Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies I-X' started by Mr Light, Jan 3, 2014.
^ That would certainly have made the scene better.
And would have been all the more poignant if Shinzon had been played by Stewart. Hardy just didn't look enough (or sound enough) like Picard, bald or not to really sell it IMO. The funny thing is I think Hardy could probably pull it off now since he's 12 years older.
I'll take your evil clone and raise you an old pop culture reference:
And yes, I believe even this could have been a better movie than Nemesis.
Yes, I like DS9 a lot so far.
Chalk that one up to homophobia and ageism against younger people for having a Star Trek they relate to vs. the older shows and movies, and also a slam against the newer movies.
Amazing how fans now love this movie despite its flaws, but hate Star Trek and Star Trek Into Darkness for what they consider plot 'flaws'.
Ok, I'm gonna throw in another "Huh?" on this one. Call me dense, but I'm not getting the point.
Not sure who loves it, but hope you weren't saying that I do...don't know how you could have gotten that from my posts....
Into Darkness had more flaws imo than Nemesis. At least it wasn't a remake (a reverse one, granted with Into Darkness), along with acting that wasn't even good at all by a lot of the cast.
I still have Nemesis towards the bottom of the Trek films, but Into Darkness holds the bottom slot for me. Can't ever watch that one again.
Actually that what I think of NEMESIS.
But I really don't mind the 'remake' of TWOK with Data sacrificing himself for Picard all that much.
Its just a shame to me that Data had to die. I wish it had been Riker instead. LOL.
You see I have this vision of Data surviving through the years way after TNG. And linking any future Star Trek series with the past.
Huh? You quoted three people who basically say that the film sucked, and then you use that as your basis for saying how fans loved it?
Sorry, no. There wasn't a single thing in Nemesis that made any kind of sense whatsoever.
I just think it's harder to defend Star Trek Nemesis when it comes to the elements that drowned it. I'm not a fan of Star Trek being all about action, but I can understand why a lot of decisions behind JJ's first Star Trek movie had to have those action scenes. But Nemesis? How can you defend the Dune Buggy scene? It doesn't do anything at all for the film, story or characters. You could end the scene right after B4's head says "Fascinating" and there would be nothing lost at all. And why does Shinzon have to be a clone of Picard when the two are nothing alike and doesn't even take into account Picard's artificial heart? They made such a big deal about the experience of one's life shaping who they turn out to be, yet they literally retcon the biggest life changing moment for Picard out of the story so they can have a "Your heart, your eyes are the same as mine". They had the perfect, tangible proof of that argument and they don't do anything with it.
If they didn't have the dune buggy scene, the first hour of the movie would have been almost completely action-less, and the entire movie would have taken place on sets. It opened up the movie and helped the pacing of the first half.
Oh. Did it? I'm sorry, I couldn't notice the apparently beautifully even pacing over the mind-numbing stupidity of the scene.
I was implying about fans in general, not you.
I was talking about the fans who like (or love) Nemesis now and use it to bash Star Trek & Star Trek Into Darkness-I'm not agreeing with them.
The word metrosexual is used in a negative (homophobic?) sense here, implying the the two recent movies were made only for these guys. I still stand by what I said about how they feel about youth, as well.
You'll have to point out where people are saying that, because I haven't seen anything of the sort.
^These days, some people are feeling and saying that movies like Nemesis are better than the two new ones.
First, you should never have to rely on pointless action scenes in order to have the audience invested in the movie. Second, I'm not saying that having an action scene at this point in the film is a bad idea. I just prefer an action scene that actually does something. If you look at Star Trek II, no action scene is wasted and everything that goes on is essential. You cannot skip Khan's ambush and expect the story to be coherent afterwards. The Enterprise needs to be crippled, and Khan needs to take Kirk more seriously. What comes out shooting the primitive natives of this planet in a Dune Buggy?
FWIW, I can find plenty of fault in the Abrams films, but on a pure entertainment level, they're easily 10 times the films that INS or NEM were.
Separate names with a comma.