So who did the worst single acting job in the first 10 films.

[starburst]

I didnt mind Curtis as Saavik just prefer Alley, it wouldnt have been so bad if Nimoy hadnt insisted on ignoring the character that we saw in TWOK and instead focusing on her Vulcan more Spock like elements.

I can't imagine the Curtis/Nimoy version of the character crying at Spock's funeral like the Alley/Meyer one, but then by TSFS her supposed Vulcan/Romulan heritage was now being ignored as it was never stated.

Id probably go with Mr Adventure being the worst played act in the movies (although I loved the scene... and TSFS in general)

 

[Sybok Was Wrong]

#1: Marina Sirtis as Drunk Troi, in "First Contact"

#2: Brent Spiner with emotion chip in "Generations".

These two performances took me out of both movies, as I found them embarrassing.

These scenes were tailor made to give the actors a moment, but both actors took it too far.

I thought " Mr.Adventure " and the Romulan lady in "Star Trek V"- are more amusing as a slice of '80's bit players.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

#1: Marina Sirtis as Drunk Troi, in "First Contact"

#2: Brent Spiner with emotion chip in "Generations".

These two performances took me out of both movies, as I found them embarrassing.

These scenes were tailor made to give the actors a moment, but both actors took it too far.

That's what happens when actors scream for recognition in ensemble productions. Everyone wants to finally take center stage and have flowers tossed at them.

In Sirtis and Spiner's case...it did not work, and the "moment" business was painfully obvious.

 

[JWPlatt]

It worked for me.

 

[enterprisecvn65]

Well there are two ways to look at it.

1. Either she was intended to be unlikable from the start and if that was the case I guess I'd say "Well done". But the fact she wasn't, in an acting sense, good as a good guy or bad guy kind of negates that

2. She was supposed to be likable and Meyer and co thought she did a good job, when in reality she was a smug little ass from the beginning. In which case in Catrell's terrible acting and the director not reading it correctly.

What I do know is that when you have a character who is supposed to be "good" turn out to be "bad" it is generally much more dramatic and makes for a much better film if the character is someone you at least sort of like from the start.

Compare this to "The Godfather". At the beginning of the story Michael is this decent guy who fought for his country when he could have gotten out of it, doesn't like what his father does but still loves him anyway and is very good to whatever Diane Keaton was at the beginning of the film (wife, fiancee, girlfriend I forget). He's not exactly Mister Sunshine but he seems like a decent man with a set of morals. So you kind of like the guy that he is this way despite the environment he grew up in.

Then he kills the guys in the restaurant, but they were corrupt and trying to kill his father anyway, so you can justify it. But then, because Sonny gets blown away and Fredo is an idiot, he's suddenly thrust into the position, he never imagined he'd be in, where he has to take over when his father dies.

At first you think he's going to be different than his father, but no. By the end of the film he's having his enemies killed in cold blood at the same time he's renouncing evil, then he let's his brother in law believe he's going to be spared before having him killed and he lies to his own sister about doing it.

Then of course in GF 2 he commits what many would consider the ultimate act of evil when he has his own brother, who he knew was kind of a helpless doof, killed. Not only that but he lets Fredo think he's forgiven him at the exact same moment when Michael is giving the silent order to have him killed. So it turns out he even more ruthless than Vito ever was.

If Michael had been a complete jerkoff from the start this might not have been so surprising. But the fact he did seem like a decent and likable guy at the beginning of the series made it absolutely horrifying when he does the things he does.

Whether is was lousy acting, directing, or both the fact Valeris comes off as so unlikable from the start makes it totally "Oh, who cares, she was a bitch anyway" moment when the big "surprise" as her being a conspirator is revealed.

The problem with your comparison is that Michael had more than one film and a larger role to develop the characters. Valeris was a supporting player in the middle of the big TOS cast (in a film eyebrow-deep in attention-grabbing history and inevitability) with a plot where she was not the central villain. For her part, she was as smug and/or cold as TOS Sarek, so if anyone did not like her from the start, I argue that she's no different than another notable Vulcan in ST history.

Adding to that, her smug behavior was telegraphing, so its not like she was going to be the cuddly, lovable hero model from the start in any case.

Ok I agree that Valeris to michael Corolone is a stretch and they are totally different in importance and depth. But the basic point I was making is if the character is likable when you first see them it makes the point when they go bad more dramatic and surprising.

If Michael had been a violent lunatic from the start it wouldn't have been powerful when he wipes everyone out.

Anakin Skywalker basically came off as a psycho and and an asshole so it was hard to feel sorrow when he got fucked up and was put in the Vader suit. In the OT we were led to believe his was a story of a good man who fell into darkness, which is not what happened at all.

Personally I never found sarek smug and a jerk. Yes he was cold and standoffish but he's a Vulcan but had a personality too. Same with savvik. She wasn't warm and cuddly but she still came off as a likable person who was following her society's beliefs. If she turned out to be in league with khan it would have been stunning.

Valeris from almost minute one didn't come off as cold but likable, she came off as a conceited smug bitch who clearly thought she was way smarter than everyone else. So it had the effect of when she was revealed as a conspirator of the audience going "who cares. She was a jerk anyway". It also took any suspense out of the film because you could see it coming a mile away she was going to be the traitor.

 

[Marsden]

I'd nominate the faceless transporter chief that we only hear from TMP. The one who said:

"Enterprise, what we got back didn't live long. Fortunately."

Two people just had their DNA rearranged into mutated monstrosity so terrible that death itself seem like an improvement...and he sounds so bored.

I was going to mention this. It's so flat and uninterested. Like they just grabbed some shlub off the street and said "Here, read this line."

Maybe that's happening all the time.

Ulp, scrambled two more, that's an even dozen today, time to make some omlettes.

Actually, can I nominate that whole scene as the worst scene in the first 10 movies? Well, first 6 anyway.
I'll just break that off to it's own thread.

 

[Joby]

I thought " Mr.Adventure " and the Romulan lady in "Star Trek V"- are more amusing as a slice of '80's bit players.

I know exactly what you mean.

The Mr. Adventure dude had a very early-mid 80s blow dried hair look about him, he looked like nearly every other 19
year old guy from around 1983 or 1984. And the Romulan chick in Star Trek V had a very late 80s 1988/1989 vibe about her. I didn't mind her, she was hot and her cheesiness fit the campy nature of Star Trek V. If you look up Cynthia Gouw, she still looks good today.

 

[BillJ]

#1: Marina Sirtis as Drunk Troi, in "First Contact"

#2: Brent Spiner with emotion chip in "Generations".

These two performances took me out of both movies, as I found them embarrassing.

I liked Sirtis' scene in First Contact. Spiner's scenes in Generations could have used some more rewrites (like much of the rest of the movie).

 

[HarryM]

The guy who played Captain Esteban, ugh. There was no reason to make the Captain such a putz, he wasn't part of the "adversary" group of Starfleet at spacedock opposing Kirk & Company.
"Stand by for evasive!" LOL.

 

[enterprisecvn65]

#1: Marina Sirtis as Drunk Troi, in "First Contact"

#2: Brent Spiner with emotion chip in "Generations".

These two performances took me out of both movies, as I found them embarrassing.

These scenes were tailor made to give the actors a moment, but both actors took it too far.

I thought " Mr.Adventure " and the Romulan lady in "Star Trek V"- are more amusing as a slice of '80's bit players.

I want to give the award to Spiner for Generations but I can't for two reasons.

1. Data wanting to be more human had been brewing for years now, so it was inevitable it was going to happen, especially after the introduction of the emotion chip. It wasn't something that came out of nowhere leaving you going "Where the hell did that come from."

2. It was clear that after he popped the chip in he was supposed to turn into a stupid cornball and Spiner played the role well. So his ACTING was actually good, despite how dumb the character.

It's like a film like "Attack of the Killer Tomatoes ". The film was bad but the makers were obviously trying to make it bad, and they succeeded spectacularly, so the movie was actual good in it's intended purpose.

Can't stand Data in generations. But Spiner played it like it was supposed to be. If you're told to F up and you do a good job at F'n up. Then you can't be faulted for doing a good job at what you were told to do.

 

[2takesfrakes]

The guy who played Captain Esteban, ugh. There was no reason to make the Captain such a putz, he wasn't part of the "adversary" group of Starfleet at spacedock opposing Kirk & Company.
"Stand by for evasive!" LOL.

The actor playing Estaban wasn't bad, at all. But I completely agree, otherwise. It's pretty obvious that Lenny & Harve are putting emphasis on the fact that Kirk's an Independent Thinker who gets things done, unlike those boring By the Book types with the P!NK seat cushions. But it's so not necessary to "make sure" that "people" don't LIKE anyone else BUT Jim Kirk and pals. I mean ... STAR TREK wasn't new, even all those years ago. It's not like people are expecting anything but what STAR TREK had been known for ... I don't know, it just seems like playing down to the audience, herding us into the "Hooray for Kirk" pen, instead of just accepting that we're smart enough to realise who to root for in these movies.

 

[HarryM]

I guess it depends on how closely they directed him. "More patronizing!" etc, then it's really not his fault. I like to imagine, for example, how someone like Paul Gleason might have taken a role like that and made it memorable. If you're going to have a character be a putz and an a**hole, at least make it interesting.

 

[PCz911]

YES.

ABSOFUCKINGLUTELY. She is the FIRST actor/actress to come to mind.

HORRID line delivery. Granted, she was nice to look at, but this woman was a Romulan? So chipper?

I'm probably thinking about this too much, but I think the ambassadors who were assigned to Nimbus III were outcasts. And a chipper Romulan would definitely be an outcast.

But on the other hand, you would expect the Romulans to send someone serious because they're always scheming.

Naaah, she was just a lousy actress.

"I don't know who you are, but I can tell you this! Our governments will stop at nothing to ensure our safety!"

Ooof.

How funny....I barely remember that she had more than one line! it seems a recipie for disaster..... Take a beautiful mediocre actress, give her bad lines and probably bad direction, stick her in a stinker of a movie, and put her in stupid make up (ear muffs?)......ta da....

 

[PCz911]

As for major characters.... McCoy seemed to sleep walk through every film past the first one. The transparent aluminum scene...ugh. The camping scene...ahhh! Painful.

 

[GNDN18]

It's pretty obvious that Lenny & Harve are putting emphasis on the fact that Kirk's an Independent Thinker who gets things done, unlike those boring By the Book types with the P!NK seat cushions. But it's so not necessary to "make sure" that "people" don't LIKE anyone else BUT Jim Kirk and pals.

Thanks for pointing that out. Esteban and Morrow's attitude bothered me for a long time (Styles would have, too, but Horner's "Stealing the Enterprise" suite fleshes out that character so wonderfully). Not only does it unnecessarily diminish Our Heroes by comparison, it simply fails to jibe with all the of starship captains we've seen.

As Portmaster Stone commented, "Not one man in a million could do what you and I have done. Command a starship. A hundred decisions a day, hundreds of lives staked on you making every one of them right." All of the starship commanders and flag officers with experience on the line were capable individuals. TWOK would have been very different if Clark Terrell had simply conceded that Ceti Alpha VI was a no-go because of a particle of preanimate matter.

 

[enterprisecvn65]

It's pretty obvious that Lenny & Harve are putting emphasis on the fact that Kirk's an Independent Thinker who gets things done, unlike those boring By the Book types with the P!NK seat cushions. But it's so not necessary to "make sure" that "people" don't LIKE anyone else BUT Jim Kirk and pals.

Thanks for pointing that out. Esteban and Morrow's attitude bothered me for a long time (Styles would have, too, but Horner's "Stealing the Enterprise" suite fleshes out that character so wonderfully). Not only does it unnecessarily diminish Our Heroes by comparison, it simply fails to jibe with all the of starship captains we've seen.

As Portmaster Stone commented, "Not one man in a million could do what you and I have done. Command a starship. A hundred decisions a day, hundreds of lives staked on you making every one of them right." All of the starship commanders and flag officers with experience on the line were capable individuals. TWOK would have been very different if Clark Terrell had simply conceded that Ceti Alpha VI was a no-go because of a particle of preanimate matter.

I think they were all different characters actually. Esteban was a play it safe by the book guy who seemed afraid of getting in trouble if he did anything wrong. Morrow seemed like he could have been a risk taker in the past, but because of the importance of his position he couldn't do it anymore. Styles was just a smug ass who thought he was smarter than anyone else and he deserved the best Starfleet had to offer him served on a silver platter.

 

[eyeresist]

It worked for me.

ditto

 

[CorporalCaptain]

I thought drunk Troi was hilarious.

 

[CorporalClegg]

The Romulan praetor guy at the very beginning of Nemesis. The consoler/advocate who speaks first wasn't much better.

I remember thinking it was such a striking contrast after what I thought (at the time) was the best Trek film opening. It was like they open the movie, get you all psyched, and then people start talking.

 

[Jose Tyler]

My nominee would be Nichelle Nichols from the ABC extended version of the TMP; After Chekov gets zapped through his tactical panel, Chapel comes to the bridge, and with cringe-worthy delivery, Uhura says, "Oh good, Christine, it's Chekov", as if there is more than one person on the bridge with their arm hair smoking...