Star Trek Generations at 20 (November 18, 1994)

[Lance]

The decision to put Kirk in the movie is, ironically, what destroys it for me.

He's simply not integrated into the story very well.

I like the opening on the 1701-B, and I like the TNG era sections, independently of each other. But the moment where they try to blend the two via the Nexus is one of the most ill-conceived plot devices that I have ever seen committed to film, and it summarily sinks the ending of the movie like a stone.

Don't get me wrong, I can *totally* understand why they wanted to have Picard and Kirk "meet". It's that brilliant notion of putting the advertising through-line on all the posters: "The Generations Meet!" But I do wonder how much better the movie would've been if the two sections had been kept strictly separate (ie, Kirk's scenes on the 1701-B being there merely as backstory to the 'main' TNG section).

 

[enterprisecvn65]

I've got some vague memory of when LaForge was captured in it, it was stated that they tortured him by doing something to his heart, even Soran says 'his heart wasn't in it' but there's no mention of it on my DVD. Can anyone else shed any light on it or am a just going senile?

Yeah I thought that line was strange as hell when he said it, like he was referring to something else. As it's been mentioned though a deleted scene had Soran starting and stopping Jordi's heart as part of his torture but they cut it out yet kept the heart line in.

I put that up with the "Why was Scotty so F'ed up over that cadet dying in TWOK that he brought his broken body to the bridge and break down when he died." When it turned out they cut out a scene, added back in the director's cut DVD, that the cadet was Scotty's nephew that would have explained everything. (Of course it would have made more sense to take him directly to sick bay to try and save his life then bringing him to the bridge to show everyone...nephew or not."

 

[WarpFactorZ]

I remember the thread about "Generations at 19" like it happened yesterday. Erg!

 

[gottacook]

I mean, in 1994, we essentially had buzz circling 4 groups of Trek actors (TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY), and at the time, my childlike brain thought things would only get bigger.

Actually Voyager didn't premiere until early 1995, and early buzz (if any) concerning the actors would have been at the Genevieve Bujold-as-Janeway stage.

As for the movie: Impressive at the time more because of what they attempted (the two captains together) than what they achieved. Also, it seems to me, a waste of Malcolm McDowell because the role was ill-written. And the huge logical flaw is difficult to ignore upon repeated viewings: If you can emerge anytime/anywhere from the Nexus, why not get backup before confronting Soran, you idiots? Or go back far enough that he never gets to build his sun-destroying gadget? Heck, why not go back 80-some years to Genesis and rescue David, too? And on the way back to the present, save the life of Picard's nephew on Earth as well...

 

[Pondwater]

I remember seeing it at the movie theaters in the Burnsville mall. It was the first Star Trek film I saw in the theaters. And that was 20 years ago. Oh my!

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

The film is a favorite of mine because it's reach exceeded its grasp.. it had a lot of deep themes. More to the point, it's the only big budget action picture that captures the feeling of "bittersweet," and it's present in the music and the conversations. Listen to the music when Kirk is riding in the nexus.. it's music that makes you think that the past can never be captured again.
[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ooIUtXEuTYQ[/yt]
Last comment: The writer's commentary on the DVD/ Blu-Ray is very funny and very informative!

 

[Dukhat]

I saw it on opening night with my college buddies. We were all pumped because it was the first time the TNG cast was on the big screen, and that was a big deal at the time. Plus, there was a lot of excitement both for the introduction of the Jem'Hadar in DS9 and the soon-to-be-debuted Star Trek Voyager. 1994 was a huge year for Trek.

So what happened after that? Well, it turned out to be an OK movie at the time, which turned out to not age well at all, and that probably should never have been made in the first place, or at least not rushed into production with TV producers at the helm and a laundry-list of crap that Paramount wanted. As time has gone by, the utter ridiculousness and illogic of this film has continued to irk me.

It also didn't help that the commercials for the film totally gave away the Enterprise-D's destruction.

 

[Trek Survivor]

Thats strange - I don't recall ever watching any deleted scenes or documentaries about the movie, yet I know about this.

It was in Dillard's novelisation as well, as I recall.

 

[enterprisecvn65]

I mean, in 1994, we essentially had buzz circling 4 groups of Trek actors (TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY), and at the time, my childlike brain thought things would only get bigger.

Actually Voyager didn't premiere until early 1995, and early buzz (if any) concerning the actors would have been at the Genevieve Bujold-as-Janeway stage.

As for the movie: Impressive at the time more because of what they attempted (the two captains together) than what they achieved. Also, it seems to me, a waste of Malcolm McDowell because the role was ill-written. And the huge logical flaw is difficult to ignore upon repeated viewings: If you can emerge anytime/anywhere from the Nexus, why not get backup before confronting Soran, you idiots? Or go back far enough that he never gets to build his sun-destroying gadget? Heck, why not go back 80-some years to Genesis and rescue David, too? And on the way back to the present, save the life of Picard's nephew on Earth as well...

Why not go back to 1920 and kill Hitler when he was some homeless painter who attended political rallies on the side and then make public all the bad things that happen in the next 400 years and see if mankind can get it right this time.

 

[Greg Cox]

Twenty years already? Time really is the fire in which we burn . . .

 

[Khan 2.0]

I think the trailers (specifically the teaser) and the general notion it was going to be a crossover gave the impression to casual fans (who didn't read spoliers) it would be "Yesterdays Enterprise The Movie." I did at the time - id tuned out of Trek somewhat after VI (couldn't get into DS9 and even TNG seasons 6/7 looked too far removed from 'my' Trek) so beyond early speculation immediately after VI of what VII would be (there were even rumours of another TOS cast film althoughthat didn't seem likely) i had no idea what was going on until i picked up a SF magazine at some point in 94 and flicked through for old times sake and in the news section saw a new photo of Shatner as Kirk on the Enterprise bridge and it saying it was from 'Star Trek VII' and would include TNG which blew my mind and made me think 'Yesterdays Enterprise The Movie' and got me back into Trek. Then I saw the trailer on a late night movie program and was left in no doubt it was going to be a redo of Yesterdays Enterprise (in a similar way to how TMP redid Changeling/Doomsday/Immunity). I think at that point it was established it'd be only Shatner/Doohan/Konig, but who knew what might happen...maybe Nimoy and the others would cameo somehow

even non fans who wernt that into Trek would've probably envisioned the 2 crews meeting in their respective ships in some YE type time travel epic

What we got was ok (esp McDowell) a mystery starting in TOS era then being picked up in TNG era with Kirk helping out (with elements of II/III/IV big death/Ent destruction/timetravel), but maybe it couldn't compete with the imagination of a time travel epic involving 2 ships and 2 crews interacting and all that would entail

 

[cooleddie74]

Malcolm McDowell's Dr. Soran was so much more textured and three-dimensional (not to mention sympathetic) a character and a villain in the J.M. Dillard novelization of the film than the on-screen portrayal, which because of time constraints and the purposes of creating a villain who came off as bad enough to be an effective enemy for Picard and later Kirk they left a lot of that texture and dimension out of the final shooting script and it resulted in a less-interesting Dr. Tolian Soran. I always wonder how great McDowell's performance would have been had he been given a little more character depth to play in front of the camera, but it just wasn't meant to be. There's always the film novelization, though, if anybody wants to see how fleshed-out and interesting the character could potentially have been.

 

[WarpFactorZ]

I wish they hadn't "loosened Spiner's leash" by giving Data the emotion chip. Those scenes were embarrassingly bad ("Scanning for lifeforms," for starters). Not his fault, I suppose -- just bad writing and directing.

 

[Smellmet]

I wish they hadn't "loosened Spiner's leash" by giving Data the emotion chip. Those scenes were embarrassingly bad ("Scanning for lifeforms," for starters). Not his fault, I suppose -- just bad writing and directing.

Whilst I agree they were cringeworthy for the viewer, it's kinda missing the point - Data is a machine that not only doesn't understand humor, but is also experiencing it for the first time.

 

[Allyn Gibson]

I've got some vague memory of when LaForge was captured in it, it was stated that they tortured him by doing something to his heart, even Soran says 'his heart wasn't in it' but there's no mention of it on my DVD. Can anyone else shed any light on it or am a just going senile?

Yeah I thought that line was strange as hell when he said it, like he was referring to something else. As it's been mentioned though a deleted scene had Soran starting and stopping Geordi's heart as part of his torture but they cut it out yet kept the heart line in.

The problem was, they shot the torture scene (I believe it was the first TNG scene shot; the Enterprise-B scenes were the first, and they overlapped filming on "All Good Things..."), but it was shot with the new uniforms they made for Generations. When they made the decision after that to scrap the uniforms, they didn't go back and reshoot the footage that used those uniforms.

 

[Lance]

I think the trailers (specifically the teaser) and the general notion it was going to be a crossover gave the Impression to casual fans (who didn't read spoliers) it would be "Yesterdays Enterprise The Movie."

I think there's definitely something in that. I watched the trailer again only recently for unrelated reasons, and it certainly gives the viewer the impression of the movie being the 1701-B coming forward in time and joining forces with 1701-D to fight a menace. Which, even as a recycled idea (kinda of used in 'Cause & Effect' too), would probably have been a better movie than the one we got...

Twenty years already? Time really is the fire in which we burn . . .

 

[Vger23]

I remember seeing this on opening night with a few friends who were casual fans. We all really liked it. The opening 5 mins was fantastic. The 1701-D crash was, at that time, one of the most amazing sequences in the franchise. I liked the themes about mortality, the value of life, and the pain great loss will drive you too if you allow it to consume you. I thought Shatner stole the show, and was saddened by his death.

Looking back now, it's one of my least-favorite movies in the franchise. Way too many plot contrivances and logic holes...and Kirk's death was clearly mis-handled. I don't hate it like others do...but I certainly see the flaws.

 

[cooleddie74]

Many fans and critics said at the time that William Shatner upstaged Patrick Stewart and was the real star and hero of the film, and that for all the superior acting chops that Stewart possessed over the hammier Shatner it was clear that Jean-Luc Picard was intended to take the backseat in the climactic act of his own movie and be Kirk's backup muscle (to the extent that Picard even landed any blows against Soran during the final battle).

 

[Lance]

I don't think Shatner "upstaged" Stewart.

I think the need to shoehorn the character, Captain Kirk, into the story upstaged the entire movie.

Kirk isn't integral to that script. Not at all. But you can't have Captain Kirk in it without giving him something of substance to do, so his inclusion in the story acts like the sudden emergence of a black hole the moment he re-appears. The last third of the movie is unbalanced by his presence.

The problem isn't an "actor" thing, it's a problem fundamental to the script.

 

[Franklin]

I don't think Shatner "upstaged" Stewart.

I think the need to shoehorn the character, Captain Kirk, into the story upstaged the entire movie.

Kirk isn't integral to that script. Not at all. But you can't have Captain Kirk in it without giving him something of substance to do, so his inclusion in the story acts like the sudden emergence of a black hole the moment he re-appears. The last third of the movie is unbalanced by his presence.

The problem isn't an "actor" thing, it's a problem fundamental to the script.

That's exactly how I felt. Kirk was wasted in this story. He had to do something heroic, but he couldn't be the hero in a TNG movie, either. So, the writers walk a fine line and the result is (to me) a largely unsatisfying encounter between the two Trek greats. The imbalance came from having this heroic figure essentially having to play second fiddle to Picard (or at least be the supporting character in Picard's adventure) when he was the central figure in so many prior adventures.

One other small thing to vent on in that area:
To me, one of the most stupid lines in Trek history (second only to, "His brain is gone.") happened when Kirk says to Picard he shouldn't lecture him because he was out saving the galaxy while Picard's grandfather was still in diapers. So what? That matters how when time travel (or the Nexus) is involved? Kirk and Picard were basically the same age when they met, too. Just by looking at Picard, Kirk could assume Picard had at least as much experience as he did. Would Kirk really say that to a fellow officer? Would he show a fellow captain of the Enterprise that level of disrespect? That's stuck in my craw for a long time as very shallow or lazy writing just to make Kirk seem flippant and dismissive of Picard for no good reason.

It also took Kirk too long to figure out the Nexus when Picard got there. At the moment they entered the stables instead of Antonia's bedroom, he should've turned to Picard and said, "What do we need to do?" At that point, the idea that he would toy with an obvious fantasy over doing his duty was way out of character.

After twenty years, my issues with the handling of Kirk still stay at a low boil.