the scene more confusing, since if it works like we saw before, Anij and Picard spending more of their time in fewer objective-time [1] seconds that's bad. The whole thread reads like fragments of a former draft where, I don't know, Picard is supposed to find a way to capture a moment and bring people together in harmony somehow.


[1] You know what I mean here.

 

[Smellmet]

It just served no purpose to the story whatsoever. To this day I still don't get it's inclusion.

 

[Lance]

I tend to think it's just more evidence that the Baku (and Anji in particular) are manipulating our crew somehow. And Jean-Luc falls for it hook, line and sinker.