By the way, who is the villain in Voyage Home? The probe? the police from the hospital?
The people who killed off the whales, I think
Nero: Worst villain in a Star Trek movie yet?
- Thread starter Darth_Pazuzu
- Start date
The people who killed off the whales, I think
S
Stone_Cold_Sisko
Guest
No.
Sybok, the guy from Insurrection, Picard's evil clone from Nemesis (lol), and Soran (who was just plain boring and forgettable) were all worse enemies. I put Nero on the same level as Christopher Lloyd's Klingon from ST3 . Unspectacular but not horrible. If anything, he needed more screen-time to flesh out his hatred for Spock.
Sybok, the guy from Insurrection, Picard's evil clone from Nemesis (lol), and Soran (who was just plain boring and forgettable) were all worse enemies. I put Nero on the same level as Christopher Lloyd's Klingon from ST3 . Unspectacular but not horrible. If anything, he needed more screen-time to flesh out his hatred for Spock.
I thought Nero was a good villian. Not one of the best but not one of the worst. My only complaint was that they should have included just a little more of His and Spocks back story from the countdown comic. Just a little bit more would have made a big difference.
I love Cristopher Lloyd's portrayal in III. And the muppet dog thing. If you ask me, every Klingon after Lloyd was basically copying him; GO JIM! "I must have had piano lessons."
The only villains to compare Nero to are the villains from the GOOD movies. If the rest of the film didn't work; who cares about the villain? Voyage, Contact and Kahn basically.
Nero is really another IMPORTANT aspect of the reboot to the franchise. Who cares what the bad guy was thinking? Sometimes it's nice to know; but sometimes there is no need for a lengthy explanation. I think Abrams and company purposely did not give us a long. post-modern, bleeding heart, excuse ridden reason to "understand" a killer.
The few lines he had were all that was needed.
The only villains to compare Nero to are the villains from the GOOD movies. If the rest of the film didn't work; who cares about the villain? Voyage, Contact and Kahn basically.
Nero is really another IMPORTANT aspect of the reboot to the franchise. Who cares what the bad guy was thinking? Sometimes it's nice to know; but sometimes there is no need for a lengthy explanation. I think Abrams and company purposely did not give us a long. post-modern, bleeding heart, excuse ridden reason to "understand" a killer.
The few lines he had were all that was needed.
He was definitely one of the weakest elements of Star Trek, but I certainly wouldn't label him the "worst" Trek movie villain. I thought Sybok had absolutely no menace to him whatsoever. Soran was interesting, but was ultimately forgettable. Same goes for Ru'afo. I like villains who leave a mark, who really mess up the hero's plans and world. Nero definitely did things that shook the course of not only the film, but the entire timeline as well. For that I think he's up there with General Chang as strong but ultimately flawed villains. I think Khan, obviously, and the Borg Queen are the best villains of the movie series so far.
I think Nero was just underdeveloped. There was a lot from the comic Countdown that I felt that if incorporated somehow, could have really helped the character become the empathetic villain that Orci & Kurtzman were going for. Either you go that route, or you go with a villain who is entirely unempathetic from the getgo, but I felt like Nero was sort of mixed in those two categories: without proper development, he wasn't quite relatable or sympathetic, and since they obviously tried to make him that way, he wasn't an all-out evil, maniacal villain like The Joker. Basically I think he exists somewhere between Khan -- relatable, empathetic villain -- and the Borg Queen, who really had no empathy to her, and was just an evil bitch.
I think Nero was just underdeveloped. There was a lot from the comic Countdown that I felt that if incorporated somehow, could have really helped the character become the empathetic villain that Orci & Kurtzman were going for. Either you go that route, or you go with a villain who is entirely unempathetic from the getgo, but I felt like Nero was sort of mixed in those two categories: without proper development, he wasn't quite relatable or sympathetic, and since they obviously tried to make him that way, he wasn't an all-out evil, maniacal villain like The Joker. Basically I think he exists somewhere between Khan -- relatable, empathetic villain -- and the Borg Queen, who really had no empathy to her, and was just an evil bitch.
I don't think he was the worst, but definitely not the best IMO. I actually thought Ayel (Nero's second in command) was more bada$$ than Nero. Clifton Collins Jr. seems to have more edge than Bana. So that could be one reason.
Part of the problem with Nero, was that I didn't "feel" his motivation. That had more to do with the writer's omitting backstory for the character, and less to do with Bana's portrayal. From what I understand, the Countdown Comics provided backstory for Nero. I shouldn't have to depend on an outside source to obtain significant backstory on a key character in the movie. That information should have been provided within the confines of the movie. Since they didn't, my interest in the character suffered. Oh well, with money constraints or whatever else constraints they were working under, that will happen sometimes.
I still liked Nero somewhat, and Bana did a good job with the material he was presented with.
Part of the problem with Nero, was that I didn't "feel" his motivation. That had more to do with the writer's omitting backstory for the character, and less to do with Bana's portrayal. From what I understand, the Countdown Comics provided backstory for Nero. I shouldn't have to depend on an outside source to obtain significant backstory on a key character in the movie. That information should have been provided within the confines of the movie. Since they didn't, my interest in the character suffered. Oh well, with money constraints or whatever else constraints they were working under, that will happen sometimes.
I still liked Nero somewhat, and Bana did a good job with the material he was presented with.
There have been MUCH worse villians.
R'uafo.
Shinzon.
Sybok.
R'uafo.
Shinzon.
Sybok.
Perhaps. The Rura Penthe stuff would explain where he was up to the last 25 years between the incident with the Kelvin and then when Spock materializes out of the black hole, but I am not so sure if that adds to any of his characterization. It might have made him more of a badass, might have explained his anger and frustration more (similar to know Khan was marooned on Ceti Alpha V).
With a crowd of very loyal madmen. What did these do to entertain themselves for 25 years anyway? Aside from kick back and tell rollicking, jolly stories about old Romulus which.. would.. be.. destroyed.....in 25 years...
I read Nero's backstory in "Countdown," and I enjoyed it; but I'm glad they didn't include much of it in the movie.
The movie is heavily weighted with backstory of the main characters, done so well and which we so inherently love, that Nero's backstory would have suffered in comparison. That would have been a slow few minutes.
I love Eric Bana; he's a great artist, and he did beautifully with the time on screen Nero had. I think most viewers only needed a bad guy; not a breakout bad guy. Not in this movie. They didn't have room to care.
The movie is heavily weighted with backstory of the main characters, done so well and which we so inherently love, that Nero's backstory would have suffered in comparison. That would have been a slow few minutes.
I love Eric Bana; he's a great artist, and he did beautifully with the time on screen Nero had. I think most viewers only needed a bad guy; not a breakout bad guy. Not in this movie. They didn't have room to care.
Not true. The anal cannon crowd (there's an image for you) don't like anything, there's no pleasing them whatsoever.
I have to say that Nero ended up pretty 2-dimensional.
I think the OP hit it on the head. It's yet ANOTHER essenitally suicidal madman bent on destroying Earth or other planets. We've had FOUR of these in a row. Very different motivations, but if the next Trek film essentially boils down to stopping a madman from blowing up a planet, my head will explode.
I felt that nero was one of the top villains we've had. Obviousley not a Khan, General Chang, or Borg queen, but still, right under them.
Worse than V'Ger? "I'm a big evil... thing. Who's going around destroying things... for some reason."
Worse than the Whale Probe? "I'm a big evil... thing. Who's going to destroy the Earth because I lost contact with whales 300 years ago. No I don't know how whale sound/transmissions carried across the vast reaches of space to get to me. I'm bad. BWAH!!!"
Worse than Shinzon: "I'm a big evil human clone of Picard. I'm going to destroy Earth. Just because."
No.
Nero at least has *some* motivation and passion. (The loss of his wife and planet.)
Worse than the Whale Probe? "I'm a big evil... thing. Who's going to destroy the Earth because I lost contact with whales 300 years ago. No I don't know how whale sound/transmissions carried across the vast reaches of space to get to me. I'm bad. BWAH!!!"
Worse than Shinzon: "I'm a big evil human clone of Picard. I'm going to destroy Earth. Just because."
No.
Nero at least has *some* motivation and passion. (The loss of his wife and planet.)
I dont know when some one kills Billions of people I think they are pretty much "The bad guy".
Let me try to rephrase this so you may understand the question:
Do we NEED to have a Bad Guy in a Star Trek movie, when most of the series preferred to avoid a definite heavy?
