Why is Star Trek: Nemesis hated so much?

[Vger23]

I do think that Logan had some good ideas in his script. The debate of what makes us who we are is a good one. Having a clone that is like you in many ways but different in others, is a good way to have this debate. And the attack on the senate scene in the opening of the movie was a great WTF moment. But I would agree that it felt like a first draft. It had a lot of problems from continuity errors to plot holes. And, the whole concept of introducing a human clone to Picard out of the blue and having this clone somehow take over the Romulan Empire is problematic. I would have replaced both Shinzon and B-4 with Lore. Having Lore lead a band of disenfranchised Remans would make sense because it would be reminiscent of what Lore tried to do with the Borg survivors in the ep Descent. And yes, Baird sucked as a director. He had no clue how to direct a Star Trek movie. A lot of the TNG actors even admitted in interviews that Baird did not even know their character names. He clearly did not know anything about TNG. He directly the movie like a generic scifi action movie and it shows. He cut out all the good character moments. The movie lacked the soul of a Trek movie and seems to just skip from one action scene to the next. With a tighter script and a better director, Nemesis could have been a good Trek movie.

This is an interesting point. I actually think there is a LOT of good character stuff in Nemesis...but that even more got cut out, and that was a huge shame. You could have trimmed a bunch of foolishness out and kept in a number of the scenes that were cut (the deleted scenes on the BR/DVD are almost all better than stuff they kept in) and had a much-improved movie.

 

[Mojochi]

Picard Clone
B4
Cheap attempt at recreating the Spock death from TWoK

Mix all that together in a boring stew & it's no wonder why it extinguished the franchise, which was already on life support after Insurrection

 

[F. King Daniel]

2nd Xindi attack

Only after a weird Space Nazi deleting timeline reset. Where were all those ships in "Zero Hour"?

 

[STEPhon IT]

He did have a pretty impressive cloaking device. It think the idea was when Earth finally saw the Scimitar it would have already been too late. Even if they knew he was coming they wouldn't know from where and he apparently could fire weapons cloaked (a la TUC) and I assume the same would have went for the thalaron device.

But I don't think it was that important. It was more or less a Maguffin. He was never going to get to Earth because that wasn't part of the story, so I figured they never really gave that element much thought.

What a great concept? A cloaking device with no weaknesses, a nod from "The Enterprise Incident". What made TUC interesting with the concept was it had an Achilles heel. If a ship has a cloak then it shouldn't have defensive screens or at least not be as good. There should be a counter balance for these things. The bad writers get confused about the process of a cloaking device; it simply turns the ship invisible not phased.

 

[Smellmet]

I've always just found it interesting the hatred this movie seems to have. I'm also curious to see who the other 9 people who liked it are. I know they're out there somewhere .

Another +1 from me. It's my favourite TNG movie. Terribly flawed, but I just find it extremely entertaining, especially the battle at the end, which remains my favourite ship battle in trek.

 

[Vger23]

Another +1 from me. It's my favourite TNG movie. Terribly flawed, but I just find it extremely entertaining, especially the battle at the end, which remains my favourite ship battle in trek.

I think that's a huge point that gets lost on a lot of franchise fans quite frankly...there's a difference between "good" and "enjoyable." Fans take themselves and the product SO fucking seriously that if it doesn't have "real world suspension of disbelief" in terms of flawless execution, they can't bring themselves to enjoy it.

I'm very lucky to not be like that. I can enjoy Trek even when it's deeply flawed.

 

[Damian]

What a great concept? A cloaking device with no weaknesses, a nod from "The Enterprise Incident". What made TUC interesting with the concept was it had an Achilles heel. If a ship has a cloak then it shouldn't have defensive screens or at least not be as good. There should be a counter balance for these things. The bad writers get confused about the process of a cloaking device; it simply turns the ship invisible not phased.

In fairness it is almost 100 years after TUC. It stands to reason they would have perfected the cloak in that time. But I was just speculating. Could they fire the thalaron device while cloaked, did they have to uncloak to set it up, or just when they were ready to fire? I don't know since we never made it that far. They did make it clear they could travel all the way to Earth without being spotted. That was why they needed to stop them before they ever got anywhere near Earth.

 

[Romulan_spy]

This is an interesting point. I actually think there is a LOT of good character stuff in Nemesis...but that even more got cut out, and that was a huge shame. You could have trimmed a bunch of foolishness out and kept in a number of the scenes that were cut (the deleted scenes on the BR/DVD are almost all better than stuff they kept in) and had a much-improved movie.

I especially like the deleted scene where Picard and Data share a glass of wine in his quarters and talk about the mixed emotions of a wedding. Good stuff.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Vger23]

I especially like the deleted scene where Picard and Data share a glass of wine in his quarters and talk about the mixed emotions of a wedding. Good stuff.

Agree...of all the cuts that they made, there's no way in hell that should have been cut. It really sets the tone and themes up for the entire movie.

It's unfortunate that we will likely never see a "special edition" that incorporates some of the cut material back in.

 

[Damian]

I think that's a huge point that gets lost on a lot of franchise fans quite frankly...there's a difference between "good" and "enjoyable." Fans take themselves and the product SO fucking seriously that if it doesn't have "real world suspension of disbelief" in terms of flawless execution, they can't bring themselves to enjoy it.

I'm very lucky to not be like that. I can enjoy Trek even when it's deeply flawed.

Ha-ha, yeah. And I admit, I get pretty animated about continuity and consistency myself. I'm actually more forgiving of suspension of disbelief in films. I know in another thread we were debating TWOK and all it's many plot holes. But I was still able to enjoy it. Actually, every Star Trek film had those moments, some more than others.

Nemesis was not perfect. But I went in without any preconceptions. I had only seen the previews, I had not read any reviews or the hate comments before going in. I thought it was an ok Star Trek film. I can understand why non-Trekkies might not get into it, even at the time it didn't seem to me to have that broad based appeal. But I came out thinking, ok, not as good as First Contact, but I thought it was better than Generations and Insurrection (which I also liked in general as well BTW--I don't hate any Trek film honestly).

I was frankly surprised at all the vitriol sprung at the film. When I first started seeing it I thought, hmm, I guess I'm in the minority and I wasn't really expecting it.

I wonder, just off hand, how many hate it due to a group think idea. Everyone else hates it so I should hate it sort of thing. I wonder if you took a sampling of Trekkies who had never seen Nemesis, who liked Star Trek and TNG, and just show them the film without ever seeing any reviews. What would they think? I know it'd be next to impossible, but I do get curious, how many people hate it because that's the thing to do? Well, we'll never know--and I do believe some people just hate it for whatever reason, and their reasons are just as legitimate as mine for liking it, and I'm not suggesting otherwise. Just something I get curious about, are there people that might think differently if they never saw a critique of the film and just went into it with an open mind.

 

[Vger23]

I wonder, just off hand, how many hate it due to a group think idea. Everyone else hates it so I should hate it sort of thing. I wonder if you took a sampling of Trekkies who had never seen Nemesis, who liked Star Trek and TNG, and just show them the film without ever seeing any reviews. What would they think? I know it'd be next to impossible, but I do get curious, how many people hate it because that's the thing to do? Well, we'll never know--and I do believe some people just hate it for whatever reason, and their reasons are just as legitimate as mine for liking it, and I'm not suggesting otherwise. Just something I get curious about, are there people that might think differently if they never saw a critique of the film and just went into it with an open mind.

This has been a theory of mine for a long time. I have friends and a wife who are extraordinarily "casual" Star Trek fans. They like the show, don't really know much other than what they are watching "in the moment" (so backstory and continuity are not a factor) and they don't really have preconception about what "good Star Trek" is supposed to be...so their take on things is almost entirely based on the entertainment value they get out of simply watching. And- they certainly don't spend any time on the inter webs getting pummeled by the "majority opinion" on anything Trek-related...that is for sure.

My wife and my buddies who are "casual" fans love Star Trek: Nemesis. It's actually probably my wife's favorite of the Trek movies.

 

[Steven P Bastien]

And B-4 was basically unnecessary.

Am I the only one who realized that B-4 was there to allow Data to be resurrected if they decided to make another movie? You always need a way to bring a dead character back. In the next movie they could have B-4 become severely damaged and his memory wiped for some reason. Then Geordi suddenly remembers that he has a backup of Data's memory. Data is then resurrected in the final movie "Star Trek: The Search for Data, in the Computer Trash Bin". Fortunately, the idea was trashed before fruition.

 

[Damian]

Am I the only one who realized that B-4 was there to allow Data to be resurrected if they decided to make another movie? You always need a way to bring a dead character back. In the next movie they could have B-4 become severely damaged and his memory wiped for some reason. Then Geordi suddenly remembers that he has a backup of Data's memory. Data is then resurrected in the final movie "Star Trek: The Search for Data, in the Computer Trash Bin". Fortunately, the idea was trashed before fruition.

Yeah, and I think that was probably the main reason for his presence. But I think it would have been more tragic if Data really was gone. Now, I did enjoy the Cold Equations novels by David Mack, so it worked out in the end. But in Nemesis he just seemed a bit superfluous.

 

[Hey Missy]

Because it managed to do what no other Star Trek film could: it sucked so bad it killed the franchise for almost a decade.

Oh, please. When Enterprise was cancelled in 2005, Paramount immediately ordered another movie, and then JJ Abrams' Star Trek was approved in 2006. If it was a dead franchise, they wouldn't have still seen the potential for profit in it.

 

[Noname Given]

Oh, please. When Enterprise was cancelled in 2005, Paramount immediately ordered another movie, and then JJ Abrams' Star Trek was approved in 2006. If it was a dead franchise, they wouldn't have still seen the potential for profit in it.

Um, to them the TNG era IS a dead part of the Star Trek franchise.

 

[Hey Missy]

TNG isn't the whole franchise.

 

[johnjm22]

I don't understand why so many people like STiD but hate Nemesis. Seems to me if you like one you should like the other.

 

[Dukhat]

I don't understand why so many people like STiD but hate Nemesis. Seems to me if you like one you should like the other.

Well as soon as you explain what one has to do with the other...

 

[johnjm22]

Well as soon as you explain what one has to do with the other...

They don't have anything to do with each other. Not sure what your point is.

 

[Hey Missy]

I think johnjm22 means how people are more likely to forgive Into Darkness for the same faults they blast Nemesis for, such as "gratuitous action scenes" and "TWOK ripoffs"