Reconsidering Nemesis...

[Phantom]

http://www.denofgeek.us/movies/star-trek/248258/star-trek-nemesis-what-went-wrong

Very interesting article. Brings up several points I had not considered, including:

• almost 1/3 of the movie was cut to encourage theatres to show the film more often to catch the "overflow" from Harry Potter and LOTR
• the cut material included many expansions of character roles and significantly advanced character story arcs
• speaking of, Potter/LOTR, putting Trek up against two of the biggest franchises in cinematic history was a really stupid move on the studio's part.
• Baird didn't do his homework, didn't really like Trek, and the cast didn't like him either

Also gives us a glimpse into the cancelled Prime universe ST XI which was intended to be the true send-off for that era of Trek.


I agree with the article author: it's not going to happen, but I suspect we'd be singing a different tune if we'd gotten the film that was made, and not the poorly chopped carcas of that movie the studio ultimately provided.

 

[BillJ]

I think they could've made The Wrath of Khan-level movie and it still would've failed. People had simply moved on.

 

[Karzak]

http://www.denofgeek.us/movies/star-trek/248258/star-trek-nemesis-what-went-wrong

Very interesting article. Brings up several points I had not considered, including:

• almost 1/3 of the movie was cut to encourage theatres to show the film more often to catch the "overflow" from Harry Potter and LOTR

• 
  
  This wasn't likely the only reason the movie was cut down for time. Movie theaters generally frown upon films being more than two hours. The reason is very simple: the shorter the film = the more times they can show it = the more money they can make in ticket and concession sales.

 

[martok2112]

Loved the faster paced cut of Nemesis. I'd love to see the full version someday, but the faster paced theatrical cut rocks. (Despite all its flaws.) Personal opinion only.

 

[Dukhat]

• almost 1/3 of the movie was cut to encourage theatres to show the film more often to catch the "overflow" from Harry Potter and LOTR
• the cut material included many expansions of character roles and significantly advanced character story arcs
• speaking of, Potter/LOTR, putting Trek up against two of the biggest franchises in cinematic history was a really stupid move on the studio's part.
• Baird didn't do his homework, didn't really like Trek, and the cast didn't like him either.

Actually, most if not all of the above was already common knowledge. IMHO, even if the cut material was restored, even if the film wasn't going up against HP and LOTR, and even if they had a different director, the film still would have flopped. It was a badly conceived story with a ridiculous villain straight out of a Tim Burton Batman movie, who was completely unbelievable as an "evil" alternate version of Picard, made during a time when people were just sick of Star Trek in general. At best, it might have made $70 million instead of $67 million.

 

[horatio83]

Of course the director was quite bad but the main problem fo the movie is the script. There is the middle-age crisis Picard buggy-driving nonsense (Stewart is a great actor but via asking for such a scene he ruiend his character) and the ridiculous idea that some vampires from the dark side of the moon can take over the Romulan Star Empire.

After numerous fantastic Romulan stories in TNG they had a great chance to do the first movie that puts the Rommies into the spotlight and ruined it.

 

[eyeresist]

Coincidentally, I just posted in the Enterprise-E thread...

I think it's extremely unlikely that "almost 1/3 of the movie was cut". That would make the original cut almost 3 hours long. The deleted scenes on the special edition totalled maybe 10 minutes, and were largely redundant.

I have a list of movies to recut, and here is my entry for NEM:

-Dune buggy scene: replace first shot of Picard et al in buggy with one from later, with Picard looking less enthused. Recut to reduce general 'fun factor'.
-Mind rape: use deleted elevator scene instead, as much toward the end of the film as possible (when Shinzon's hostility is overt).
-Remove Riker/viceroy fight, just intercut shipboard battle when a beat is necessary.
-Showdown: foreshadow spikes. Maybe grab a shot from elsewhere of Picard quickly looking off-camera to insert before he grabs the spike. Push in on Shinzon as he pulls himself along spike, add squishy noises.
-Use subtle slow-mo and push-ins to heighten Data's emotion rescuing Picard and killing self.
-?Remove wake scene, replace with Worf/Spot deleted scene.
-Remove animated window view from final Picard/B4 scene.

But yeah, by 2002 the public was sick of Trek, as represented by an overabundance of drab, apparently interchangeable series on TV, and the shittiness of INS in terms of story, humour and visuals. At that point, commercial failure was inevitable - arguably.

My own impression at the time, when I was not hugely into Trek, was that the posters gave me no idea what the movie was about, just lots of gloomy green, and a lot of Picard's bald head. I think it's odd that they didn't focus on the starship battles, which would have been a good selling point.

 

[Firebird]

I think it's extremely unlikely that "almost 1/3 of the movie was cut". That would make the original cut almost 3 hours long. The deleted scenes on the special edition totalled maybe 10 minutes, and were largely redundant.

It's been acknowledged since the first special edition came out that it didn't include all of the deleted scenes. Any movie tends to be really long in its initial assembly cut, so the claim that 50 minutes were cut from the film is entirely valid. Now, how much of this 50 minutes contains truly deleted scenes vs edit trims remains to be seen.

 

[Marsden]

I disagree that the public were tired of Star Trek.

The public was tired of crap that had the Star Trek label.

There's a difference.

If Insurrection hadn't sucked so bad, same note for Enterprise, then Nemesis was a different, good movie, there would have been plenty of interest for Star Trek.

Of course, my theory is unprovable as we will never know. You guys might be right.

 

[Trek Survivor]

I've always liked Nemesis/

People need to get over the dune buggy scene. It was silly (but harmless), but there has been plenty of silly moments in Trek. Some folk take Trek way too seriously.

 

[martok2112]

I've always liked Nemesis/

People need to get over the dune buggy scene. It was silly (but harmless), but there has been plenty of silly moments in Trek. Some folk take Trek way too seriously.

Agreed. And a big +1 to the part I boldfaced in Trek Survivor's statement.

It's more of that presumptuous "Oh, Picard would never do that!" stance. Fans do not own the character of Picard, ergo, they cannot presume to know just what the character is capable of. This is not a slam against fans or fandoms....it's just an unfortunate truth.

Only two entities know what Picard would and would not do: The writing staff, and Patrick Stewart himself.

I liked the Argo scene just fine. Why couldn't there be a brief fun-factor scene in Nemesis? After all, there was a subtext (that wasn't fully explored) in Nemesis about Picard starting to feel his age (granted, that would've been very Wrath of Khan, which so many people seem to hold against the movie as is). The Argo scene was, in my humble and personal opinion, Picard getting to feel a bit of his youth again....and this time, without the aid of metaphasic radiation from the Planet of Youth (as previously seen in Insurrection).

By the logic that some fans use (where there should not be any wheeled, combustion engine vehicles in the 24th century, since such tech would've supposedly been dead for at least a couple of centuries), there should not have been a wheeled, armored, combustion engine-based vehicle being used as an armored personnel carrier in ALIENS. Yes, a different universe altogether, but it still takes place in the latter 22nd century.

Like I said: Some fans. Some fans (of sci-fi/space fantasy in general) have this universal tech fetish where everything past the late 21st century (no matter what franchise or universe we're talking about) should've been repulsorlift/anti-grav/ion engine powered or motivated.

 

[Phantom]

I think they could've made The Wrath of Khan-level movie and it still would've failed. People had simply moved on.

If that were the case, explain the last 2 films doing so well. You are one of the ones who keep insisting that mainstream or "core" Trek fans support JJ Trek.

If they were willing to support JJ Trek, then they would have come to see the "intended" cut of Nemesis as well.

http://www.denofgeek.us/movies/star-trek/248258/star-trek-nemesis-what-went-wrong

Very interesting article. Brings up several points I had not considered, including:

• almost 1/3 of the movie was cut to encourage theatres to show the film more often to catch the "overflow" from Harry Potter and LOTR

• 
  
  This wasn't likely the only reason the movie was cut down for time. Movie theaters generally frown upon films being more than two hours. The reason is very simple: the shorter the film = the more times they can show it = the more money they can make in ticket and concession sales.

• 
  
  That is true, to a point. That said, it isn't universal, given LOTR, etc's longer running times.

 

[Karzak]

http://www.denofgeek.us/movies/star-trek/248258/star-trek-nemesis-what-went-wrong

Very interesting article. Brings up several points I had not considered, including:

• almost 1/3 of the movie was cut to encourage theatres to show the film more often to catch the "overflow" from Harry Potter and LOTR

• 
  
  This wasn't likely the only reason the movie was cut down for time. Movie theaters generally frown upon films being more than two hours. The reason is very simple: the shorter the film = the more times they can show it = the more money they can make in ticket and concession sales.

• 
  
  That is true, to a point. That said, it isn't universal, given LOTR, etc's longer running times.

• 
  
  I'm aware it isn't "universal." Also helping make the case for the 3 hour movie are films like Cameron's Titanic and Avatar, which did major business during their theatrical release.
  
  Lord of the Rings is obviously another example. But the majority of films tend to be shorter than two hours because of this general operating procedure in theaters, which was the point I was making.
  
  At the time of Nemesis' release, it wasn't part of a franchise that was a critically lauded as Lord of the Rings or The Godfather, and the Trek movies sure as shit weren't doing Titanic or Avatar level business either.
  
  It makes perfect sense that the studio would want the film cut for time.
  
  Reading the article at Den of Geek over again, I'm struck by two things. They make this exact point in the article.
  
  The other thing - and one much more concerning - is the utter lack of sources supporting any of the blatant supposition provided in the article, the assumptions about the motivations behind the decisions made by Berman, Baird, Paramount and theaters, and schlocking it all together with some numbers and factoids about what movies were out at the time:
  
  

  It's not hard to come to the conclusion that the film simply got overlooked.

  
  

  With movie theaters desperately trying to get more showings of the other films in each day, it's no surprise that the number of screens showing Nemesis dropped dramatically, very quickly. Paramount knew all this, though. The decision to go up against The Two Towers was made specifically to catch those who couldn't get a ticket to the sold out fantasy epic.

  
  

  Indeed the pressure from the studio, and Rick Berman as its representative, was to cut the film's running time, with the alleged intent to allow it to be shown more times a day per screen compared with Jackson's film running at 172 minutes.

  
  

  Nemesis came as a bit of a surprise, to Patrick Stewart at least, as with the completion of Star Trek: Insurrection the contracts of the core cast (except perhaps, Michael Dorn due to his involvement on Deep Space Nine) were complete and none had any ongoing commitment to the studio or further Star Trek films. It was a phone call between Brent Spiner and his friend (and huge Star Trek fan) John Logan, the writer of Ridley Scott's Gladiator, that led to the film's development.

  
  

  Behind the scenes friction can't have helped while filming, either.
  
  In a revelation that will shock few who have seen the film, Stuart Baird (helmer of films such as Executive Decision and US Marshalls, and long-time film editor) had no knowledge of Star Trek before becoming director of Nemesis. He even refused to watch any of the Next Generation TV series to prepare (and reportedly went so far to say he hated the franchise, and had to be forced to watch the preceding films, allegedly), so it's no wonder so many fans feel the characters act strangely.

  
  

  It's reported that the director even kept calling LeVar Burton 'Laverne' and thought Commander LaForge was an alien.

  
  

  Jeri Ryan was approached to reprise Seven Of Nine in Nemesis and the part would have required a couple of months of filming, according to the actress. This was something Paramount wanted and Rick Berman was intending to plug her into the film.

  
  

  Thanks to LeVar Burton having a word with Rick Berman, Wil Wheaton finally makes an appearance as Wesley Crusher in a Star Trek: The Next Generation film.

  
  

  Other plans for the film included showing a little more of Starfleet than we had seen previously in the franchise's cinematic outings, and according to multiple accounts, would have brought in characters from Star Trek: Deep Space Nine and Star Trek: Voyager (depending on who was available). This may well have seen the starships Enterprise, Titan, Defiant, and Voyager unifying threads from all three series in a conclusion to that entire era of Star Trek, perhaps truly coming to the end of a whole generation's final journey.

  
  

  One can only speculate how costly a one-film contract for the cast would have been.

  
  Apparently, "one can only speculate" entire articles about entire subjects, too.
  
  In short, this is hardly a journalistic or scholarly look at the facts surrounding the release of the film. It's more shit from some blogger connecting rumor dots and fan-fueled wet dreams, pretending to be a journalist and trying to pass his or her conclusions off as fact.

 

[BillJ]

If that were the case, explain the last 2 films doing so well. You are one of the ones who keep insisting that mainstream or "core" Trek fans support JJ Trek.

TNG was never given time for general audiences to miss it. It bowed from TV in May of 1994, it was on the big screen in November of that year. Then you factor in that there were another, roughly, 350 episodes of Trek produced between the end of TNG and the premiere of Nemesis. Trek was no longer special by that point, it was being seen as the fast food of sci-fi. McTrek.

Trek was everywhere and it was suffocating.

If they were willing to support JJ Trek, then they would have come to see the "intended" cut of Nemesis as well.

Not necessarily. There is a lot less material featuring Kirk and Spock. But, in 2002, would the Abrams films been successful? I'm not so sure.

 

[Mudd]

1. Make a bad movie.
2. Make the bad movie longer.
3. ?
4. Profit!

 

[BillJ]

1. Make a bad movie.
2. Make the bad movie longer.
3. ?
4. Profit!

 

[eyeresist]

My own impression at the time, when I was not hugely into Trek, was that the posters gave me no idea what the movie was about, just lots of gloomy green, and a lot of Picard's bald head. I think it's odd that they didn't focus on the starship battles, which would have been a good selling point.

I posted this earlier, and was just wondering what people remember of publicity for NEM at the time of its release. Did you notice the publicity, what did you think of it, and what do you think the non-fan audience made of it?

 

[BillJ]

My own impression at the time, when I was not hugely into Trek, was that the posters gave me no idea what the movie was about, just lots of gloomy green, and a lot of Picard's bald head. I think it's odd that they didn't focus on the starship battles, which would have been a good selling point.

I posted this earlier, and was just wondering what people remember of publicity for NEM at the time of its release. Did you notice the publicity, what did you think of it, and what do you think the non-fan audience made of it?

They were thinking there was an Enterprise episode on a couple days later. If they really wanted Trek, why pay for it when new episodes are on TV for free.

 

[eyeresist]

New conspiracy theory: Berman deliberately tanked Nemesis in order to increase Enterprise's ratings.

 

[Dukhat]

...and the ridiculous idea that some vampires from the dark side of the moon can take over the Romulan Star Empire.

After numerous fantastic Romulan stories in TNG they had a great chance to do the first movie that puts the Rommies into the spotlight and ruined it.

The ironic thing is that after Nemesis bombed, Berman & Braga made a statement something to the effect of "I guess the fans didn't want to see a movie about Romulans." Which was not only untrue (since Nemesis wasn't actually about Romulans), but was not even close to the real reason why the movie bombed. Although to their credit, I'm sure they really felt that way and weren't just making up some BS as an excuse, just like I truly believe B&B meant well when making TATV. But it also showed just how out of touch they were about Trek and the fanbase at the time.