Was moving 'The Next Generation' over to movies a bad decision?

[Dukhat]

I might be bursting some people's bubbles here, but TNG's switch from television to films happened twenty (20, vingt, veinte, venti, dwadzieścia, ZWANZIG!) years ago, and TNG's last outing was ten (10, you get the idea) years ago.

So WHATEVER decision they made back then, TNG would be over by now, replaced by something else. Had they continued the show, it would have ended 5 years later because the entire cast jumped off, and the ratings were already dropping anyways. Had they remade TOS, those remakes would be over by now as well. Had they done a new show, it would be over. 20 years is a very long time.

Sorry, we didn't realize we we not allowed to discuss something that happened 20 years ago

Anyway, I've said it before, but I'll reiterate: The switch to movies was the right idea at the time, but they just needed to make better movies. In retrospect, the TNG films steadily hurt the "franchise" instead of making it more popular. In my own personal opinion they should have never been made, and focus instead should have been put upon an eighth season devoted entirely to having the crew winding down their assignments. Picard and Beverly should have gotten together, retired from Starfleet and marry. Riker should have eventually married Troi as well, gotten command of the Enterprise, and had Worf as his XO. Data should have gotten command of his own ship, with Geordi as his XO.

 

[TheSubCommander]

IMHO moving TNG to movies was a good decision, it was the execution that was the problem. Seven seasons is enough for pretty much any series. I just wish the TNG movies were more serial, like Star Trek 2-4 and 6 were. All the TNG movies were more or less self contained, didn't have the feel quite like the TNG series, and didn't have many references to TV continuity. Generations could have been done better, but the basic premise was fine with me. First Contact was good, in fact great when I first saw it, it was awesome, but has some issues with aging in some parts of the movie, now. Insurrection was more like a typical TNG episode, that the only thing horrible was the Pintafore singing crap. Nemesis just was a failure on all fronts, especially introducing B4 out of thin air, without even referencing Lore at all. Tom Hardy was fine as Shinzon, but his motivations for revenge seemed misdirected. Neither Earth nor Picard did anything bad to him. It might have been better if instead of Earth, Picard was trying to keep Shinzon from destroying Romulus (of course with Star Trek 2009, it is moot, now).

 

[Dukhat]

Generations could have been done better, but the basic premise was fine with me.

And that's the thing...at the time, it was probably fine with everyone. TOS was dead, TNG was the future. Let's represent that symbolically by killing Kirk. And while we're at it, we're all tired of looking at the Enterprise-D for seven years, right? So let's just destroy it in the most pitiful way possible so we can get a brand-spanking new ship for the next film!

But how has this attitude stood through the test of time? Well for me personally, it doesn't age well. Killing Kirk was silly (or at least the way they did it). Thinking that we were tired of the Ent-D was wrong; we had seven years invested in that lovingly-designed ship, just so it could be replaced by some soulless John Eaves product (John, I think you're a nice guy and all, but your designs all tend to look the same...)

First Contact was good, in fact great when I first saw it, it was awesome, but has some issues with aging in some parts of the movie, now.

Again, liked the film at first, but in retrospect, I don't like how they portrayed Cochrane, and don't like the whole concept of a Borg Queen. For insects, a queen is necessary to create more drones. For the Borg, drones are created by assimilating other species. So why have a queen?

Insurrection was more like a typical TNG episode, that the only thing horrible was the Pintafore singing crap.

Insurrection was the only Trek movie I never saw in the theaters. Take that for what it's worth.

Nemesis just was a failure on all fronts, especially introducing B4 out of thin air, without even referencing Lore at all. Tom Hardy was fine as Shinzon, but his motivations for revenge seemed misdirected. Neither Earth nor Picard did anything bad to him. It might have been better if instead of Earth, Picard was trying to keep Shinzon from destroying Romulus (of course with Star Trek 2009, it is moot, now).

Agreed on almost all points; however, I don't think Hardy was all that great. The character's motivations notwithstanding, his acting was just too over-the-top for me.

 

[Jonesy]

...ah, perhaps thats why the movie felt like a tv episode...

Trek tv writers also produced "First Contact", and while you can argue the merits of the film, it barely felt like a tv episode.

 

[Dream]

...ah, perhaps thats why the movie felt like a tv episode...

Trek tv writers also produced "First Contact", and while you can argue the merits of the film, it barely felt like a tv episode.

It screams big budget episode at times. In fact all of the Trek movies do, with the except of TMP and Abrams' movies.

Just compared FC to STXI or STXII.

 

[JarodRussell]

When FC came out in 1996, it was da shiznit. Nothing cheap about it.

 

[Turd Ferguson]

...ah, perhaps thats why the movie felt like a tv episode...

Trek tv writers also produced "First Contact", and while you can argue the merits of the film, it barely felt like a tv episode.

It screams big budget episode at times. In fact all of the Trek movies do, with the except of TMP and Abrams' movies.

Just compared FC to STXI or STXII.

One thing that REALLY stands out for me is in TNG it's always supposed to be the regulars getting the action scenes and making the startling revelations. I love in the battle of Deck 16, Data is breaking Borg necks, Picard is phasering them, and Worf is beating the shit out them, all the while there's countless extras just standing there, staring blankly off into the distance like they're watching a wrestling match. For God's sakes, fire a phaser or something!

Also, when Riker gives out the location of the Borg sphere's fire, the crewman is just sitting at his console like a mute, incompetent moron. At least the incompetent moron communications officer on the JJ-prise had lines.

 

[Hober Mallow]

The extras on TNG were almost always hilariously oblivious to anything going on. The ship's about to be destroyed and the conn officer is just pressing buttons like everything's normal. Or if one of the regulars is knocked away from his station, an extra pops out of nowhere and calmly takes over. IIRC, in "All Good Things" an extra actually bumps into Picard, nearly knocking the captain over, and continues on his merry way as if nothing happened. (Although maybe I'm remembering that one wrong.)

 

[TheSubCommander]

Generations could have been done better, but the basic premise was fine with me.

And that's the thing...at the time, it was probably fine with everyone. TOS was dead, TNG was the future. Let's represent that symbolically by killing Kirk. And while we're at it, we're all tired of looking at the Enterprise-D for seven years, right? So let's just destroy it in the most pitiful way possible so we can get a brand-spanking new ship for the next film!

But how has this attitude stood through the test of time? Well for me personally, it doesn't age well. Killing Kirk was silly (or at least the way they did it). Thinking that we were tired of the Ent-D was wrong; we had seven years invested in that lovingly-designed ship, just so it could be replaced by some soulless John Eaves product (John, I think you're a nice guy and all, but your designs all tend to look the same...)

First Contact was good, in fact great when I first saw it, it was awesome, but has some issues with aging in some parts of the movie, now.

Again, liked the film at first, but in retrospect, I don't like how they portrayed Cochrane, and don't like the whole concept of a Borg Queen. For insects, a queen is necessary to create more drones. For the Borg, drones are created by assimilating other species. So why have a queen?

Insurrection was more like a typical TNG episode, that the only thing horrible was the Pintafore singing crap.

Insurrection was the only Trek movie I never saw in the theaters. Take that for what it's worth.

Nemesis just was a failure on all fronts, especially introducing B4 out of thin air, without even referencing Lore at all. Tom Hardy was fine as Shinzon, but his motivations for revenge seemed misdirected. Neither Earth nor Picard did anything bad to him. It might have been better if instead of Earth, Picard was trying to keep Shinzon from destroying Romulus (of course with Star Trek 2009, it is moot, now).

Agreed on almost all points; however, I don't think Hardy was all that great. The character's motivations notwithstanding, his acting was just too over-the-top for me.

I agree with most everything with you said, save for just minor points.

Generations:
I agree, killing Kirk was not necessary to pass the torch. Personally, I was always of the opinion that rather than kill Kirk, that he somehow, in order to prevent the destruction of the planet, did "something heroic" (I leave that for an actual writer to figure out), that both prevents the destruction, as well as pulls him back into the Nexus, thus leaving his final fate open for interpretation. Ironically, the way he is pulled into the Nexus on the Enterprise-B, was the more fitting end for Kirk.

I also was sad to see the Enterprise D go, especially in such an ignominious way, but I understand if they wanted to introduce another ship for the movies. Besides, one criticism the E-D always had (I am not one, just saying that I heard the criticism) was that it was very un-Enterprise looking. THe Enterprise E returned to a more similar Constitution Class silhouette.

FC
I didn't mind the Borg Queen. I can see how that somewhat contradicts previous TNG Borg canon, and is sort of a retcon, I thought the portrayal was just fine.

Nemesis
Again, I didn't mind Shinzon per se. He was a little over the top, yes, but I chalk that up more to poor writing, than the actor. Not to mention, the total transparent reference to Excalibur the movie when Shinzon, while impaled, drags himself through further in an attempt to kill Picard totally took me out of the movie (in Excalibur, which Patric Stewart was in BTW, it was almost opposite roles but a similar scene, as Arthur was impaled on Mordred's lance, and drags himself across the lance to kill Mordred).

 

[I am not Spock]

Shinzon dragging himself further along the girder he's impaled on reminded me of Lurtz doing the same thing in LOTR

 

[Hober Mallow]

My reason Shinzon didn't work for me as a character was that I just couldn't see him as Picard. At all.

 

[Lance]

It would have helped if we'd seen more (or indeed, any) scenes of him being a tactical thinker. Instead he was just a ranting villain with a bald head.

Mind you, there is some correlation between Hardy's over-acting and Patrick Stewart shouting "And I will make them PAYYYYYYEEEEE forwhattheyhaveDONE!!!!" in FC. So maybe Picard had it in him all along?

 

[pirates_dc]

I dont care what anybody says, nemesis was good. With that said, TNG is more of soap opera than an action series. And even tho i would be the first one in line at the opening day of tng movie..it shouldnt be there. Its like putting the day time soaps on the big screen, it just doesnt belong.

 

[Hober Mallow]

I dont care what anybody says, nemesis was good. With that said, TNG is more of soap opera than an action series. And even tho i would be the first one in line at the opening day of tng movie..it shouldnt be there. Its like putting the day time soaps on the big screen, it just doesnt belong.

They just needed a good story competently written. IMO, "Generations" had the most potential of all the movies, it was just badly written by two guys who didn't know what they were doing.

 

[Trek Survivor]

...ah, perhaps thats why the movie felt like a tv episode...

Trek tv writers also produced "First Contact", and while you can argue the merits of the film, it barely felt like a tv episode.

It screams big budget episode at times. In fact all of the Trek movies do, with the except of TMP and Abrams' movies.

Just compared FC to STXI or STXII.

Do you know how much more budget and money Trek XI and XII had than the other films??

Anyway, rewatched "Insurrection" again over the weekend. Last year I made a thread called "Learning to Love Insurrection". Well, I loved it even more this time! In fact, I'm rather happy with all 4 TNG films (perhaps the only person around these parts!). Yes, there were elements that could be better etc, but I enjoy watching them.

 

[Belz...]

The "feel" of the TNG movies was too different from the TV shows

Well, Insurrection was actually pretty close, IMO.

I don't like it when things are different.

I love it.

 

[Belz...]

But how has this attitude stood through the test of time? Well for me personally, it doesn't age well. Killing Kirk was silly (or at least the way they did it). Thinking that we were tired of the Ent-D was wrong; we had seven years invested in that lovingly-designed ship, just so it could be replaced by some soulless John Eaves product (John, I think you're a nice guy and all, but your designs all tend to look the same...)

I think Generations showed that 1701-D looked fabulous on the big screen. It's just a damn shame.

For what it's worth:

Generations was a fine idea but poorly executed, First Contact was a good sci-fi action movie but it didn't feel like Star Trek and it had plot holes the size of that temporal anomaly, Insurrection was fine by me, and Nemesis was, again, a fine idea but poorly executed. Tom Hardy has great in the role but I would've prefered if Stewart had played both Picard and Shinzon.

 

[sonak]

I dont care what anybody says, nemesis was good. With that said, TNG is more of soap opera than an action series. And even tho i would be the first one in line at the opening day of tng movie..it shouldnt be there. Its like putting the day time soaps on the big screen, it just doesnt belong.

They just needed a good story competently written. IMO, "Generations" had the most potential of all the movies, it was just badly written by two guys who didn't know what they were doing.

yes, two guys who were long-time Star Trek show writers, and who also wrote the very successful "first contact." They sure didn't know what they were doing.

 

[Lance]

TNG is more of soap opera than an action series. And even tho i would be the first one in line at the opening day of tng movie..it shouldnt be there. Its like putting the day time soaps on the big screen, it just doesnt belong.

I think there's a fundamental truth in this. Some things just can't be shoehorned into being something that is essentially against their nature. TNG was kinda long form. It was a tone poem, a fine wine, something that needed a certain degree of reflection to appreciate. TOS was much more immediate and visceral. It makes sense to me that TOS could fit the "popcorn movie" label like a glove, but TNG basically fails because the characters/format are not suited to it.

The TNG cast might have worked really well in The Motion Picture.

 

[Hober Mallow]

I dont care what anybody says, nemesis was good. With that said, TNG is more of soap opera than an action series. And even tho i would be the first one in line at the opening day of tng movie..it shouldnt be there. Its like putting the day time soaps on the big screen, it just doesnt belong.

They just needed a good story competently written. IMO, "Generations" had the most potential of all the movies, it was just badly written by two guys who didn't know what they were doing.

yes, two guys who were long-time Star Trek show writers, and who also wrote the very successful "first contact." They sure didn't know what they were doing.

They either didn't know what they were doing, or they deliberately screwed up the payoff of the characters they set up. Which do you think it was?

At the beginning of the film, they set up Kirk's character as unable to bear a quiet retirement, to needing to be in the middle of the action.

The Nexus is set up as the place that knows and gives you exactly the life you want.

And so Kirk, once inside the Nexus, gets exactly what his character needs. Right back in action, right? Well... no. A quiet retirement.

In writing, the payoff is supposed to match the setup. In this case, it doesn't. It's the exact opposite.

Moore himself expressed disappointment for the movie and admited in the commentary for "Generations" it was a script he wasn't mature enough yet to write. Braga and Moore were writing "All Good Things..." as they were finishing up "Generations," and, according to Braga in the "Generations" commentary, Braga was more than a little worried that the script for "All Good Things" was much better than "Generations." (His exact words in the commentary was, "Oh, my God... 'All Good Things' is better!")