TNG movie dislike?

[johnjm22]

I didn't like FC much. It did feel formulaic, the scenes with Cromwell (Cochrane) have a forced feeling to me--the actors are just trying too hard to gosh-wow it (don't even get me started on Frakes here), only Sirtis does well here I think--and Alfre Woodard just felt weirdly shoehorned into the whole thing and I felt took screen time from actual TNG characters who might have been given more to do. Also the Borg Queen/Data scenes went on too long and were repetitive. And I am right along with the people who don't like Crazypants Picard.

And frankly it's a pedestrian, plodding story without much in the way of plot twists. Every little thing that happens is mapped out and known in advance. In fact there are none (twists) for the A plot and in that respect reminds me of TMP.

I'll watch TSFS any day over FC.

In addition to what you've said, FC also has poor special FX, set design and props.

Making Picard "Vengeful" was out of character. It was lazy writing done only to create conflict.

The TNG movies also have this cutesy type humor to them that's really annoying.

 

[Paradise City]

I didn't like FC much. It did feel formulaic, the scenes with Cromwell (Cochrane) have a forced feeling to me--the actors are just trying too hard to gosh-wow it (don't even get me started on Frakes here), only Sirtis does well here I think--and Alfre Woodard just felt weirdly shoehorned into the whole thing and I felt took screen time from actual TNG characters who might have been given more to do. Also the Borg Queen/Data scenes went on too long and were repetitive. And I am right along with the people who don't like Crazypants Picard.

And frankly it's a pedestrian, plodding story without much in the way of plot twists. Every little thing that happens is mapped out and known in advance. In fact there are none (twists) for the A plot and in that respect reminds me of TMP.

I'll watch TSFS any day over FC.

I liked First Contact. But there's truth to this post. The easy going carry-on on earth belies the grave situation this is supposed to be. Cochrane shouldn't be quite the lackadaisical clown he's portrayed here and the whole cowardly-reality-behind-the-heroic-public-image trope is done is in an entirely predictable and pedestrian way . It'd be cooler if Cochrane was some Werner von Braun type with a nasty war record that made our heroes think twice. Rambo-Picard, nope. The Borg Queen as a sultry dominatrix molesting Data, funny stuff, but, for me, it detracted from some of the tension and gravity that this crisis otherwise demanded.

 

[Jonesy]

For me it's missed opportunities and I really believe it's micro-management. First Contact to me is the only of the four films that felt that it grew quickly and organically from a single idea. (it's merits I believe can be debated irregardless) Generations had a laundry list of things that needed to be in it. Insurrection had a prolonged writing process (if you read Michael Piller's unpublished book) that I think killed any real drama that could've been mined from that idea. Michael was a great writer and he should've had carte blanche with his script given he was co producer on three shows. Nemesis...the less said the better. Terrible director and rehashed idea remixed from a mediocre screenwriter.

 

[Lance]

Michael was a great writer and he should've had carte blanche with his script given he was co producer on three shows.

I believe Piller said that, as he'd less experience with writing for motion pictures specifically, so he deferred on several key decisions to those whose experience was more extensive. He also acknowledged that while his original story outlines were determined to return to some of the more philosophical Roddenberry-ian ideals after the pure action romp that was First Contact, he did cave in to pressures to add more of that 'action movie' flavor to the finished script as it was what the suits wanted.

Personally I think the story is fine, but it does strain under some of these contradictory elements.

 

[Jonesy]

I believe Piller said that, as he'd less experience with writing for motion pictures specifically, so he deferred on several key decisions to those whose experience was more extensive. He also acknowledged that while his original story outlines were determined to return to some of the more philosophical Roddenberry-ian ideals after the pure action romp that was First Contact, he did cave in to pressures to add more of that 'action movie' flavor to the finished script as it was what the suits wanted.

Personally I think the story is fine, but it does strain under some of these contradictory elements.

IIRC, Patrick Stewart had a lot of problems with the script, and made points that were both valid and (IMO) supporting his ego. I have mixed feelings about actors directly involving themselves into the writing process. I think they should be heard, and the writers should go think about them and decide whether they are worth integrating or not. That isn't how it worked out though.

 

[TheAdmiralty]

In the TOS movies they for the most part did things they could have never done on the TV show, giving the movies a reason to exist. Aside from killing Data in Nemesis and maybe bringing Kirk into Generations, everything in the TNG movies could have been done in two part episodes on TNG. I prefer the good two parters on the TNG series to any of the TNG films, even First Contact. On top of that, TOS is just more conductive to a rousing action/adventure movie than TNG is. Trying to make Picard an action hero didn't work and was somewhat of a betrayal of what the character was supposed to be about on TNG (brain over brawn, violence as a last resort, exc). Part of the reason TMP may have been so disappointing to people when it came out is that they were expecting a big adventure like Wrath of Khan for the first TOS movie, whereas a headier TMP type thing would have been more appropriate for the TNG crew.

Thoughts on each of the movies-

Generations- Mostly okay, but a lot of things about the Nexus don't make sense and Kirk's death was anticlimactic and lame.

First Contact- I loved the crap out of it when I was a kid and would have cited it as my favorite on certain days, but there are some things I don't like about it now. The stuff on the planet is boring an tonally out of place. Aside from the big space battle it still feels like a TV show. It maybe goes a little too much in the sci-fi horror direction to the point of not feeling like Star Trek at times. The Borg Queen was a bad idea and despite probably costing a lot more money the new borg costumes/makeup didn't look as good/scary as it did on TNG. Still a good movie though, despite those gripes, definitely the best of the TNG series.

Insurrection- Not a lot to say, just boring and wouldn't have even been good condensed to an hour as an episode of the TV show. Picard is out of character the whole time too.

Nemesis- I don't mind this one nearly as much as some people. The script/story have a lot of issues, but it's the only one of the TNG movies that actually feels like a "major motion picture" in terms of things like cinematography and the action scenes. There are lots of great character moments (including more that got left on the cutting room floor) that have extra weight since it's the last go around for the TNG crew.

 

[Vandervecken]

It'd be cooler if Cochrane was some Werner von Braun type with a nasty war record that made our heroes think twice.

I really like this idea. That would have been way more fun and interesting, even intriguing. Let them see, not the, for-them, slightly jarring idea of someone in it for profit, but the far more jarring/dissonant idea of someone in it because he likes making arms and the controlled production of destruction--and their meeting could be what changes him to at least a non-warlike if not pacifist mindset. And let him have a direct hand in defeating the Borg, too! I don't know how, some genius thing.

 

[Lance]

TOS is just more conductive to a rousing action/adventure movie than TNG is. Trying to make Picard an action hero didn't work and was somewhat of a betrayal of what the character was supposed to be about on TNG (brain over brawn, violence as a last resort, exc). Part of the reason TMP may have been so disappointing to people when it came out is that they were expecting a big adventure like Wrath of Khan for the first TOS movie, whereas a headier TMP type thing would have been more appropriate for the TNG crew.

Well said! I completely agree.

 

[2takesfrakes]

David Koepp's worked on some big event movies, but I find that his writing is very pedestrian. But John Logan is even worse. NEMESIS is not impossible to get through, or confusing, or anything but it's highly derivative. There's nothing fresh about the movie, at all. The dialogue isn't especially interesting. There's an unusual overreliance on cliché, as well - even in the battle scenes. "Aft shields are buckling!" "Compensate!" "Divert Main Power!"

Honestly, I've read better Fan Fiction than what this script offers up. Having said all of that ... I find myself becoming increasingly forgiving of NEMESIS' many and varied shortcomings. I suspect it's simply a matter of Time ... of nostalgia, really. It's just good to see these characters and the original actors playing them interacting, even on this pedestrian level.

 

[WB2]

For me it was the fact that Insurrection was such a let down after the very good First Contact, then Nemesis came and was just a whimper.

 

[Mudd]

FC's the only keeper.

 

[Jedi_Master]

The only one that didn't feel like an extra long TV episode was First Contact, and that in a nutshell is the problem. I didn't enjoy spending 10 bucks to see an extra long TV episode.

 

[locutus101]

...
Making Picard "Vengeful" was out of character. It was lazy writing done only to create conflict.
....

Yes, it was kinda weird that after all these years, we found out that Picard was traumatized by the Borg to the point of losing his senses.

 

[RAMA]

People still associate those movies with the franchise fatigue they had at the time.

To be sure, a lot of the fatigue was earned. While Voyager and Enterprise continued to produce many good episodes, particularly Enterprise, they simply were staying static, and needed to change and expand.

Before Enterprise I argued they just needed to shake up the franchise and install new producers and writers, and change the look. They produced over 500 episodes with most of the same "team" in place. Then another whole series. There were a lot of talented people there, but any group with the same ideas eventually winds up seeming repetitive and tired. In the movies, new directors and writers attempted to change that, but even change has to be carefully managed, and Stuart Baird and John Logan just couldn't take it to the heights required. Maybe it was Berman's fault.

As far as the actual movies go: Generations looks pretty decent. It has several immensely entertaining scenes and moments..but simply fails as a story. It's too convoluted and to my estimation, has the most and biggest plot holes of any Trek movie. It has a smaller budget than STV...which kind of shows despite some good cinematography that attempts to counteract this. I rank it as one of only 2 "bad" Trek movies, though it's several million times better than STV.

STFC is very good, but possibly only the 7th or 8th best Borg story. It could have been much better. The battle at the beginning was the setup of most of the first few Tv episodes! It was short and underwhelming and framed like a TV show. The 21st century scenes could have been a bit tighter. Still I only rank STII higher from the TOS movies.

ST:INS is a quandary. In the theaters I was underwhelmed by it. I believe it has a worthwhile message but that alone doesn't make it great. It's without a doubt a "TV" episode though the location shots are just beautiful to watch. The set design is disappointing. If I'm in the mood, it's not a bad diversion.

Nemesis: Possibly the most "controversial" Trek movie. Not in it's themes but because people differ in opinions over it almost as much as the Kelvin universe. I rank it 7th, just below STIV. Middle-of-the-pack. It looks like the most expensive of the first 10 and it is. Pacing might be the biggest problem in this one. Editing would have helped immensely.

Part of it is, I think, franchise fatigue. Objectively the movies all have their good points, but subjectively there are a lot of people who feel that Trek as a franchise was beginning to be on the wane after nearly 2 decades of production, and that the people behind the scenes were becoming very "risk adverse". There was (and still kind of is) a feeling that the TNG movies failed to reach the potential of the TV show, certainly that they didn't make as good use of the show's ensemble.
Personally, I think that view is incredibly unfair. But it persists. (The same perception dogs the later seasons of Voyager, as well.)

 

[RandyS]

I think the destruction of Enterprise-D was the very least of Generations problems. In fact, the crash scene was really cool and well-done.

Which was the point of that pointless scene. The only point in fact.

 

[Galileo7]

FC is great, Generations has its moments but otherwise the movies were too much of a departure from what I loved about TNG. The cast were not used very well. Only Data and Picard seemed to be the focus of each movies whereas Beverly, Geordi and, in the latter 2 movies, Worf faded into the background. Riker and Troi did okay I guess. I hated the fact the Enterprise-D got destroyed in the first movie. That was so lame and not needed. A refit for the big screen would've been better. All 178 episodes took place on that ship. At least TOS movies waited until TSFS to blow up their Enterprise. Apart from all that the movies just didn't capture the feel of the tv series. I'd have preferred TNG to take a break for a few years and then return for more seasons rather than go to the big screen.

The destruction of the 1701-D in GEN was a disappointment.
The 1701-E should have been a Galaxy class too.
The NG Picard's crew should have remained on a Galaxy class as TOS Kirk's crew remained on the Constitution class in their films.

 

[locutus101]

Which was the point of that pointless scene. The only point in fact.

Well, it's entertainment after all. People would be disappointed without a few catastrophic scenes, regardless of the quality of the scenario. A good movie must have both.

 

[Relayer1]

TNG was a fantastic show ill served by it's films which ranged from drivel to poor.

I like Nemesis most, for all of it's flaws.

 

[locutus101]

TNG was a fantastic show I'll served by it's films which ranged from drivel to poor.

I like Nemesis most, for all of it's flaws.

Well, I like Nemesis least. Between the two of us, we have an average.

 

[Seven of Five]

Aside from First Contact, the films are just average.

Generations certainly starts promisingly but then tanks in the final act.

Insurrection is just bland, repackaged Prime Directive fluff, framed with dodgy humour, and thus is my least favourite.

Nemesis was aiming for better things but ultimately was executed in a strange manner. The editing could have been much better.

Having said all that I still watched them all again this year. They all have good bits in them.