Why Is Nemesis Unpopular?

[Amaris]

^ That would certainly have made the scene better.

 

[Tiberius Jim]

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.

 

[cardinal biggles]

I put this together a few years back to show how badass it could have been.

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.

 

[Tiberius Jim]

Haha, classic.

 

[Runetouch]

Were they really that bad? Regarding why I haven't seen them yet, that's because after watching First Contact, I decided to start Deep Space 9, and currently am on Season 2.

They ain't very good.... Between the two of them, they manage to make the TNG movie series look like mostly crap in retrospect.

DS9 = Good. Stick with DS9.

Yes, I like DS9 a lot so far.

 

[Shaka Zulu]

"metrosexual" . . . huh?

If you don't know what the word means, here's a definition: Metrosexual

Oh, I'm familiar with the term. I was just puzzled by its use in that context. I've seen a lot of criticisms, good and bad, directed at the new movies, but that they were too "metrosexual"?

That seemed to warrant a "huh?"

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.

 

[Shaka Zulu]

...would it have killed them to at least name-drop Lore? They seem to be going out their way to ignore his existence.

What makes the most sense is that a Lore story was considered but then dropped in favor of "B-4" because Lore had been written originally by others, and the producers of Nemesis didn't want to share credit and/or didn't want to pay whatever amount may have been demanded for the rights to the character.

(The whole idea of a Soong android being detectable from such a distance is just weak. It makes about as much sense as the locals in "The Mark of Gideon" being able to construct a convincing 1:1 Enterprise scale model despite not even being Federation members, and despite the planet obviously being too crowded to build such a thing.)

I think that what he meant was that they mention Lore, not that he actually appear. They find another copy of Data, and are way too quick to trust him. They could have mentioned Lore as a justification for being suspicious of B-4. What was really stupid is that Shinzon, who has only days to live and needs Picard's blood, decides to put B-4 on a barren planet near the neutral zone and just kind of assumes that a. he'll be detected by Stafleet, and b. that the Enterprise will be the one to find him. Not only that, but the planet is full of hostile aliens with guns and Shinzon decides to scatter B-4 in pieces all over the place so that Picard has to spend most of the day driving around picking up the pieces while being shot at. So Shinzon wastes time that he doesn't have for no good reason and puts Picard in a situation where he could easily have been killed, at which point Shinzon would have been completely screwed. Like I said, Shinzon is the most idiotic movie villain in ST history.

Finished the rewatch...the film is just a mess. As others have stated, so many missed opportunities.

Was B4 necessary to the plot at all? Seems like he easily could have been written out. Spiner is so busy playing B4 in this one that I feel like we're not getting enough of Data is his final appearance.

Also, it seems like the whole story could have been tighter. There are two separate parts of the film where Picard is on the Scimitar and Data goes after him. They could have tightened those beats into a single sequence. Have Data sacrifice himself saving Picard instead of stopping a contrived McGuffin.

I also wasn't fond of how the Enterprise and its allies flailed about helplessly fighting an overpowered uber-ship. If they wanted to ape TWOK, they should have paid more attention to the battle, which was more about matching wits with evenly-matched ships.

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'.

 

[urbandefault]

If you don't know what the word means, here's a definition: Metrosexual

Oh, I'm familiar with the term. I was just puzzled by its use in that context. I've seen a lot of criticisms, good and bad, directed at the new movies, but that they were too "metrosexual"?

That seemed to warrant a "huh?"

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.

Ok, I'm gonna throw in another "Huh?" on this one. Call me dense, but I'm not getting the point.

 

[The Old Mixer]

What makes the most sense is that a Lore story was considered but then dropped in favor of "B-4" because Lore had been written originally by others, and the producers of Nemesis didn't want to share credit and/or didn't want to pay whatever amount may have been demanded for the rights to the character.

(The whole idea of a Soong android being detectable from such a distance is just weak. It makes about as much sense as the locals in "The Mark of Gideon" being able to construct a convincing 1:1 Enterprise scale model despite not even being Federation members, and despite the planet obviously being too crowded to build such a thing.)

I think that what he meant was that they mention Lore, not that he actually appear. They find another copy of Data, and are way too quick to trust him. They could have mentioned Lore as a justification for being suspicious of B-4. What was really stupid is that Shinzon, who has only days to live and needs Picard's blood, decides to put B-4 on a barren planet near the neutral zone and just kind of assumes that a. he'll be detected by Stafleet, and b. that the Enterprise will be the one to find him. Not only that, but the planet is full of hostile aliens with guns and Shinzon decides to scatter B-4 in pieces all over the place so that Picard has to spend most of the day driving around picking up the pieces while being shot at. So Shinzon wastes time that he doesn't have for no good reason and puts Picard in a situation where he could easily have been killed, at which point Shinzon would have been completely screwed. Like I said, Shinzon is the most idiotic movie villain in ST history.

Finished the rewatch...the film is just a mess. As others have stated, so many missed opportunities.

Was B4 necessary to the plot at all? Seems like he easily could have been written out. Spiner is so busy playing B4 in this one that I feel like we're not getting enough of Data is his final appearance.

Also, it seems like the whole story could have been tighter. There are two separate parts of the film where Picard is on the Scimitar and Data goes after him. They could have tightened those beats into a single sequence. Have Data sacrifice himself saving Picard instead of stopping a contrived McGuffin.

I also wasn't fond of how the Enterprise and its allies flailed about helplessly fighting an overpowered uber-ship. If they wanted to ape TWOK, they should have paid more attention to the battle, which was more about matching wits with evenly-matched ships.

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'.

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....

 

[Random_Spock]

What makes the most sense is that a Lore story was considered but then dropped in favor of "B-4" because Lore had been written originally by others, and the producers of Nemesis didn't want to share credit and/or didn't want to pay whatever amount may have been demanded for the rights to the character.

(The whole idea of a Soong android being detectable from such a distance is just weak. It makes about as much sense as the locals in "The Mark of Gideon" being able to construct a convincing 1:1 Enterprise scale model despite not even being Federation members, and despite the planet obviously being too crowded to build such a thing.)

I think that what he meant was that they mention Lore, not that he actually appear. They find another copy of Data, and are way too quick to trust him. They could have mentioned Lore as a justification for being suspicious of B-4. What was really stupid is that Shinzon, who has only days to live and needs Picard's blood, decides to put B-4 on a barren planet near the neutral zone and just kind of assumes that a. he'll be detected by Stafleet, and b. that the Enterprise will be the one to find him. Not only that, but the planet is full of hostile aliens with guns and Shinzon decides to scatter B-4 in pieces all over the place so that Picard has to spend most of the day driving around picking up the pieces while being shot at. So Shinzon wastes time that he doesn't have for no good reason and puts Picard in a situation where he could easily have been killed, at which point Shinzon would have been completely screwed. Like I said, Shinzon is the most idiotic movie villain in ST history.

Finished the rewatch...the film is just a mess. As others have stated, so many missed opportunities.

Was B4 necessary to the plot at all? Seems like he easily could have been written out. Spiner is so busy playing B4 in this one that I feel like we're not getting enough of Data is his final appearance.

Also, it seems like the whole story could have been tighter. There are two separate parts of the film where Picard is on the Scimitar and Data goes after him. They could have tightened those beats into a single sequence. Have Data sacrifice himself saving Picard instead of stopping a contrived McGuffin.

I also wasn't fond of how the Enterprise and its allies flailed about helplessly fighting an overpowered uber-ship. If they wanted to ape TWOK, they should have paid more attention to the battle, which was more about matching wits with evenly-matched ships.

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'.

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.

 

[Commishsleer]

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.

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.

 

[Dukhat]

What makes the most sense is that a Lore story was considered but then dropped in favor of "B-4" because Lore had been written originally by others, and the producers of Nemesis didn't want to share credit and/or didn't want to pay whatever amount may have been demanded for the rights to the character.

(The whole idea of a Soong android being detectable from such a distance is just weak. It makes about as much sense as the locals in "The Mark of Gideon" being able to construct a convincing 1:1 Enterprise scale model despite not even being Federation members, and despite the planet obviously being too crowded to build such a thing.)

I think that what he meant was that they mention Lore, not that he actually appear. They find another copy of Data, and are way too quick to trust him. They could have mentioned Lore as a justification for being suspicious of B-4. What was really stupid is that Shinzon, who has only days to live and needs Picard's blood, decides to put B-4 on a barren planet near the neutral zone and just kind of assumes that a. he'll be detected by Stafleet, and b. that the Enterprise will be the one to find him. Not only that, but the planet is full of hostile aliens with guns and Shinzon decides to scatter B-4 in pieces all over the place so that Picard has to spend most of the day driving around picking up the pieces while being shot at. So Shinzon wastes time that he doesn't have for no good reason and puts Picard in a situation where he could easily have been killed, at which point Shinzon would have been completely screwed. Like I said, Shinzon is the most idiotic movie villain in ST history.

Finished the rewatch...the film is just a mess. As others have stated, so many missed opportunities.

Was B4 necessary to the plot at all? Seems like he easily could have been written out. Spiner is so busy playing B4 in this one that I feel like we're not getting enough of Data is his final appearance.

Also, it seems like the whole story could have been tighter. There are two separate parts of the film where Picard is on the Scimitar and Data goes after him. They could have tightened those beats into a single sequence. Have Data sacrifice himself saving Picard instead of stopping a contrived McGuffin.

I also wasn't fond of how the Enterprise and its allies flailed about helplessly fighting an overpowered uber-ship. If they wanted to ape TWOK, they should have paid more attention to the battle, which was more about matching wits with evenly-matched ships.

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'.

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?

Into Darkness had more flaws imo than Nemesis.

Sorry, no. There wasn't a single thing in Nemesis that made any kind of sense whatsoever.

 

[Jeyl]

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.

 

[Mr Light]

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.

 

[USS Triumphant]

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.

 

[Shaka Zulu]

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....

I was implying about fans in general, not you.

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?

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.

Ok, I'm gonna throw in another "Huh?" on this one. Call me dense, but I'm not getting the point.

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.

 

[Dukhat]

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.

You'll have to point out where people are saying that, because I haven't seen anything of the sort.

 

[Shaka Zulu]

^These days, some people are feeling and saying that movies like Nemesis are better than the two new ones.

 

[Jeyl]

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.

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?

 

[The Old Mixer]

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.