What could have improved 'Insurrection'?

[C.E. Evans]

I always felt that Insurrection should have been a start of a trilogy that ultimately exposed something rotten at the heart of the Federation. Probably Section 31 could have been involved, with a big reveal at some point that they had a secret army of genetically-enhanced supermen like Khan...

Oh wait. Never mind...

 

[trevanian]

I always felt that Insurrection should have been a start of a trilogy that ultimately exposed something rotten at the heart of the Federation. Probably Section 31 could have been involved, with a big reveal at some point that they had a secret army of genetically-enhanced supermen like Khan...

Oh wait. Never mind...

Stewart was gung-ho to do a direct followup too ... at first.

 

[GalaxyX]

Some good ideas here, with Picard vs some crew ... I'd think you would have a running battle between Riker on E and Picard on whatever he is flying, with Picard trying to convince Riker long-distance to reconsider his position, and Riker being caught in the Weps-in-CRIMSONTIDE position of having to change his mind and side with Picard against Starfleet vessels sent in to settle matters. That's be worth the title (assuming you could offer a view that would have ME siding with Picard, which hasn't ever happened yet.) The Ba'ku have to be the most selfish people in the trekverse.

They are the primary reason I hate that movie. They do not deserve sympathy or help in any way, shape or form.

Most importantly I think would be more likable protagonists. Not sure why the Ba'ku needed to be Amish immigrants rather than naturally primitive natives. Making them immigrants (rightly or wrongly) confuses the moral issue they were trying to bring up, and making them able but not willing to participate in their own defense instead of the other way around makes them fucking assholes.

Replacing the space magic with natural resources found on the surface, preferably in the plants or animals would have helped too. The sight of forests being razed and animals slaughtered would have communicated the environmentalist message they seemed to be going for better than some plasticky toy thing stealing a planets magic rings.

Great post, just had to correct some minor points in it

Exactly who is revolting in this movie?

Everybody.

You're revolted by the characters?

By the way, the Enterprise-E's crew already disobeyed orders in First Contact and two movies ago, it was Spock and the Enteprise-A to prevent an actual insurrection.

That is hilarious!! I remember that. Picard goes to the crew "We are about to commit a direct violation of our orders, any one who wants to complain can do so now".

So there you go, Star Trek Insurrection at First Contact.

I always felt that Insurrection should have been a start of a trilogy that ultimately exposed something rotten at the heart of the Federation. Probably Section 31 could have been involved, with a big reveal at some point that they had a secret army of genetically-enhanced supermen like Khan...

Oh wait. Never mind...

 

[Shaka Zulu]

BillJ already completely nailed it in the very first reply of the thread:

Ditch the S'ona. Made the film Starfleet vs. Starfleet (maybe Picard vs. Riker). Return to the concept that the planet was chock full of minerals that was the basis of the Federation's medical technology. Kill off one of the characters due to not having access to the mineral.

The plot of Into Darkness was Starfleet vs. Starfleet (Kirk vs. Marcus and Khan), yet people hated it.

 

[BillJ]

BillJ already completely nailed it in the very first reply of the thread:

Ditch the S'ona. Made the film Starfleet vs. Starfleet (maybe Picard vs. Riker). Return to the concept that the planet was chock full of minerals that was the basis of the Federation's medical technology. Kill off one of the characters due to not having access to the mineral.

The plot of Into Darkness was Starfleet vs. Starfleet (Kirk vs. Marcus and Khan), yet people hated it.

Well, some people hated it. But it seems like more people liked than disliked Into Darkness.

 

[Lance]

BillJ already completely nailed it in the very first reply of the thread:

Ditch the S'ona. Made the film Starfleet vs. Starfleet (maybe Picard vs. Riker). Return to the concept that the planet was chock full of minerals that was the basis of the Federation's medical technology. Kill off one of the characters due to not having access to the mineral.

The plot of Into Darkness was Starfleet vs. Starfleet (Kirk vs. Marcus and Khan), yet people hated it.

Oh I do dislike the word 'hated'. 'Hated' is such a loaded word. In my experience, *if* there are people who 'hated' on STID, then it was for reasons other than the Starfleet vs Starfleet plot. To suggest otherwise would be to mistake the subjective for the objective. Let's not start doing that now, hey?

Well, some people hated it. But it seems like more people liked than disliked Into Darkness.

Indeed.

 

[austen_pierce]

If nothing else could be changed, I would have at least liked the Ba'ku to be likeable, and really in need, and not the arrogant pissants we got that didn't "need" anything.

I could have actually enjoyed the movie on another level.

Yes to this... the Ba'ku were not people I sympathized with. They didn't "need to be saved" was the message I got. With their powers, why couldn't they have dealt with the S'ona without starfleet? For that matter, why didn't they know the Federation was spying on them with the duck blind.

Sigh, I actually liked the duck blind scene, then Ruafo ruined it later by calling it a duck blind.

Ditch the S'ona. Made the film Starfleet vs. Starfleet (maybe Picard vs. Riker). Return to the concept that the planet was chock full of minerals that was the basis of the Federation's medical technology. Kill off one of the characters due to not having access to the mineral.

Yes, yes, yes, and yes. The movie was called Insurrection, yet Picard does what... disobey an order? Where was the uprising against starfleet? We almost get this when Riker flees in the ENT-D but whatever showdown happens between our heroes and the evil Federation is OFF SCREEN. We don't even get more than passive aggressive posturing between Picard and Daugherty.

The only two things that really moved me was when Geordi got his eyesight back

Absolutely agree. The reverse aging and it's impacts on the crew could and IMO should have been a much wider focus of the movie. And not for laughs or cringe boob joke moments. Have the crew begin exhibiting younger, less mature behavior patterns, for example.

(Dukhat, I think I screwed up this quote, so apologies if this wasn't you)

Things that could have been left out.

The manual joy stick on the bridge. Just can't find a single realistic reason for it.

The boobs joke, certain don't have Data repeat it to Worf.

Agree to both... the joystick on the bridge is only slightly more cringeworthy than the bridge console text messaging in Nemesis.

Most importantly I think would be more likable protagonists. Not sure why the Ba'ku needed to be Amish immigrants rather than naturally primitive natives. Making them immigrants (rightly or wrongly) confuses the moral issue they were trying to bring up, and making them able but not willing to participate in their own defense instead of the other way around makes them unsympathetic.

Replacing the space magic with natural resources found on the surface, preferably in the plants or animals would have helped too. The sight of forrests being razed and animals slaughtered would have communicated the environmentalist message they seemed to be going for better than some plasticy toy thing stealing a planets magic rings.

Sure, call it Star Trek: Avatar

 

[Lance]

The "manual steering column" is such an odd beast. On the one hand I think it might definitely have had a place in a smaller scale vessel like a shuttlecraft, it makes sense to me that something small would benefit from the ability of a pilot to have more precise high velocity control, and I might even say I find it bizarre that we never actually saw one appear in that context in most Star Treks. But other the other hand, it's totally incongruous on the bridge of the Enterprise herself, this joystick thing popping up out of the floor in the middle of a vast command center surrounded by sleek touch-screen controls. I just can't buy the concept of a ship the size of the Enterprise being steered by one guy with a joystick either (which is the implication; at least I could buy it if the idea was that it simply gave the captain some kind of control in conjunction with a regular conn officer, but everything about the way its presented in INS suggests that it's literally Riker taking personal control of the entire damn ship, talk about stretching credibility that one stage too far!). And that's all before we get into the dumbass production design decision to put it in the middle of the room, instead of somewhere sensible (like, I dunno, next to the captain's chair? ), Jonathan Frakes, who as we remember was one TNG's taller cast members, looks like a complete fool having to lean over this tiny thing that's popped up out of the floor.

So, uh, I guess that'd be an F for the Manual Steering Column from me.

 

[AgentCoop]

I liked STID. Not loved, liked. But of the people who apparently hated it, I've never seen the "Starfleet vs. Starfleet" angle cited as one of the reasons.

As far as Insurrection goes, it seems that most of the people in this thread agree with me. The biggest problem with this movie is that the Baku are utterly unsympathetic and unlikable. A close second is the fact that the producers (of which Stewart was one) were never willing to take the chance that the audience might disagree with Picard. A reasonable, effective argument from, say Riker or Crusher, that just maybe Picard might be on the wrong side would have improved the film immensely.

 

[Anji]

Fix Insurrection? Easy.

First, get the cast to take the movie seriously. I don't know what they're doing but they sure as hell aren't acting.

Second, better dialogue
.
Third, director needs to be better focused on what the theme or point of the movie is.

Fourth, actual pacing to the scenes.

 

[austen_pierce]

Fix Insurrection? Easy.

First, get the cast to take the movie seriously. I don't know what they're doing but they sure as hell aren't acting.

Second, better dialogue
.
Third, director needs to be better focused on what the theme or point of the movie is.

Fourth, actual pacing to the scenes.

The dialogue was terrible. Both what was being said and how the actors said them. It felt forced and preachy... from several actors in several scenes.

As others have said, Geordi's sunset scene was one of the few moments which felt genuine and Burton deserves praise for contributing a solid performance there.

 

[Shaka Zulu]

^True.