Slashdot Mirror
Rick Berman Doesn't Know Why Nemesis Tanked
Steve Krutzler writes "Star Trek producer Rick Berman broke his silence today on the debacle that was the North American box office for STAR TREK NEMESIS. The film grossed $18.5 million in its opening weekend in mid-December, the lowest of any TREK bow, and its current domestic total stands below even that of the much-lambasted STAR TREK V. Read more at TrekWeb. Berman says he doesn't know why the movie failed and the future of more TREK movies is uncertain."
NO MORE.
Thank goodness. Give the franchise a nice tombstone and lay it to rest already.
The Star Trek previews sucked. It had no 'new' plot, it seemed like an extension of any normal weekday movie. You weren't going back to earth, you weren't doing anything original. Didn't seem to be an exciting movie, so I skipped it. Get a better plot and people will watch Star Trek again.
Obviously its because they cut Wil Wheaton's scenes out of the movie.
Maybe it tanked because Star Trek is dying out in mainstream culture. We still have Enterprise, which is interesting, and Voyager reruns, but I can't imagine that they get good ratings. Sure the cultists still worship Star Trek, but I imagine most people have become less entralled with it.
Success of trek (proportional to) minutes of wheaton. eh???
I read his site. He wasnt even called for opening night.
wilwheaton.net
(repruhsent!)
-- -- --
Help my mini cause: My journal
Ask Slashdot why Nemesis failed. You just know you'll get a ton of insightful and intelligent answers out of a question like that.
in a better way, in previous Star Trek adventures.
It was retelling of Wrath of Khan without the great characters.
Just as "Generations" sucked, where they tried to put every element into one movie (destroy the ship, cold character gets emotions, major character dies, etc.), so did Nemesis.
They'll eventually figure out the deep, dark secret of the ST:TNG series: Wil Wheaton was the glue that held that show together. He was the driving force that kept us all watching. His creative spirit guided the series, and to leave him out of a project is to incur the Wrath of Khan.
Seriously, Wil, got any comments?
Didn't it open the same weekend as Rob Schneider's The Hot Chick?
My God, what was Paramount thinking of!
That, and the movie before that, Star Trek - Insurrection wasn't good at all. Remember: Once fooled, shame on you. Twice fooled, shame on me.
The public might be stupid, but not THAT stupid
I don't go to see very many movies at all. Only films that are really really interesting to me. Maybe, 6 movies a year, tops? I'm guessing that puts me as part of the crowd that you have to draw in for the big numbers. (The swing viewers?!)
The previews were kind of interesting. I've seen every Trek movie in the theater. Just the plot didn't quite capture me. Something about Romulans and an evil bad guy. Looks like lots of action, but nothing that really piqued my interest.
In the end, I think the large part of my decision not to go to theaters was the DVD. Since I didn't have an immediate need to see it, I'm more than happy to watch it in the comfort of my own home. Plus the bonus material on the DVD. Not that I have a great home theater, but the "movie experience" isn't a draw for me.
saying something along the lines of "we don't know why the kids aren't buying more albums. This last boy band album was just like the others we've released, and they made millions."
Perhaps they'll eventually learn that a good script with an original story line even off a commonly used theme (see Big Fat Greek Wedding) will make more money than a rehashed overdone clone.
- gtaluvit (prnc. GOT-tuh-LUV-it)
Simple: It was released at the worst possible time. There was too much competition during christmass, Lord of the Rings alone must have hurt Nemesis seeings a LOT... Which reminds me, I havent seen Nemesis yet... what a bad Trek fan I make. Is it still in theaters?
Why ST: Nemesis "tanked":
(1) The plot wasn't worthy of the talent arrayed; and,
(2) The plot was nothing more than an episode turned feature length;, and,
(3) It was all hype, no substance; and,
(4) People don't want to see a main character (Data) die in a lame way, give the man some respect, will you?; and,
(5) Retarded androids aren't funny.
If my memory serves me well, it did open right around LOTR and I'm sure that didn't help. But I'd say that the mair reason it "tanked" probably had more to do with the current state of affairs of the TV series. It didn't have a monster promotion machine of a hit (read HIT) series running on TV to drive fans and other folks to theatres. The series is tired, so I would bet most folks thought the movie would be "tired."
1) The actors hadn't played the parts in so long, they had forgotten their characters.
2) The actors had all aged a good decade since the last episode and aren't as appealing anymore.
3) The plot had more holes than swiss cheese.
4) Better movies were released at the same time.
5) The previous movie was going downhill, why see another if the previous one wasn't worth paying for.
A super ship owned by a sect of the Romulan empire?
Picards clone leading them?
RAMMING SPEED???
Bah, I've seen better on sites like this and many other sites like it.
The above post is an editorial, the poster cannot and will not be held responsible for all or in part for it's contents
It tanked because movie goers are conditioned to expect that Star Trek movies are "rentals" and not movies that require the full, wide-screen cinema experience. Make an excellent movie and the word-of-mouth will draw in crowds. Yes, I saw it in a theatre, and the 10 or so other people I heard murmuring after the show said words to the affect of, "I could have waited" (for it to appear on video).
That series became pretty interesting in the last couple years and left some unfinished story lines. I would rather see movies based on that series coming up with weak plots like the one for Nemesis.
Worst. Sig. Ever.
Rick Berman's First Post-NEMESIS Interview: Future of Feature Franchise Unclear
Posted: 12:22:56 on February 04 2003
By: Steve Krutzler
Dept: Star Trek: Nemesis
In his first interview since the debacle of STAR TREK NEMESIS at the North American box office, producer Rick Berman says the future of the feature franchise is uncertain and he and the studio are not ready to jump back in immediately.
"I don't think this is like falling off a horse, and you want to jump right back on it," he told Sci-Fi Wire. "There's a theory that there was too much time [between Insurrection and Nemesis]. There's another theory that there wasn't too much time. I, along with the people at Paramount, need a few months of perspective and thinking about it to then decide what's the best thing to do next."
The exec is also cautious about explaning the film's poor performance.
"There's no way of telling what happened," Berman said. "I'm convinced that we made a very good movie, and I'm also convinced that the movie was promoted properly. I thought the trailers and the television spots were all excellent. It's easy to blame that sort of thing, but I don't think we can in this situation. I think that the competition of other films may have played some part in it, but I can't be certain of that, either. It's very, very hard to tell."
STAR TREK NEMESIS debuted in U.S. and Canadian theatres on December 13th and went on to the #2 spot in its debut weekend with $18.5 million, the lowest opening weekend gross of any STAR TREK picture. The film's domestic total currently stands well short of $50 million. 1989's STAR TREK V: THE FINAL FRONTIER was the previous record-holder for lowest domestic box office with $52 million.
Check out the original article here.
It then linked to:
ScifiWire Nemesis
Trek Film Future Unsure
Star Trek Nemesis executive producer Rick Berman told SCI FI Wire that several factors likely contributed to the film's lackluster box-office performance, and he added that the future of the film franchise remains uncertain. "There's no way of telling what happened," Berman said in an interview. "I'm convinced that we made a very good movie, and I'm also convinced that the movie was promoted properly."
Berman added, "I thought the trailers and the television spots were all excellent. It's easy to blame that sort of thing, but I don't think we can in this situation. I think that the competition of other films may have played some part in it, but I can't be certain of that, either. It's very, very hard to tell."
Berman sounded disappointed. "Obviously, you want a film to do well," he said. "You work for a long time, and you work for a long time, and if it doesn't do well, it's not fun."
Berman went on to say that he's not sure what the future will hold for the Trek film franchise. "There's a theory that there was too much time [between Insurrection and Nemesis]," he said. "There's another theory that there wasn't too much time. I, along with the people at Paramount, need a few months of perspective and thinking about it to then decide what's the best thing to do next. I don't think this is like falling off a horse, and you want to jump right back on it. But we'll see."
Nemisis was the greatest movie of the year! What better plot than to have evil mirror images of the Star Trek Crew. This idea is so deep and spiritual, that surely they deserve more credit. And what's more, the survival of Earth was at stake! It sure doesn't get more exciting or original than that I can tell you.
It's good to see Star Trek follow the quality ideas of such exciting shows as Andromeda, and StarHunters.
"I only speak the truth"
Karma: null(Mostly affected by an unassigned variable)
Nemesis tanked for the same reason that UHF did in 1989... too many other good movies for the fanbase to watch. The Two Towers was still in the theaters, the James Bond flick was playing, and so was Harry Potter. All of these movies have a good "sci-fi geek" following, so people just didn't have enough money or time to see Nemesis. That's how it was for me, I would have rather seen Two Towers multiple times than see Nemesis once.
UHF was going up against Batman and Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade in the summer of '89. Plus, it's a weird movie. But it deserves more credit than it gets!
It stopped showing in my area to soon. There were 3 movies on my list to see over xmas holidays. Harry Potter, LOTR, and Star Trek. I saw the first two as they came out first. By the time I was able to see ST it was gone. It was in the theaters for 2 weeks and then gone. No wonder it bombed! My friends and I were PISSED! I could not belive that it left that quick. The nearest theater showing it was 1-1/2 hours away. Guess I'll have to wait for it to be on DVD in 6 months now, where it will probably do real well.
Only 'flamers' flame!
Need I say more?
He is the best sailor who can steer within fewest points of the wind, and exact a motive power out of the greatest obsta
"It failed because it sucked - plain and simple. It felt like an extended episode rather than a "film" (e.g., compare it with something like LoTR)."
That doesn't explain a bad opening weekend. It 'sucking' (geez, is that the most sophisticated opinion of the movie you could muster?) would explain a sharp falloff after opening weekend.
The truth of the matter is that it didn't have a lot of people rushing to theaters to go see it. It kind of fell off the radar with all the other movies out.
Personally, I can't help but think people wanted to avoid crowds. You know those LoTR fans, casting spells and rolling dice and shit.
But I didn't see it opening weekend or soon thereafter, because Berman & Co. have been churning out so much crap lately (Voyager, Enterprise) that I did not have high expectations for the movie.
And even though I enjoyed this one, I have no particular burning desire to see another. You can't miss something if it refuses to go away -- give the franchise a rest for a while, and then people might care about seeing a new feature file.
Subscribers can see articles in the future? So what? Everyone gets to see them in the future.
In the old days, real science fiction writers wrote episodes of Star Trek. Excellent wrting made for a compelling show.
Unfortunately, since Next Generation, it seems the writing has suffered and "special effects" and a preachy political correctness has been more a focus for the producers.
Star Trek was charming because it told good stories. It hasn't in a while. No quantity of Vulcan or Borg hotties in decon showers can fix the fact that the writing has been lame for years.
Yeah yeah karma whore and all that, but I couldnt resist :)
10. After slugging down six Shirley Temple's in 10-forward, Wes stumbles to the holodeck, which he commands to "take me to hell." His broken body is later found on the empty holodeck in a pool of vomit.
9. Wesley gets gang-raped by a group of female Klingons.
8. Riker gets carried away executing an order from Picard to "knock the little snot around a bit."
7. Data catches him tossing off. Uncomprehending, he requires a detailed explanation from Wesley, who dies of embarrassment.
6. Extensive lab analysis of a green slime found on one of the control panels uncovers the fact that our favorite ensign has, once again, been picking his nose. He is summarily fired and commits suicide.
5. Wes gets gang-raped by a group of male Klingons.
4. On an earlier episode, Wes got to kiss a girl who turned into a Chewbacca-like creature. Here, she returns, and they once again get involved. (Un)fortunately, once she gets really heated, she mutates back into a wookie and forces Wesley to be her cringing sex slave. She then tears him limb from limb and eats him.
3. In a rare episode involving characters from both ST and ST:TNG, Spock attempts a Vulcan mind-meld with Wesley. Wesley's head explodes. Spock barely survives, spending the next several days scratching himself and whining.
2. Worf notices a Romulan ship on the scanners, and sends Wesley down to clean out the photon tubes. Later, someone makes a comment about the needs of the many having outweighed the needs of the few.
1. Wes gets involved in a deviant sexual practice known as "tribble stuffing," not realizing that tribbles multiply any where. Even an emergency laser enema by Dr. Crusher fails to save him
Anataka suki desu. Itsumo. Itsumademo.
Personally, I find myself enjoying the TV series more, because they have more time to develop the characters and storylines. A character can evolve over the course of a series, and threads of stories can continue to emerge over the length of the show. Movies, on the other hand, need to tell one compelling story in a short amount of time. That's also why short stories tend to translate well to movies, but novels don't.
Ummm... because it sucked?
Seriously though, it's not that hard to figure out why this movie didn't do well
Granted most of those points exist for ANY Star Trek production you can name, but we expect more in movies. Or should.
When the bad guy was cold and evil and had it in for the captain specifically I felt like I was watching The Wrath of Khan. When the Enterprise was damaged beyond belief I felt like I was watching The Wrath of Kahn. When Data downloaded his mind, I felt like I was watching The Wrath of Kahn. When Data died to save the Enterprise, I felt like I was watching the Wrath of Kahn.
So the next time I wanted to see Nemesis, I dusted off my VHS copy of The Wrath of Kahn and watched it instead. At least Spock comes back.
How dare they allude to this being the last episode of the next gen crew and have Data die.
For shame.
This is my sig. Its pathetic.
Yes, I agree. Berman fell victim to one of the classic blunders.
The most famous, of course, is never get involved in a bidding war with Dreamworks.
But only SLIGHTLY less well known is this:
Never go in 5 days ahead of LORD OF THE RINGS when the franchise is on the line!
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!
Ha ha ha ha --
Why did it tank? Well pretty much all the exciting parts were in the previews, in fact I thought the previews were better then the movie after I saw it. The movie felt rushed, and pieces of the plot just seemed absent. Ok, wedding with Riker, that was what a whole five mins when they have been working on that relationship since the original series? The whole he's your clone thing, face your demons was really kinda lame IMHO. I had a hard time believing that this was penned by a 'fan' of the series who knows Star Trek inside and out. When we left the theater it was like I having watched a lame episode of the series on TV (which happened from time to time). For it to be a final chapter in the movie series (ya right) it went out with a wimper and not a bang. But its not just this movie, the last couple have felt incomplete and rushed. The last Trek movie that I felt was really well done was 'First Contact'. ah well, my 2 cents.
Ever since Star Trek VI, each movie has had less character advancement, plot, etc. than a typical episode of TNG, and any episode of DS9.
I think what may be going on is "going for the big score" as opposed to "targeting the geeks". When you're doing a weekly series, you can target a higher IQ / continuity awareness / suspension of disbelief because you know your base. When you produce a major film, you necessarily (because of a greater budget) try to bring in a larger audience, so you are inclined to lower the bar for the audience.
This doesn't explain Enterprise, which is dismal, nor does it explain Star Trek II, which is both the greatest movie success (whether it pulled the biggest box office or not) and HEAVILY dependent on continuity, IQ, suspension of disbelief.
I liked Nemesis, it's just that we've done 4 movies on Picard and Data now, and that vein is dry. Unlike TOS, TNG was SUPPOSED to be much more balanced with respect to the entire cast. Are you telling me that a movie with Worf as the central character wouldn't work? I think it's worth a try.
If your bitterest enemies are people who hack the heads off civilians, then I would say you're doing something right.
What? There was a new Star Trek movie?
Business News and Resources: www.usasource.net
Nothing is so smiple that it can't get screwed up.
Man, do I feel dumb. I don't even remember there being a Star Trek movie out over Christmas. Weird. They apparently only marketed it in media I don't pay attention to. Or maybe it's just the fact that there have been so many Star Trek movies that it just wasn't possible for my subconcious to register "Nemesis" as having an existence of it's own. Kind of like James Bond movies. My brain doesn't seem to be able to register the existence of new episodes of that series either. I'm just too damn old to waste brain cells trying to keep track of a dozen different Bond or ST flicks.
I think Rick Berman not knowing why the movie tanked is pretty much the reason it tanked. If the producer of a movie is so out of touch with an established fan base that he can't see why they didn't flock to see the movie, then perhaps it is time for somebody who does understand the fans and the story to take the lead.
I like Star Trek, and now that it has found its feet a bit I am enjoying Enterprise (though I still don't know all of the characters' names), and I was planning on seeing Nemesis. But, after friends who are big Trek fans came back and told me not to bother, or catch it on DVD, I really lost all interest.
... and I had no compulsion to see this movie. It was a TV show wrapped in the typical hollywood "Blockbuster" action-plot-effects formula. Bad combo. Star Trek II didn't have effects all that spectacular, but goddamnit, it had character development and dialogue and suspense and tragedy. You know, things that make a good story regardless of medium.
Know what the next ST Movie I'd like to see is? An epic-length, well-written, character-driven drama (with some action) in the DS9 branch of the Star Trek universe, with special attention paid to the complex (and Hard SF) relationship between species, cultures, and individuals that defined that show. Maybe even make it dangerous to be R-rated. THAT would be different, and interesting.
---If you can't trust a nerd, who can you trust?
There needs to be some life breathed into the franchize. Right now, it seems to be on artificial respiration. Who, or what, can breath life into Star Trek? I have no answer.
Also, the reason, I didn't go see the movie, is that I thought the previews looked like an action movie, not a trek movie. And I'm not going to take my kids to see it when it shows sexual action in the previews.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"First things first -- but not necessarily in that order"
-- The Doctor, "Doctor
to be honest by the end of the movie you wish they were all dead.
Is there any other character from TNG (other than maybe Data) that had the potential for a more interesting future than that of Wesley!?!? He apparently had the ability to become a "Traveler," which opens up a ton of possibilities. Wil Wheaton is a decent actor and there's no reason to think a 20 something Wesley would be anything like a teen Wesley. I think Berman has screwed the pooch by not exploting the Wesley character in the TNG movies.
Ruger
I desribed the film to my friends thus:
"Like Star Trek 2. Only crap."
Nemesis is a good movie, it got too much bad press though. Especialy from respected news sites such as cnn. Imagine my suprise when i could read in big fat letters "NEMESIS SUX!!!" on cnn.com.(and this was well before the premiere) It's like they allready decided to bring it to the ground well before it was ever made. It won't even have a premiere here i sweden untill atleast this summer, if ever. And they have the nerve calling harry potter a good movie.
- "There is nothing quite like an ineffective solution to an nonexistant problem"
I think I'm probably a good example of why it tanked, whether it was good or not. Before this article popped up I had honestly forgotten that it existed. Now, I liked a lot of TNG fine, I've certainly seen most of the episodes at least a couple of times, and I saw the previous TNG movies, although I wasn't thrilled by either. It came out, I thought, oh, new Star Trek movie, I'd see that. But there was a lot of other stuff out that came higher on the list, I had no sense from the very light media coverage of what the movie was about, and the next thing it had disappeared and I forgot all about it. Maybe they got the idea that TNG fans are a captive audience and all they have to do is release the thing and sit back, maybe they were worried about it tanking and did the usual self-fulfilling low promotion thing. Its presence simply failed to make a sufficient impression on me, so it's probably destined to become a non-new-release rental some time in the future.
It Is the Nature of Information to Transgress Artificial Boundaries
2) The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers 3) Star Wars Episode II IMAX
Now, I know Berman is thick, but to ask this question and to wonder why it happened outdoes any of the insipid things he's done since Gene's death. Paramount opened the movie smack-dab in the middle of two major, highly anticipated openings and one major "event" release (I think AOTC IMAX made more than Nemesis did, even). Berman needs to be replaced with someone who has a strong sense of SF and storytelling. J. Michael Straczynski and Harlan Ellison would be a great team to take on the franchise.
That said, I found Nemesis to be fairly strong. My expectations were low when I went in, but I was pleasantly surprised by the movie. I think it sets up a Star Trek XI that could, truly, be a massive hit (or mess), involving the TOS, TNG, DS9 and Voyager crews and could tie up the Romulan thread (especially considering that Scotty is still tooling around out there and Spock is still on Romulus!).
SPOILERS BELOW
(in case you haven't seen it yet)
It didn't fail because they killed Data. It failed because they killed Data, and five seconds later, replaced him with stupid Data (aka B4).
In ST II, when Spock was killed off, we were given a grieving period, and treated to a respectful funeral. Kirk told us that Spock was the most human person he'd ever known, etc. In this movie, Data is gone, we get not even ten seconds of crying, and Picard is talking to stupid Data, and it's like Data was never gone.
They cheapened his death so much that it wasn't even funny.
Not to mention that they pretty much threw out every tenet of Star Trek TNG (no beaming through shields, etc.), and it just didn't work. Also, absolutely no attempt was made to pay attention to physics! When two ships crash into each other in space, they would each move back... they don't go through each other like that!! There would have to be something behind the ships to force them into each other, or they would both have to have their engines going.
libertarianswag.com
10 tips for living in the 24th century...
1. Never get a cabin in the front of the saucer section
2. Always carry a knife. You never know when the other guy will have a knife.
3. If you are in a hurry, the ventilation ducts in the walls of the ship are large enough to drive a tank through.
4. They might be full of aliens, though.
5. Ignore Counselor Troi. She may just be having her period.
6. Anyone who looks remotely like you is probably your evil twin, a robot, or both, and should not be trusted.
7. There is no complicated political scenario so complex that it cannot be resolved by two men beating the crap out of eachother followed by a giant explosion.
8. If anything remotely interesting happens on a nearby planet, take the entire command crew to investigate, even if it means leaving the ship's janitor in command of a multi-billion dollar starship.
9. Anything with lots of veins showing is probably not very nice.
10. Never wear a red shirt.
If I missed any cliches, rest assured Nemesis didn't.
I was a trekkie when younger - also a star wars fan. I am much less the 2 now, even though sci fi and sci fantasy still capture my interest.
Why? Well, it isn't the characters, but most definately is the plot. Star Trek lacks history. It had it with TOS and TNG. Technology had advanced, and we could see that. Story lines were still based on the premise that people and aliens have feelings and personal demons to battle.
With the advent of DS9 and Voyager, Star Trek left the historical line and issues between peoples and personal demons for outrageous story lines that included the borg chasing but never defeating a small ship in the middle of no where- neglecting the history of the borg as almost undefeatable. And a space station of mixed people. So much potential in that series, but it lost because they could not create enough internal issue stories.
Star Wars had a huge following not only because of its ground breaking fx, but also because it had history. 1000 years of jedi rule. Empire that was how old? Jedi master was how old? Clone wars? Obi Wan knew Vader before The Fall? History was loud in the ears of Star Wars fans. I cared less for the post ROTJ books. I wanted more history. It was finally granted- and I was sickened.
I think another area is culture. Star Trek was a 'perfect culture' that worked well in TNG, and was still rough and being learned in TOS. But there was culture. It was neglected in the newer series. Again, DS9 had the opportunity, but the ball was dropped in favor of a huge war that left me thinking 'eh'.
I loved the culture of star wars- so many peoples, and yet corruption, love, hate, revenge, politics, all together loosely in a republic and empire. It works for me.
I think that the rules were perverted so severely in Star Trek that it wasn't funny. Suddenly in one episode the tachyon field can be adjusted to deflet energy fields, while in the next they can't stop weapons from smashing the shields to '12%' and 'surrender'. Star Wars allowed for everyone to be able to die- and the heroes are either gifted or lucky- not suddenly supremely good at manipulating technologies and even nature.
Time travel and cloaking devices should go. Why does it work here, but not there. Suddenly we can track a cloaked ship, but next time we are completly caught off guard. I understand the element of surprise, but people, come on.
Rick, Star Trek is dying because you neglected what made it great. Sure, some story lines were campy, but until the end of TNG, it worked. Culture, history were enough to keep the story fresh. But you trashed those along with technology and left it utterly unwatchable.
They stuck me in an institution, said it was the only solution, to...protect me from the enemy, myself
Wesley suggests to `Q' that Q might stand for Queer. The all-powerful being takes offense, turns Wesley into a giant testicle and hits him with a hammer, thus extinguishing him in the most painful way possible.
Magnus.
Clearly, the only way for the Star Trek series to get itself out of this rut (the only way it's EVER gotten itself out of any rut) is to bring back an old character and make him evil! Do I mean evil Khan? Evil Kirk? Evil Spock's brother? Evil Lor? No! I'm talking about Evil Wil!
After years of being abandoned at the academy and getting dumped in trash cans and toilet swirlies, Wil wants nothing more than for Captain Picard to grovel at his feet as he gives him the galaxy's worst wedgie! "Ha ha ha! That's right Picard! Feel my pain! You could have been a father figure to me, but you kicked me off your ship!" In a shocking twist, Wesley's own mother shoots him with a phaser.
"Et tu Mother?"
"You know, I never like that little brat anyway."
The only thing sadder than Nemisis will be the lackluster number of posts on Slashdot about the movie that no one went and saw.
_____________
Too many screenwriters only know SF as film & TV...you need a good SF writer to create a story, and help on the script.Too may cycles of recycling has made the ST universe boring...
ttyl
Farrell
CAN-CON 2019 - Ottawa's only book oriented Science Fiction Convention! October 18-20, Sheraton Hotel, Ottawa, Canada h
Ask Slashdot why Nemesis failed. You just know you'll get a ton of insightful and intelligent answers out of a question like that.
I got no indication that the poster was trying to make a joke. I think Paramount, Berman and Braga would do well to listen to the fans for a change instead of ramming standard sci-fi with the Trek label slapped on down our throats. The size and imagination of the Trek fanbase is legendary. There is TONS of free information out there for them to consider. Obviously, the studio wouldn't want to take some fanboy's idea verbatim or even hire fans to provide input. All they would have to do is cruise a few forums and get an idea what the fans want. Nemesis is a classic example of what happens when a studio is completely out of touch with their fans and thinks they can figure out what the fans want more than the fans themselves.
It doesn't have to be slashdot. There are plenty of free forums where the so-called creative talent behind the Trek franchise could go cruising for inspiration and insightful analysis. After 30+ years of Trek, there's really no excuse for them the studio to get it wrong.
GMD
watch this
Forget them ole Next Gen'rs, that Starship Exeter movie had better acting and a superior plot.
Seriously, I enjoyed watching that fan-based production as much as I enjoyed Nemesis. They both sucked equally and one cost a lot less to make.
I only mod up parents of "mod parent up" posts...
1. Sex: Nobody wants to see any of the old flabby asses of TNG crew anymore. They are too old. Get a new sexxy crew if you want to direct a porno.
2. Crazy Psychic Sex: Even worse, some guy sees a girl for the first time and has psychic sex with her. Doesn't make a good plot.
3. Buggys (aka toys): Ok, must they introduce a new toy in every movie? I don't think that makes sense.
4. Obvious plot continuations: Data will return, at least with spock you had to guess.
5. No character development: Picard's clone wasn't developed very well. I felt nothing for him. The sex scenes should to have been cut and turned into scenes where this character was developed. Also, the exploration of 'would Picard turned out like this if he were raised in a death camp.' Was weak and not very thought provoking.
As a fan of the Star Trek OTS movie franchise, here's some suggestions to Mr. Berman and how to make Trek better. Figure out the characters. The best OTS Trek moments came from knowing the characters well and seeing how they behaved in unique situations. The interaction between Kirk, Spock and McCoy was priceless. You have some pretty good characters in Next Gen. Re-familiarize yourself with them and how they interact and make a plot that is based around characters, not "let's blow some crap up and chase a villain". Get a hold of Nicholas Meyers and pick his brain. Maybe he will suggest to you, watch all the Next Gen Trek episodes in a marathon sitting and figure out some plot themes and arcs that span the series. You also have a really great actor in the form of Patrick Stewart. Give him something worthy of his talents other than shooting a laser gun. For example, in Nemesis, why didn't you let Stewart play Shinzon? He was a clone, right? You could have had some great acting moments there, plus a little nod to the Original Series "Good Kirk Bad Kirk" parallel universe episode. Lastly, I dread seeing a Deep Space Nine or Voyager Movie. Your last great hope would be to ring Nicholas Meyers and see if he has any decent ideas. If not, let it end.
The TNG Universe (and Enterprise) is formulaic, over-produced, slick to the point of featurelessness, and so politically correct it is painful to watch.
In other words, it sucks. I have not seen it; nothing in the previews gave me any sense as to why I'd want to see it.
I've been watching Trek since the original series. The original was fun, quirky, politically-incorrect for its time, and just plain fun. The dynamic of Kirk-McCoy-Spock was fun and stimulating.
TNG started off good, and sank into mediocrity, boring characters, and political correctness. The Federation had gone from being an adventure to being a boring bureaucracy filled with faceless people who remind me of white bread. DS9 had some good moments, most of which were lost in Voyager and the movies. Where is the passion, the joy of exploration, the diversity of cultures? Bah, Berman's Trek is mostly about destroying any sense of individuality or culture or faith or initiative.
Enterprise is an example of everything that is wrong with Trek. These are not bold adventurers; they are simpering fools who wouldn't last fiv minutes in the universe of Kirk and Spock. The only character I have any fondness for is the Chief Engineer, who exudes some personality (when he's allowed to).
I do not want to live in the Star Trek envisioned by Berman and Braga; in my opinion, they destroyed the series with blandness.
All about me
There seems to be this consistent need to preserve everything from film to film; plots get wrapped up too neatly at the end. At least at the end of Star Trek 2, it looked like Spock bought it.
Babylon 5 understood this. You never could be sure at the beginning of each episode and season whether the characters were going to pull through, as it seems they almost always do in the Star Trek films. You know they're going to win. That's why I'm sick of it.
They blew an incredible opportunity with Voyager. Wouldn't it have been interesting if Voyager returned home only to find the earth completely assimilated by The Borg and the entire Federation being decimated? Or maybe just have the Borg follow them home, to add a bitter note to their return?
What about a Star Trek film which details the birth/genesis of The Borg - how they came to be? Star Trek films also have got to start killing characters and *losing* sometimes.
And they really have to get a grip on their incessant need for cute humor. Humor once in a great while is fine, but they seem to really want to pack that into movies, and I'm just not interested in that. When I watch Star Trek, I want *epic* struggles. I want multilayered plots with twists and turns and powerful moral challenges (Picard trying to get his reign on his hatred of The Borg is the kind of thing I'm talking about.)
The characters are too perfect, and they are too at the center of the Star Trek universe. The emotion chip for Data was one of the stupidest ideas ever; they completely ruined his character.
I'm speaking generally of all of the Star Trek movies of course. Trek needs less action, and more cerebral plots. The shiny, bright Federation needs fascist factions and political problems within. More espionage, and most importantly - the *death* of some of the main characters. I want to
It's always disappointing watching Star Trek because I know going in everything's going to end up fine. It didn't at the end of Star Trek 2, and Kirk lost his shit and let the hatred boil, adding a rough, imperfect edge to his character. No wonder that movie is most peoples' favorites.
I'm just tired of the perfectly lit, wall-to-wall carpeted, Dudley Do-Right shit that makes up Star Trek films. I would hope the future would be partly that, but that should stand in contrast and struggle against darkness, greed, hatred, and fascism.
I want to see The Borg infilitrate the federation and eventually earth. I want to see a Star Trek movie end with a helpless crew watching as Earth or Vulcan is assimilated.
I want to see starships blowing up, and captains of them being pushed to the edge and sometimes losing it and acting immorrally.
I want to see guerilla rebels resisting the Federation like the Maquis. And I want to be on their side.
I want to see characters die. I want to see an end to all time travel plots, and want to see more plots that - as on Enterprise - require the characters to use cunning rather than tech to get out of scrapes.
I want to see no more hippie political crap like in Star Trek IV. I wouldn't mind them dealing with political issues we have not yet faced, but this whole Trek-as-metaphor-for-present-social problems stuff is played out; it was played out after the first series where they dealt with all of the 60s problems like race, space hippies, etc. Star Trek 4 was a travesty.
I want to see more darkness and less humor. All of this will make the victories of the main characters that much more interesting to watch, rather than just assuming that they'll triumph. Movies need to be treated as serials; plots need to continue from movie to movie and they have to leave us hanging. I don't want to see it all wrapped up at the end of the movie. That just ruins is and wrecks the tension. "Oh who cares that they're hanging off of a precipice, we know that can't be the end; there's still 17 minutes left to the movie."
Most or all of this applies to the television series as well.
Watching Star Trek in any form is an infuriating thing; if you're a hardcore fan, you grit your teeth and get through it for some reason; but my teeth have been ground down to powder. Berman needs to sit down and watch Babylon 5, 2001: A Space Odyssey, Space: Above and Beyond, and get some ideas.
A quote from his Nemesis review:
" think it is time for "Star Trek" to make a mighty leap forward another 1,000 years into the future, to a time when starships do not look like rides in a 1970s amusement arcade, when aliens do not look like humans with funny foreheads, and when wonder, astonishment and literacy are permitted back into the series. Star Trek was kind of terrific once, but now it is a copy of a copy of a copy."
I think you need to review your physics. Two objects colliding in an inelastic collision will do what the movie showed. The hulls buckled under the inertia of the two masses colliding.
The hulls of the ships aren't like pool balls, but like planes. When two planes collide, they don't bounce off each other.
Easy. No nudity. They had it all setup with the betazoid wedding mumbo jumbo, then left you hanging worse than a nervous virgin.
You shouldn't frustrate geeks like that.
They have a tremendous selection of fresh juices
That doesn't explain a bad opening weekend.
Sure it does - it stunk so badly, people on the east coast were diving out of theatres and calling ahead to pre-warn people in line out west. Not to mention Sat/Sun (assuming "weekend" includes Friday night) being down due to people reading reactions online from the previous night's viewings.
The truth of the matter is that it didn't have a lot of people rushing to theaters to go see it. It kind of fell off the radar with all the other movies out.
Nice theory, but then you'd expect it to pick up over time as people get round to viewing it. Which they patently haven't done.
Nae bother
Well he obviously survives or is brought back somehow.
If you watch the last ST:TNG episode, "All Good Things..." Picard is jumping between the present, past and the future. In the future Data is alive and well other than the rediculously overdone grey streak on one half of his head.
So how would Data survive? Many ways!
- Q could bring him back easilly.
- Time travel, after all this is Sci-Fi
- Beamed out by the other Romulan ships in the area and help captive for a time for study.
- Since he uploaded himself to B4 (think Spock grabbing McCoy's head and saying "Remember!") they could potentially rebuild Data and reload him from the image stored in B4. (I can just see "Star Trek, Search for Data!")
- I suppose even the nanites which Wesley created in one of the episodes could stumble upon the wreckage and rebuild him from vaporized particles.
- And the most likely and to revive him: Random annoying Star Trek plot device.
--Won't that be grand? Computers and the programs will start thinking and the people will stop. - Dr. Walter Gibbs
The pure tribal satisfaction of seeing our fellow Slashdotnik is a movie would have to count for something.
They are not kidding about waiting too long... Way too long, and it damaged the excitement. Star Trek is first and foremost a television show. It is a serial adventure. This is not like Star Wars, you expect a quick succession of episodes. Also the fact that Next Generation has been off the air for quite a while has, I think diminished some of that excitement and surprise that you expect of any new episode, especially one for the movies. Also the cast is getting older and are still locked into their roles of many years, unchanged. I think these factors and others contributed to the poor turn-out of Nemesis. Then, when you top that with a lackluster script and a main character (Picard's clone) who I found uninteresting, unrealistically motivated and capable of more than I think is possible, like taking over the whole Romulan Star Empire, it's even worse. The script broke no new ground. It absolutely re-hashed old ideas and I thought it pandered to what they thought fans would like and accept. They made a mistake of hiring a screen writer who was too much of a Star Trek fan and a director who was not enough of one. The movie did not advance anything or put a new twist on anything enough to make you want more and come back for another.
I guess he didn't watch it.
A clever person solves a problem. A wise person avoids it. -- Einstein
I thought it had a strong start, but immediately started going down the crapper with the detection of the positronic signals systems away.
The dune buggy sequence was mildly exciting, but entirely retarded. Brent Spiner and Stewart did good work throughout the film, but the rest of the cast was all over the place.
The Remans were a mistake, and Shazam or Shimano or Shinzon, whatever you call him, was a pathetic character, even if the acting was OK. And why didn't the Romulans just kill the stupid little kid when they were through with him. You can't tell me they were hesitant to kill a cloned human out of ethical reasons.
The animosity between Riker and the head Reman was poorly contrived, played up, and had about as much suspense as Discover Magazine's Letters to the Editor section. The movie had good effects, some strong acting, and some good action, but it failed BIG time in the realm of plot and character development.
"Star Trek Nemesis" rightly should have been called "Star Trek: Attack of the Clones" or "Star Trek: The Not-Quite Wrath of Not-Quite Khan".
"The words of the prophets are written on the Slashdot walls."
It didn't fail because they killed Data.
No they didn't. It's all an illusion.I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
I've been a Trek fan for over 25 years. I do love the TV shows but the movies are lacking. I think we've all had enough of Enterprise being 'the only ship that can save/defeat/whatever whoever.
The focus needs to change. What I would like to see for the next movie is an in-depth account of the final battle with the Dominion. They could show the leadup and the actual battle from all sides (Federation, Klingon, Romulan, Cardasian, etc.).
Get away from the plodding one-on-one battles and do a full engagement.
The GEEK shall inherit the earth...
The reason they have a franchise in the first place is because there is a long history of positive, intelligent writing. The writing on the latest installment could as well have been for a TV special. Heck, they produce a script a week for the TV show. Did they spend a week or two working on the movie script?
The producers need to do something better to pull movie audiences in. Solicit top-quality writers and spend the time and money to produce an original, engaging, and intelligent script that is not simply a formulaic, rehashed TV episode, then surround it with top-quality production values, and audiences will return.
If they continue to try to extract profits by minimizing cost and effort in the short term, they will find their franchise dwindling and will end up sacrificing profits in the long term.
-- My choice of computing platform is a symbol of my individuality and belief in personal freedom.
Funny. I'm in the same boat, and there are others in the thread who said the same thing. We're Star Trek fans and we've all decided, simultaneously, to give up.
That's not necessarily the reason the movie tanked. We're not really its core audience anymore. They've been trying to make it more mainstream for some time. My guess is that the mainstream heard, "Well, if the Trekkies aren't going to see it, why should we?"
That's not the media reviews. That's their friends. I'm the biggest Trekkie of my group. If I'd gone, others would have come.
Why did we all give up simultaneously? I think it's a combination of sub-par TNG movies and the sub-par Voyager and Enterprise series. When there were only 79 episodes of TOS, you _had_ to see the movies: you'd seen everything else. You even had to see Trek V. But if you gave up after Voyager, as I did, and never got into Enterprise, you're already out of the loop. It's not that you're afraid you won't get it. It's that you no longer have that drive to see 100% of Star Trek.
I don't think that LotR at the same time was the problem. If it had been very good, or if we were all still dedicated fans, we'd have made time. We weren't spending that time watching LotR again. We were doing something else, out of the theaters entirely.
I don't believe the Trek franchise can be salvaged. Certainly not as long as Berman doesn't understand why the last one tanked. But even if he did, he's lost an awful lot of potential fan base. He might be better off starting a new series of his own.
He could turn it over to the Deep Space 9 crew instead. The series didn't develop the cult that TOS did, but it did have a devoted following. They too would have a hard time digging out of the hole the franchise has dug itself, but they've got the best chance.
If not that, then just let it rest. I loved the series, but none of the other things I love are immortal. Someday I will find something new to love; indeed, I already have. I will remember Star Trek fondly, and that means I probably won't see Nemesis until I catch it, wistfully, on DVD, and remember better days.
"The Search for Lost Data"
Get Symantec/Norton to underwrite it.
In the SAME exact way that Spock died. In fact, much of that (piece of crap) Nemesis movie was directly ripped off from previous movies and older episodes (which I haven't even watched in about 10 years, and I STILL saw all kinds of old episode rip-offs)
Berman should just be told, "You can't shine shit."
Also, expect Data to make a comeback (if ever they make more of this garbage); he downloaded himself into someone else before he died (just like Spock; how original)
"It's overkill, of course. But you can never have too much overkill." - Anonymous Slashdot Coward
Babylon 5.
Babylon 5 showed audiences that they can expect a long story arc to keep their interest in a show. DS9 almost had it. Andromeda could have had it but through it away. Enterprise doesn't even come close, and the films just can't have that kind of plot line in only 2 hours. Sci-Fi traditionally appeals to the higher intellectual bracket, but most modern TV and Film Sci-Fi seems to have been written by soap-opera writters. Why?
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Ok people...Forget the future. Between the actions of Kirk and Picard and to an extent Sisko, the future is bright and shiny and getting brighter and brighter as time goes on. Borg are not as great a threat as they once were, Klingons are allies, Romulans are now talking to us, Dominion is not a threat, the cardassians are worse than the bajorans were. There's nothing left to 'darken the future'
What needs to be done if you want movies is to cover things in the ST Past. The Romulan war, the first war with the klingons...all sorts of things that can be done.
If the authors of the Star Trek Novels can keep putting out good stuff, there has to be something that the scriptwriters can bring to a big screen.
Or the best idea of all...
Give it a rest for another 15 years, keep it in syndication, THEN come out with stuff after the new blood gets behind the wheel.
You know...kinda like what happened with ST:TNG.
Phoenix
-- Wiccan Army, 13th Airborne Division "We will not fly silently into the night"
One reason why Trek is taking is because the writers are afraid to take chances with the characters. Since the TNG movies began - the crew of the enterprise has been stagnant. Nobody's been introduced, nobody has died, nobody's even been promoted (until this outing).
Why should I care about the the latest "danger" if I know they'll just hit the reset button at the end of the movie? They couldn't even kill off a main character this time without making up some horribly improbable way to bring him back from the dead.
If you make a really good movie, people will show up next time.
If you make a really good movie and then a really bad movie, people will show up at least one more time. (Example: STAR TREKs IV, V, and VI.)
If you make a mediocre movie, fewer people will show up next time. (To some degree, a really bad movie is less harmful, since people hope it's a fluke, and the film makers might try harder afterwards.) Two in a row, even more so.
If you make a movie where I have to turn my brain off in order to ignore the inconsistencies -- if you think shiny things and loud noises are enough to keep me in my seat -- somebody may show up next time, but it won't be me.
Stupid job ads, weird spam, occasional insight at
Instead of taking what was in the box, Star Trek should have stuck with the red snapper. Verrrry tasty!
(2) is an insult to the best of the series. Who could forget "The Best of Both Worlds" (Season 3 finale / Season 4 premiere), "Yesterday's Enterprise" (middle of Season 3) or "Cause and Effect" (middle of Season 5)?
Remember when the Borg were actually scary? When the crew didn't have to blow up the ship/have Data swear/have every character do something memorable? When they actually had decent SF plots ("Cause and Effect", "The Inner Light") instead of trying to pretend it was a non-geeky action movie? See what happens when you forsake me, Berman! I said you'd come crawling back, and now you have!
Oh, the show had its stinkers, too, but I think it had a much, much higher hit rate than the movies have. I'm just going to pretend that they never mentioned the Borg after "Descent", and let them go gracefully.
--grendel drago
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
Maybe if there's a next movie episode they could slip through a wormhole into an alternate universe where all spaceships don't fly "right side up" in space. Just think of the possibilities in a reality with an extra, third dimension!
"with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
I think the movie failed because it wasn't satisfying, nor it it seem to make much sense.
And no, I'm not talking the dumber-then-hell physics nonsense that usually permeates ST. I'm talking about the plot.
Cuts. Check IMDB for the movie's quotes. How many of those were actually in the movie? The cut out a lot of background stuff that explained why this stuff was happening, and what the character's motivations were.
For instance: That Romulan commander (woman). At first she appears she's going to be a toady for Shinzan. She was asking that Romulan admiral some pointed questions after the big ship goes to zap Earth, like she was trying to see if the admiral was going to betray Shinzan. Then, all of a sudden, she's betraying Shinzan? What? Why did she change her mind? Did we learn enough about her character to understand why she might change her mind?
Over and over the point of the movie is that people are good when they aspire to be better than themselves. That's what is supposed to make Data better than B4. It's a fine sentiment, but where is it actually shown in the movie? Saying it is fine for a book or something. But you've got to have it be a central part of the movie, or it is just a plattitude.
And how did Deanna learn to fight back against Shinzan and the Chancellor? Why didn't she do that the first time?
Oh yeah, and as for physics... Ships with impulse drive can go like 0.99c. If you decide to ram another ship, you're going to end up with a big cloud of plasma and debris, not some lame "crunch".
And the cloaking... why couldn't the Enterprise's brilliant engineers program the weapons to shoot right back at anything shooting at the ship? It doesn't matter if the Romulan ship is cloaked, it's shooting you right now! Right over there! Sheesh.
You are wrong - and right...
Try this little experiment:
Chain yourself to a locomotive with tinfoil in a free fall environment. Now, back up (fire your engines) and you will move away from the locomotive and the tinfoil will break. The locomotive will not move.
It is entirely within the realm of possibility that either event could have taken place - depending on how 'attached' they were from the impact and how much mass is involved on either ship.
If the attachment of interconnecting metal was strong enough to move the mass of the Enterprise, then it would have remained attached. If, on the other hand, the interconnecting metal was not strong enough to move the mass of the Enterprise, it would break at some point - as we saw in the movie.
Lodragan Draoidh
The more you explain it, the more I don't understand it. - Mark Twain
Rick Berman needs to go. Rick Berman has needed to go for a very, very long time. Under Rick Berman Star Trek went from cutting-edge Sci-Fi to recycled plots and characters. The most refreshing thing Berman did was make Captain Janeway a woman, which would have been interesting were there not already female admirals. The most exciting thing Berman has done with Star Trek is cheesy sexual innuendo on "Enterprise;" other television shows broke that barrier in the 1980s.
Star Trek fans have been sick of Berman for over a decade. His stewardship has done nothing but run Star Trek shows and films into the ground while Paramount marketing made it a commodity. Perhaps the failure of Nemesis will finally wake up Paramount and Rick Berman will get the boot.
And Bowie J. Poag Doesn't Care Why Nemesis Tanked.
Bowie J. Poag
It didn't matter how good they made it; thanks to the string of bad movies before it, the characters had completely lost credibility by the time they got to Nemesis.
:(
See, the big thing about the Next Generation series is that a lot of people really felt for the characters. They all had their own individual battles or things that made things difficult for them, even though this was supposed to be a utopian future. The ones that come to mind immediately are Data, who struggled to be human, and Geordi, who had no natural vision. And Picard, of course, with the Borg. (And his other little quirks..)
So instead of seeing some real character development over those first few movies, with each of them struggling with their impediments or against them, and triumphing over them, which is what being a hero's all about, we see them getting them handed to them deus ex machina. LaForge--bam--has these newfangled eyes. Data--bam--emotion chip got fixed. Picard... is a special case; I'll get to him in a minute.
Data, they should've done the following; stretched out the problems he had with his emotion chip. We see him responding poorly to it when he first gets it, but very quickly he overcomes this--and here's the kicker--in such a way that the audience never actually sees him overcome it. We, the audience, don't get to see this happen, and thus, we aren't able to really root for him. He has many minor struggles, but we never really see the big one, as it were.
So when Data dies in Nemesis, he's no longer the same entity we know and love; we can't even tell what emotions he's feeling in a lot of those scenes where he finds B4, because we feel no empathy for this feeling Data. To the audience, he's totally different. So when he goes bye-bye, we feel a sense of loss, but not because Data overcame all and gave of himself, but because the writers took our Data from us, and never let us get to know him before kicking him out the airlock.
LaForge, I don't really know what to say.. there just should've been more to his ocular upgrade. It just happens too quickly, and without cost.
Worf---What the heck is he doing there!?!? The fact that he's there, doing the same old job, just screams TV episode to everyone in the audience. Especially after all that he went through in DS9, regaining the respect of his fellow Klingons... to treat him like the Worf from TNG is just unacceptable.
Finally, the biggie; Picard. He's the one character that you've admired through the whole series. You sympathized with his problems with talking to kids. (Because he had to tell Wesley his father was dead.) You respected him because he was the voice of reason in times of war, conflict, strife. He's been the source of nobility in times of uncertainty. And you sympathized with him when he personally experienced what it was like to have his humanity ripped away from him by the Borg, and cried with him as he struggled to regain something of that humanity from his brother.
Then the movies started.
Generations started off the work on him by throwing him into the Nexus, and having him meet up with Kirk for some good 'ole fashuned cowboy-style fun. Okay... so it's his first movie in this role... but still, they managed to completely ruin the Guinan/Picard dynamic, and kill off his family. The former wrecked a very delicate and interesting relationship between the two; the latter destroyed something about the nobility of the man--from here-on he's lost something of his humanity, of his nobility, that his brother was providing him. Now, he just fights for the federation; his links to the average man have been severed, and he's now just another member of the military arm of the federation. This is a sad turn of events.
Next comes First Contact. One word; borg queen. Whaaaaaa...?? Okay, if it, like, explained something about why the borg were doing what they were doing, or gave us some better piece of the bigger puzzle, then okay. Instead, she's just the new voice for the borg, who has the hots for Picard. (Huh???) And Data. (Double huh????) Other than that and the fact that it's a time travel plot, though, it was the most credible of all the movies.
Then came Insurrection, and Picard's been reduced yet again. Now he's off on some planet playing hokey mind-magic... I think everyone's starting to suspect by now that Picard's really off his rocker. First his family's gone, then this borg queen shows up again, and now this mind-magic fountain of youth crap he's playing with some old hag....!?!? It's just ludicrous..! Remember how he cried after Best of Both Worlds? That's what we needed to see; him struggling with what he's lost, and trying to build on what he's gained, and instead we get.. this?!?
Why Nemesis failed is because Picard was no longer the emotionally strong man he was in the series--and yet they pretend he still is. They've torn away at what makes him tick so much that to have him act like none of this ever happened--or that he came to grips with it all while we weren't looking, and hey, no biggie, nothing changed as a result--is just insulting the audience.
So when you see Picard saying crap throw-away lines that use the words "unsafe velocities" or you see him laughing like a crazy man on the desert planet, so at ease with himself that it's beyond belief, you just can't help but realize that this isn't the same man from the series, or even the movies. This is someone completely different, who has more in common with someone like Storm from X-Men. ("Know what happens when a toad gets hit by lightening?") And that just plain sucks.
I'm not even going to bother going into Riker, Troi, Crusher, or anyone else at this point because they haven't been the focus for any of these movies anyways. The problem with the movies for TNG has been that they've just destroyed the characters we've cared about too completely.. and any time they spend on any of the other characters would certainly finish the rest of 'em off.
Berman, I hope you're reading this..
1. Lose the Political Correctness. Seriously. We don't appreciate being preached to. We watch Star Trek for the science fiction, not to have some leftist Californians tell us how great their sensibilities are. I stopped watching Enterprise in the middle of the first season for this reason (go Farscape!!)
2. Plot holes suck. I saw Nemesis with some friends of mine. After it was over, the most rabid Trekkie in the group announced, "It never happened. I never saw it." Yes, it is fiction, but that doesn't mean we won't be angry if your writers completely destroy our ability to suspend our disbelief. Worf, as a member of the crew? How did this happen? Wasn't crusher with the Traveler? And why put him in at all, if he doesn't even have any lines? We don't need a label telling us what garbage is; our noses can detect it just fine.
3. Idiotic notions. How many times have we heard this line: "You're the only ship in the area..." I'm starting to get the impression that there is only one ship in the entire Federation.
4. Terminal pacifism. Sit up, get the wax out of your ears, and listen up: people want to see the Federation kick A$$. A lot of us are tired of the "Oh, but we can't possibly hurt anyone" attitude. If the Federation was run by the USA, believe me, each ship would be loaded for bear with the biggest, baddest, nastiest weapons and gizmos imaginable. A lot of us on the east coast have thicker skins, so spare us the pacifism. Ever heard of Darwinism? The Federation would have been annihilated by now, and good riddance.
5. Two (what am I saying?) ONE-dimensional characters. Ever watched Farscape? You should. The characters are dysfunctional. They have issues and problems. Like the rest of us. They're just as neurotic as the rest of us, and we can relate. We can't relate to the cookie-cutter folks you keep putting before us.
Whats up with the stupid car thingie on the planet??! That reminded me of the chase in Diamonds are Forever. I mean, a dune buggy with Picard and Worf riding shotgun (Ok, riding Phaser) is NOT what I'd expect from an ST movie, somehow. For one, why the hell did the Enterprise not just beam them up when they were under fire??!!
:)
The problem with Nemesis is that the movie was directed by a action movie director who is not an Startrek fan (Stuart Baird) and he directed it like an action film. SO here goes to Paramount. THIS IS NOT JAMES BLOODY BOND!
In one scene my friend (who is not a St fan and do not know the chars) leaned over to me and said "Picard, Jean luc Picard". That said it all.
That said, the movie was not THAT bad. I really liked Shinzon's "I was lonely" line and of course, Deanna Troi in that skimpy little thing. Hmmmmm. I mean, this ST actually had an MPAA rating for "scene of sexual content". And its not Kirk porking aliens either.
Data singing was a little embarassing. No wonder they killed him off
The dangers of excessive individualism are nothing compared to the oppressiveness of excessive collectivism
Dear Rick
The screenplay was horrible! The writing for Voyager and TNG was wonderful. I remember plots within plots and sideplots and twists and turns.
Nemesis was so one-dimensional, it hurt my head. I kept waiting for the "retarded" Data to turn out to be Lore or for some new technology to be introduced or for Troi to get pregnant... or a million things that might have been interesting with that much raw acting talent on hand.
You gave a cast of superb actors the worst screenplay I think I have ever seen. It looked as though every interesting idea got tabled by committee or something. We ended up with a really flat uninteresting story. Whatever happend with Wesley going off with the traveler?
Where are the other members of the crystalline entity's species? How about Species 8472? How about Janeway and Picard gettig together? What about the Voyager crew on Earth.. what about the reunion therE? For crying out loud, this could have been SO cool! It just plain sucked because it didn't live up to its potential. DAMN it could have been awesome! Instead it was just disappointing.
The machine that has been Star Trek still has the capability of producing heart-pounding, thought-provoking and deeply interesting entertainment worthy of the cast and worthy of Roddenberry. Hop to it! We expect more.
- a Star Trek fan
Vortran out
Knowledge is like ignorance.. too much can be just as bad as not enough.
The thing is that the original Star Trek series was something fresh and new. The Next Generation was a well done revival of the Star Trek universe that allowed things to play out for more than just a handful of seasons. But then they tried to take a good thing and exploit it.
So DS9 comes around and that was pretty good, and at it's peak, it was better than ST:TNG IMHO. But then, comes voyager, and that had its moments but really went down the tubes. Now we've got Enterprise which had great premise, but not nearly as well executed as it could be.
The other thing is that Star Trek has tended to be somewhat saccarine. It's in this future where humanity has made the utopian society and there's just enough bad guys around to give the good guys somebody to fight with. It's a very black and white universe and after a point, that gets pretty dull.
Compare this to something like Babylon 5. There you've got a head of security who's an alcoholic, and his alcoholism actually becomes a serious problem. You've got the good guys and the bad guys but then you find out the good guys are actually just as bad as the bad guys, they just dress better.
This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
Why did Nemesis tank? same reason Firefly got cancelled just when it was starting to get good: Richard Berman!!! hes doing the same thing to the Star Trek franchise that he did to his wife to get her to cancell Firefly, fucking it hard and thuroughly. Send his bosses a message, treat anything with his taint on it (including what his wife touches)like it was covered in leper's piss, avoid like the plague. Maybe after the two of them are begging for dollars off the freeway exit the franchise will start to recover.
I am Jack's complete lack of surprise. -Fight Club
TNG was the first Star Trek *anything* that really went mainstream. But a LOT of the fans were really young -- I'm 33, love the original series because I grew up with it, but you can only stretch that so far. I love Enterprise (so far) because it's so much like the original series, but I never liked TNG for a lot of reasons. The TNG fans I knew were almost all teenagers, and that was in the early to mid-90's. And you know how quickly the tastes and attitudes of teenagers change -- maybe the demographics of the TNG fans has changed massively???
Also, even though I never liked the TNG series much, most of the TNG movies were good enough for me to go see. I paid for Insurrection, I thought it was very, very weak, and that had a big effect on my not going to see Nemesis -- for whatever reason, the previews didn't make me decide I wanted to go see it enough to risk wasting my time again (on a side note, if movie trailers suck so bad that they don't tell you what the movie is about, I will not go to see the movie). I think it's likely a lot of the hard-core Trek fans like me who were left after most of the teen TNG fans lost interest felt they were screwed by Insurrection.
The bottom line is I think the people who made this movie did NOT do their homework. $52 million is nothing to sneeze at, but if you spent $70 million to make the movie (according to IMDB.com), you got screwed. If you have a small target audience, you'd better damn well limit the budget.
Maybe those same people need to WATCH the damn movies they are making (do your homework!). According to IMDB.com, Insurrection's budget was $58 million and it made a total of about $81 million. Maybe they didn't notice that Insurrection sucked and they stupidly gave the next movie a higher budget.
I think this all comes down to business, and Paramount made some bad business decisions because $52 million in revenue is not a bomb, IMHO, unless you make dot-com-like business decisions.
Nemesis reinforced just how important it is to remember to backup your Data.
Thank you! Thank you! I'll be here all week, drive safely.
And that's sad for a Star Trek. What did the previews make it look like?
Hellraiser Nazis in Space.
Also it seemed to not go for any of the interesting content-drama-adventure that ST is known for. It was more of just an action movie... which everyone smirks at if you mention it in the same sentence with Star Trek ("That bald dude... an action hero? pfff!").
Hell even *sigh* Star Trek V had an... interesting presence. Sure, they blew up God with a photon torpedo but that's not the point. The point was that it was thought provoking SF, in line with what David Brin always touts, not space opera.
Trying to make it that will always turn people away from Star Trek.
What is music when you despise all sound?
I wasn't in it!
OTOH, Voyager and Enterprise were and are dreck. What's the point of continuing to make Star Trek shows? I've loved Trek in the past, but I also love SF, and all I really want is a good show. Trek shows haven't been good because they were Trek, but because they were good. Babylon 5 didn't need to be Trek to be a good show... can everyone see where I'm going with this? If there are any people working on Trek for Paramount who actually care about SF, for god's sakes, leave the sinking ship, and make us some good SF shows.
I have great memories of Star Trek; I hate having them ruined by Berman and Braga's need to drag out a dead horse and beat it, year after year. They keep (trying) to make movies and TV shows because they have secure positions at Paramount, and they need to produce content. But we don't need content from Paramount. We just need SFnal content, period, and hopefully someone more talented then Berman (not that that's difficult...) will step in and fill this need.
There was no Jar-Jar Binks.
You know where you are? You're in the $PATH, baby. You're gonna get executed!
1. 'Star Trek - Planet of the Hippies' (Insurrection) left a bad taste in everyone's mouth.
Not even Oscar Winner F. Murray Abraham could have saved this movie. This movie should have never been made. Horrible Story, horrible script. Jonathan Frakes (Commander Riker) did a pretty good job directing with what he had to work with. It took me a long time to decide on wether or not to go see Nemisis based on the terminal putridness of this movie.
2. Very Poor Script Selection for the Entire ST:TNG movie series.
Let's face it, most of TNG movies should have been ditched in pre-production. I can't beleive there weren't better movie scripts to choose from. If I were the producer, Nemesis, Insurrection, and First Contact would have never been made.
3. Expectations from Star Trek 2.
I don't know about all of you but, 'The Wrath of Kahn' was the best Trek movie. It made the best use of all elements of the Trek world. (Bringing a character back from a single episode, Space battles, classic Kirk dialogue, scenes at home, training scenes {Kobiashi Mauru test}). I think nemesis tried too hard to set new expectations for Space battles based on the final battle in Trek 2.
4. Evolution of Characters/TNG World.
The only character evolutions in the ST:TNG movies were Data, Jordi, and Riker/Troi's revisit of their relationship. What about the other characters? What about the evolution of the ST:TNG world? What happened to the sexual tension Between Capt. Picard and Dr. Crusher?
How do the character development in the movies move towards the characters portrayed in the final TV episode of TNG?
In the Original Star Trek Movies Characters, there were attempts to show evolution of characters/the Trek world (Sulu's own command, Kirk's promotion, and Klingon Peace).
5. Q. Not one movie even touches on Q. A great movie could be made from this character.
6. Use Movie Screen writers instead of Trek TV writers.
ST:TNG is notorious for it's anti-clamatic endings, most books (Non ST books) on the market today are written this way. You'd get a great story, great character development, great build up....but the ending really sucked and left you scratching your head on how this ending came to be.
7. The Mistique of the ST:TNG TV series hasn't been transferred to the big screen. It seems like the actors are just going through the motions in the films.
8. Let Nicholas Meyer Write/Direct again!
This is the man who directed ST 2 (The Wrath of Kahn) and 6(the Undiscovred Country) and wrote ST 2, 4 (The Voyage Home), and 6.
Nicholas Meyer seems to have a grasp on a good story and character development.
I think the people at Paramount have some serious thinking to do before another Trek movie is made.
Dolemite
Save the World! Use a Quote!
Roger Ebert had a REALLY funny review of Nemesis and why he's not interested in Star Trek any more. It had me laughing for at least 15 minutes. Here are a few choice quotes in case the page gets Slashdotted:
... "I'm thinking, life is too short to sit through 10 movies in which the power is shifted around on these shields. The shields have been losing power for decades now, and here it is the Second Generation of Star Trek, and they still haven't fixed them."
"There might have been a time when the command deck of Starship Enterprise looked exciting and futuristic, but these days it looks like a communications center for security guards."
"Fearsome death rays strike the Enterprise, and what happens? Sparks fly out from the ceiling and the crew gets bounced around in their seats like passengers on the No. 36 bus. This far in the future they wouldn't have sparks because they wouldn't have electricity, because in a world where you can beam matter--beam it, mind you--from here to there, power obviously no longer lives in the wall and travels through wires."
"I've also had it with the force shield that protects the Enterprise. The power on this thing is always going down."
"I tried to focus on the actors. Patrick Stewart, as Capt. Picard, is a wonderful actor. I know because I have seen him elsewhere. It is always said of Stewart that his strength as an actor is his ability to deliver bad dialogue with utter conviction. I say it is time to stop encouraging him."
"There is a scene in the movie in which one starship rams another one. You would think this would destroy them both, and there are a lot of sparks and everybody has to hold onto their seats, but the "Star Trek" world involves physical laws which reflect only the needs of the plot. If one ship rammed another and they were both destroyed and everyone died, and the movie ended with a lot of junk floating around in space, imagine the faces of the people in the audience."
"I think it is time for "Star Trek" to make a mighty leap forward another 1,000 years into the future, to a time when starships do not look like rides in a 1970s amusement arcade, when aliens do not look like humans with funny foreheads, and when wonder, astonishment and literacy are permitted back into the series. Star Trek was kind of terrific once, but now it is a copy of a copy of a copy."
AMEN.
(mostly spoiler-free) For filmmakers the only audience reaction worse than disappointment must be indifference. And I'm afraid that's exactly what I experienced after watching "Star Trek: Nemesis" this evening. I felt like I had seen almost all of it before, several times, and sadly by the end of the movie even the fates of my favorite Star Trek crew didn't seem to matter as much anymore. Four years is a long time to wait between installments and it felt like too much time had passed since their last big screen appearance. Things I had waited to see for years finally happened and I was left with an ambivalent shrug afterwards.
There were definitely some nice moments in the film, despite some stunningly weak parts of the plot which resembled non-sequiturs without explanations more than holes. And I sucessfully avoided reading spoilers about the movie so the big surprise did catch me off guard and it had emotional impact. But I was hoping for more than a mere rehash of the best Star Trek film or at least some more closure concerning the destinations of the less visible members of the crew. I have since read that those scenes were filmed, edited and then left on the cutting room floor along with Wesley Crusher's cameo. It's funny how I am starting to prefer the DVD director's cut editions of films over the versions which are initially released. To me, the additional material is usually worth some intermittent pacing and after watching a fully fleshed out story I still walk out of the cinema wanting more.
I don't think it has much to do with how good or bad the movie really was. I think that it was because of the following reasons:
1. Interest in Star Trek is fading. The last couple of Trek TV show offerings has not really done a good job of pleasing fans. I think a lot of on-and-off Star Trek fans are getting tired of Berman's crappy TV offerings, and are looking elsewhere for Science Fiction.
2. They released it at the wrong time. They were directly competing with Harry Potter, a James Bond flick, and Two Towers. I think that a lot of people would have checked Nemesis out, except for the fact that there were probably three or four other movies that they'd rather see.
I skipped out on Nemesis myself. It isn't that I didn't want to see it, but I rarely go to the movies nowadays. The first chance I had to go to the movie theater, I naturally went and saw the Two Towers.
But I've heard that Nemesis isn't really all that bad. It might not be as good as Star Trek 6 or First Contact, but it is definately on my TO RENT list. I think that the home video release will see a lot more acceptance than the theatrical release.
"You spoony bard!" -Tellah
First, Nemesis didn't tank because of competing films. Nemesis could have been released at any point in the year, however clear the schedule, and it would have tanked. I agree with most of the previous comments as to what's wrong with the ST franchise, including the political correctness, plot holes, cute humor, and Left Coast touchy-feeliness.
..bruce..
Second, I think the real demise of the (movie) franchise came after ST3:TSFS. At that point, you had the Enterprise destroyed and Kirk, Spock, and McCoy on the run from the Federation in a Klingon cruiser. Stop for a moment and think what a killer movie you could make with that setup, going off on a completely different tangent from anything seen in ST movies or shows, but still true to form to Kirk's approach to problems. Instead, we got ST4:TVH, which put everyone back in their neat little boxes and made everything all better again (and threw in some gee-whiz eco-sensibility about whales). (Did I mention that my wife for Christmas got me a t-shirt that says "Nuke the gay whales!"? And I'm a registered Democrat.)
Anyway, while individual episodes and movies have shown promise, the whole franchise is sinking down to heat death; Nemesis and Enterprise are likely to be the end of the Star Trek franchise. It's been a nice run, but let it go, folks.
Bruce F. Webster (brucefwebster.com)
Seriously, Wil, got any comments?
Well, I was going to burn my mod points in this thread, but I'll give it a shot:
I think that the release date was incredibly stupid. It's almost like Paramount wanted to "bury" this movie. I have no idea why they released it when they did.
But the release date shouldn't matter. If the story is strong enough, people will go to see it over and over again. As far as I can tell, this is where Paramount fumbled this movie.
When Star Trek is good, it's about people. That's why my favorite episode is Inner Light. That's why I loved working on First Duty and Final Mission.
The script that I read for Nemesis was about people. John Logan is a HUGE fan, who knows every detail about TNG. He infused the characters and plot with detalis that would make a Trekkie drool. He understood why people cared about these characters, and told an incredible story. I still haven't seen the final cut, but everything I've read indicates that they got away from that. I have heard that on more than one occasion the director proclaimed that he didn't care about Star Trek history and continuity. It seemed like he really didn't respect the fans or the franchise, so they ended up with yet another action movie with robots and laser guns.
Sadly, I think that an action movie in space is exactly what Paramount wants.
Marketing a Star Trek movie is insanely difficult. Mainstream audiences think it's just for nerds. They think that they need to watch seven seasons of TNG to know what's going on. Paramount knows that the hardcore fans will show up no matter what, so they focus their attention on convincing the mainstream audience that they'll like this movie.
The trap they seem to fall into when they do this is to cut up the movie, take out stuff that's too "fan-specific," and focus on themes that appeal to a broader audience: babes and bombs. This usually alienates the hardcore fans, and doesn't excite mainstream audiences enough to see it more than once -- and that's where a movie makes money: on repeat sales.
The few times they've managed to hit both audiences -- Star Trek IV and Star Trek II -- they've focused people.
I'm hearing that this is the end of TNG, and it probably is. From what I've heard, some of the actors aren't interested in doing it any more, which is understandable, considering that they've been playing those characters for over 15 years.
But I don't think it's the end of Star Trek movies. TPTB aren't stupid. If they were, they wouldn't be running this franchise. I think they've just gotten away from the heart of Star Trek. If they find that heart again, and hire some very good SF writers to defibrillate it, Star Trek will be fine. There's still some life in the old girl.
He doesn't know why? He doesn't know why? I hope he reads this site so I can clue him in on it.
I was watching an episode of enterprise; the one with the Klingons abusing the subdued duterium miners. Well heads blowing up all around, phaser fire filling the sky, Klingons on the hunt, and the total fatalities: 0
I mean good god I was sitting there screaming about how I was expecting Mr. T to come around the corner at any second. A visit to bureau42.com only reaffirmed that situation when someone with a similar sensation stated "I pity the fool who messes with duterium miners!"
In the end they trap the Klingons in a ring of fire, not one with a signed eyebrow and what do my ears behold. Did that Klingon just say, "We don't want your dueterium anyways!" and stomp off like a small child back to his ship (teleported out anyways...)
The Klingons I know would have teleported up, then back down directly behind the unsuspecting enterprise crew, slit their necks before they knew what happened, slain have the duterium miners as a lesson, and demanded the same yields. The two writers of that episode should have been hung up and bled dry for that sorry excuse of an episode.
Nope Star Trek is just a T&A show now (thats TITS and ASS)... so anyways I digress. Rick Burman, obviously needs to pulls his ****ing head out of his ****ing ass.
Go ahead mod me down for troll. But it's true. Star Trek was great. How the mighty have fallen.
The Similarities between the former greatness of both star trek and star wars are astounding when put in regards to their current demise. Both Series initiated with a great breadth of depth and intricacies in either plot or charcters. However they've devolved into explosions on the screen in place of humanity threatening wars of grander scales.
Granted the first star wars movis and star trek series had their fair share of campy and goofy moments, but these were almost always counter-baleneced by an enormous weight of responsibility to mankind. And never the grandois responsibility of saving humanity, but the responsibility of LEARNING to do whats right in your small piece of the universe and hope that the effects of that piece of good will ripple out to the benefit of all.
Look deeply into the better aspects of both series and you will find the characters and struggles alike are all centered around our heroes fighting with themselves or with their respective goverments to save only a small portion of the universe, which turns out to do more good than ever expected.
But now both series are more about the adventure, and how cool it looks to go along. How much resonance is there after their missions are acomplished? almost none. The darkness of struggle and REAL pain are almost non-existant, and the brutal consequences of failure are rarely made a reality in either series. Why is this?
Marketing
a bunch of marketting clowns got their hands on both enterprises and said to themselves "short time gain, short time gain". They figured out how to pack the most glitz onto the least amount of "dangerous" themes to provide the greatest immediate bang to their bucks. What we have been consistently handed are pre-packaged formulated products with little more soul in them than green money can fill in.
Darkness and potential evil crowd our lives everyday, the majority of us have trained ourselves in how to be good. We ARENT good, we just act good. And we are Painfully aware of how easy it is for us to "go to the dark side". Yet we dont, and what we look for in all our stories and films alike are the reasons WHY we dont go over. These franchises are supposed to serve to remind us of our own innate good which is only apparent after realizing how easy it is not to be good.
Star trk and star wars no longer remind us why our moral compasses are unexplainably good for the most part. And as such they present no significant worthwhile struggle thats memorable for the satisfaction of vanquishing the darker aspects of life. They are just explosions in space with pretty women on the hood.
In other words... Star marketing
--Idiots, Every single one of YOU, A flaming mass of conglomerated morons, hey wait a second, isnt that how RAID works?
Get Avery Brooks to do one, dumbasses. And make sure Wheaton's scenes don't get cut.
-oZ
It's not really that hard to see why the entire Star Trek Empire is falling... the Eastern and Western Emporers (B&B) have put such a tight stranglehold on their creation, that it can't breathe.
Star Trek has the classic problems of any television series that refuses to change. It has become stagnant. Bremen refuses to hire decent writers and let them run loose. He won't allow any cliffhangers that can't be resolved in 2 or 3 episodes. He also won't allow major characters to die, or fail, or turn evil, or just plain disappear from sight for more than 1 short story.
Once you have a setting (which Gene provided for you), and a cast with some chemistry (DS9 and Enterprise, not Voyager), all you need to do is get some good solid writing. What makes good sci-fi? What makes good writing!
Surprise! If I can predict how the episode will turn out before the first commercial break, it's not really that much fun to watch. Yes, I enjoy seeing T'Pol bounce around in her jumpsuit... but that's not enough.
Suspense! If I know that everything will all turn out O.K. in the end, because the next episode will be out in a week... why do I care? In good writing, you are never quite sure if any character or endeavour will work out. Major characters can die too. They can also become evil, or just disappear without a trace. Watch Babylon 5 someday... see how the characters evolve, and see who survives and who doesn't.... and why.
Common Sense! Enough with the time travel out of your ass already. There's a difference between asking us to suspend our disbelief and go with the idea of phased particle weapons, or warp drive; and smacking us with technobabble just to see how much blood pours out of our ears. Cause and Effect work well together, and can do wonders for finding holes in a plot.
While I'm at it, might I also suggest not only sticking with it (don't change the direction a show is headed just because a week or two were unpopular), but letting the characters evolve over time? The Piccard of "All Good Things" was a vastly different man than the one in "Encounter at Farpoint"... and that evolution was part of the show's charm. You got the sense that he'd learned from his experiences, and that he had become a hero.
Many people have complained about Enterprise... it certainly isn't a "Next Generation", but the chemistry is already better than TNG was for several seasons. If they would just toss them a few really GOOD scripts, I think we'd all be impressed with the results.
*sigh* It will never happen though, it's too risky. B & B have grown too accustomed to their regular paychecks to risk failure. If they keep to the formula and let the show die a whimpering death, they can blame the fans, or competing TV shows, or sunspots. If they dare produce real stories, they might get blamed for those that don't do well.
I think ST can be saved, if B&B will keep their damn hands off it. Hire writers who have proven track records, tell them they can do whatever they want -- but they have to ask before they can kill off major characters, and let the stories flow and stretch across seasons. See the "Thieves World" set of novels as a great example of cooperative and competitve storytelling in a common universe.
The fact that Berman doesn't know why it tanked is the reason it tanked.
Seriously, I mean, if producers knew that the movies they were producing were going to suck, do you think they'd produce them? (Well, maybe some of them.)
So, when you take a producer, writers, and director who don't know how to make something good, they're very likely to make something awful, and that's what happened with Nemesis.
The movie had no plot. Everything that happened in the movie that might have been interesting (like the naked wedding) was glossed over for a main plot-line that didn't go anywhere. Literally. The primarly segment of the plot happened in damaged ships in the Romulan neutral zone.
And of course, the Remans were just a BAD idea. Talk about YASTPOTW! (Yet Another Star Trek Particle Of The Week.) It was a plot devices pulled out of someone's nether regions. They used it because they thought it was cool, but they never stopped to consider if it was a bad idea or try to develop it into something interesting.
I have hated the last two Star Wars movies. Lucas totally sold out, and it's completely tainted my feelings about the three movies that came before. BUT, at least we get a proper introduction to some of the creatures. I mean, we actually get to see some interesting things about the Gungans.
Of course, it's possible that I missed some of the character development. I was bored and maybe didn't pay attention well.
The bottom line is that Star Trek has been going down-hill (except maybe Enterprise, but it's got problems too) since Roddenberry died. It's a case where other people just do not understand Roddenberry's vision but are arrogant enough to believe they can continue on with it. I don't know a small fraction of what it is that made Star Trek Star Trek when Roddenberry was around, and I have a feeling that, while Berman may know a lot more, he doesn't know it all either. And by 'know', I mean 'grok'.
It's simple. We need a new perspective. The first five shows were from the perspective of the Federation, from a human perspective. Why not change the perspective to mix it up a bit?
How about Star Trek: Obsidian Order? A sci-fi Alias-like show that follows an agent or two from the Obsidian Order? Or how about a show from the Romulan's perspectives? I'm tired of watching a show about the high-minded Federation who is always perfect. I want to see shades of grey instead of black and white. I want to see some depth to the universe.
"Remember that "Bones with tits" season-2 doctor? That was a direct result of Roddenberry insisting that Dr. Crusher be written out."
The reason people stupidly prefer Dr. Crusher is because she is a likeable character, whereas Pulaski could be a real bitch at times. But she was human and she was interesting. Dr. Crusher was just like a Stepford Wife, or a 50s TV "Welcome home, Jean Luc, how was your day at work?" kind of stupid thing.
graspee
1. A movie is a much bigger investment of the viewer's time & money than a hour TV program. Therefore it has to be about something much bigger, much more important, or much more ... something ... than this week's episode of Whateverville.
The Star Trek universe is basically stable. Gradually the Federation expands, or gets stomped for a while by the Dominion; gradually Voyager goes home. There's a lot of characters who over the course of a couple of years develop characters with a few lines per show.
Movie universes have to be unstable. Blow up the Death Star or the Rebellion is crushed. But what if the Enterprise doesn't stop the Great Space muffin from engulfing the earth? We know that it'll be back next week. ST is basically not movie material, despite the most fanatic fans ever.
2. ST writing really really sucks for movies. On TV it is ok for Picard to look at the Awefully Big Romlan Ship and say, "That's a predator" because you've got a small screen and rely on sound to communicate more. In a movie you have a bigger screen, more opportunity for acting; Picard would no more say "That's a predator" than Data would reply "There is no fecal matter in that statement, sir".
3. I felt especially ripped off because the publicity pretended the movie would tell us about the Romulans. The ongoing exposition of Klingon culture throughout the later TV series was a real pleasure! But this movie focussed on the Remans, wholly made up ugly guys, and gave only a few sets to the Romulans.
If you want to do a Trek movie, do "Reunification" about the Vulcans & the Romulans. Don't screw around - make it a major change in the universe so we take it seriously. And get a real science fiction writer/movie writer in there. Actually ST has some good actors, they've just got lousy materials to work with
--- Attorneys Assisting Citizen-Soldiers & Families -
And Paramount has nothing to do with it. Some snippets from their website.
"Star Trek: Renaissance is a collaboratively written fan fiction project depicting events in the Alpha Quadrant after the Dominion War with an original ship and crew. The series is a mixture of political intrigue, exploration and character driven drama with a definite story arc running in the background.
A new Star Trek series written with the same industry standards as a real TV drama, but from the fans, to the fans, by the fans - most of them people who were disappointed to the lack of ingenuity in Star Trek: Voyager. Like its canon cousins, the series is written in standard script format and divided into seasons, each lasting for 26 episodes."
"The Dominion War has been over for a quarter of a century, but the painful scars of the conflict still run deep. The Alpha Quadrant rebuilds but in the process, a lot of compromises are made. Idealism and principles of the old are sometimes bent, sometimes broken.
Alliances forged in the fires of war buckle as the galaxy looks for the troubled new century, a time of isolationism and prejudice. New and old enemies rise, both without, and within. It takes a resolved crew to face the challenges of this era. A new Captain. A new ship. The USS Enterprise."
We've got a Captain that's flawed, alien shipriders that we're not sure we can trust and a Federation that could be withering from internal corruption. I've read the first few, and they have been GOOD. Easily better than the last 2 TV series AND movies to come out of Hollywood. If you've been thirsting for new Trek but with the same qualities that endeared you to the old Trek then you should stop reading this and click the link.
So, Rick Berman doesn't know the answer to, "Why did Star Trek do badly?
Of course not because the answer is, "Rick Berman".
Fans left in droves over the last decade because of his constant attempts to transform Star Trek into a touchy-feely franchise about emotions that occasionally had some adventure from time to time, instead of the other way around like it originally was under Roddenbery.
Look at these two ideas that *sound* like a great setting for an awesome sci-fi series, but in practice they fell flat: 1 - A federation ship on it's own stuck too far away from home to get any help has to find it's own way home and make it's own repairs by hook or by crook in a totally alien section of the universe. Great idea, right? Yeah, on paper. But in practice we got some stupid show about a crew we don't like, who we wouldn't care if they all died tomorrow because they are that annoying.
Okay, but how about this one: 2 - The adventures of the very first enterprise ship, back in the days before Earth had become powerful, back when it was just getting it's feet wet and making mistakes and learning the hard way how to make it in space. Sounds great, right? Yeah, but then Berman, putz that he is, instead gave us a show about feelings, and how humans are all stoopid, and where they actually spent an entire episode trying to learn what one crewman's favorite food was. (No, I'm not kidding!). It's like one of those terribly boring episodes in the middle of an anime series where all they do is eat and go shopping, but stretched across the entire series instead of just one episode.
The best way for Berman to save Trek would be for him to quit and give the helm back to people who know how to entertain.
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
How about a miniseries on Klingons... maybe a history of the Klingon Empire?
"Under the spreading chestnut tree, I sold you and you sold me."
>Star Trek: The Next Generation got a whole lot
>better around season 3, when Roddenberry pretty
>much lost control of the show and let Berman
>take over.
Berman had a lot of help. Michael Piller came in as co-executive producer for Season 3, working beside Berman and writing a considerable number of episodes himself (far more than Berman ever wrote or co-wrote). As Roddenberry was increasingly ill by that point, there were several producers and co-producers working on the show as well, including writers like Ira Steven Behr. They'd also attracted a stable of excellent writers by that point, particularly the brilliant Ronald Moore, who wrote classics like "Yesterday's Enterprise," "Sins Of The Father," and "The Defector" for Season 3.
Giving Berman all (or even more than a little) credit for the success of TNG would be like giving Al Gore all the credit for inventing the Internet. I'm sure Berman was very effective at getting money out of the suits, but it's obvious the man doesn't have a clue when it comes to forging a compelling story. And that's precisely why Trek is in the trouble it's in today.
One Fine Day At The Academy
Wes: Bye, Mom!
Bev: Bye, Wes!
(door closes)
Squadronmate Tom Paris: Damn, Wes! Your mom is one hot piece of ass. I would pound the holy hell out of her for hours on end.
Wes: Shut up!
Tom: I'm talkin' about burying a diamond class erection to the hilt inside old Big Red!
Wes: Shut up you ass!
Tom: I mean, what more could you want out of life? Is she a natural redhead, if you know what I mean?
Wes: Shut up now!
Tom: Damn, I'd like to go to sleep with her stink on me. I'm just gonna take this little genetic sample over to the bioclone lab and run a little...experiment.
"Has [being a kidnapped teenage girl, raped repeatedly for months] changed you?" - Katie Couric to Elizabeth Smart
The problem is that Roddenberry (not Berman!) learned his moral sensibilities from Leave it to Beaver. Inexplicably, he thought that 50's US prudeness is a universal virtue, and in his fantasy, it would remain with us for centuries. Instead of the grungy Rock and Roll, Star Trek characters would love cliche classical music (or: "wild guys" like Riker favored castrated "Jazz"). Instead of Sade or Nabakov, the future would read... oh yes, Shakespeare and Conan Doyle. Like Leave it to Beaver, it seems nobody has ever gone to the toilet on the Enterprise. It's not clear whether they even have any. Maybe they use the transporters for that? We are never told. That would be "dirty."
You know, if there is ever going to be a communist revolution, you can count me out if as a result, we'll all end up in some sort of a prude navy. Life is Roddenberry's world seems so fucking stale because nobody pushes the envelope. That's no accident. That's written into the show by Roddenberry himself, who spent his life trying to show how the hippies will not win. The coolest concert to ever take place on the Enterprise is ... what? Data's poetry reading?
As far as the rest of what happens in the future, it's all about the Protestant work ethic. By the time we get to the point where human labor is not necessary for sustaining our species in comfort, you would think that many of us would pursue pleasure, crazy art, group sex, drugs, body modification, etc. But no! In Roddenberry's world, we rush to sign up for the space-navy. If we're "lucky", we get uniforms and duty shifts and we spend our time taking orders from some Wald Cleaver pinhead while praying to be promoted a rank.
Notice that Rick Berman went some ways towards undoing this "50's anti-beatnik" attutude on the shows. Can you imagine Roddenberry agreeing to Enterprise-style coed decontamination scences? Ha! The whole point of Enterprise is to spice up Rodenberry's pristine, prude world with some sex, grime and humanity. Now if they only got better characters and scriptwriters, there might be hope!
To make vivid how totally dull (for example) TNG characters are, imagine what they would say if they took out a personal ad. I'll do one for Troi; you can do the rest on your own.
I am a SWF seeking a special someone with whom to share my feelings. My hobbies are yoga, collecting vases, reading books you were probably assigned in High School, going on long walks in the holodeck, attending staff meetings, eating chocolate and annoying people. Just kidding! Did I mention I have a great sense of humor? Send me a message in Box 4251
Simple. No Wesley Crusher. That is all. And the #2 reason it tanked was that it didn't "feel" like a proper Star Trek plotline. The overall theme of the movie was not similar to previous Treks. Also Data dies, and that sucks. They failed to use or killed off my two favorite characters. Other than that, it just wasn't up to snuff.
But the real reason good trek was produced was Bob Justman who was the one who found all of the good writers that made Trek what it was. He also had a LOT of creative input. One of the best of those writers was Gene Coon who perhaps did more to shape what we now know as Trek than Gene R. or Bob! Coon did write the WORST of all TOS eps "Spock's Brain" - BRAIN BRAIN!!! WHAT IS BRAIN!!! - (sorry, couldn't help myself there) under a nomme de plume but let's not forget that he was the man who invented the Klingons (the non brussel-srpout headed kind) in addition to penning some of the best eps while helping to stave of declining ratings (in what is now known as the flawed system for ratings they were using at the time).
But the episodes that Roddenberry wrote were usually pretty bad to downright AWFUL. Turnabout Intruder is basically an hour of enduring Shatner playing - no - NOT the role of Captain Kirk but that of AN HYSTERICAL FEMALE. Woops! Did I say that Spock's Brain was the worst episode? My bad! What a truly inauspicious way to end that fine series! And "Charlie X"? C'mon! The episodes that he wrote were usually pondeous morality plays or worse.
And Gene Roddenberry certainly wasn't the reason that any of the movies were any good. After TMP, the studio basically rested control from him and placed stewardship of the franchise in the hands of Harve Bennet. And if you ask me Nicholas Meyer is actually the wunderkind of the movie franchise!
Roddenberry's involvement in the movies (after TMP) was minimal and mainly consisted of him firing angry memos at Meyer, Bennet and the studio brass about how they were murdering his creative lovechild! His solution? The movie he proposed for Star Treks II THROUGH VI (and I swear I am NOT making this up) consisted of the Enterprise crew travelling back in time to save JFK from being assasinated! He proposed it EVERY...SINGLE...TIME the issue of a new Trek movie came up.
So Star Trek does have moments of greatness, but I don't really think they had much to do with Roddenberry. Star Trek at its BEST was a co-creation between Roddenberry-Justman-Coon.
And I would agree that TNG actually picked up for a while after Berman grabbed the reigns from G.R. But his performance over time is dodgy at best. I really think that if you want to save the future of Trek, you either have to
- Find someone new - or -
- Bring back the creative team of Meyer and Benet
As the creative team of Berman and Braga clearly isn't cutting the mustard at this late date.Quod scripsi, scripsi.
...can be read in this post. I think I was pretty close to the mark.
This movie was never made for its fan base. It was created for the masses. It's lack of intellect failed to attract the fans and because it was a Star Trek movie, it failed to attract the masses that it targeted.
Stupid director. So, was I close?
Why bother.
Back in the heady days before Enterprise was released / revealed / rehashed, there was an interesting theory that the reason one would do a prequal to ST:TOS was because there would be an inherent frailty in the crew and in the technology that would be utilized to build dramatic tension and put everyone into genuinely interesting and complicated situations. Knowing the future of Star Trek, we could have longer story arcs revealing in detail the depths which necessitated the creation of the federation and the failures of early human explorers from which this glorious and successful universe would expand.
ST:TNG started with an episode proving that human beings were frail, weak little things subject to the whims of godlike aliens, and the wars of those stronger than us. The Borg dominated Trek lore for so long, due to their indestructable nature. And legend of the Klingon tenacity in pre TOS days is far and wide.
So when Enterprise turned out to be more boring happy-happy nothing bad ever happens stuff, people realized that it wasn't resonating with them. Spiderman not only took people on a fantastic, original journey, but turned what could have been a stock kissy kissy ending into something complicated and real. Insurrection? They took something that by definition should have been complicated and painful (the reprocussions of the crew's actions WRT what was basically an order from starfleet), and turned it into a glossed over kissy-kissy ending. First Contact? Started the movie by destroying the indestructable Borg, ended the movie by destroying indestructable Borg lore, and in the middle destroyed the Borg several more times. Generations? Picard wasn't even slightly torn, Soren wasn't even slightly torn, Guinan wasn't even slightly torn...
It's almost like Star Trek has been too afraid to be tense. It's too valuable a property to the studios to allow anything controversial, interesting, or potentially unpopular to come of it. You can't get much further away from the "Star Trek" formula than collecting whales in a modern day Monterey, but it is that sort of creativity and willingness to explore what defines the characters and the universe they find themselves in that made TOS so great. Wrath of Kahn? Very human scale with an epic presentation. Undiscovered Country? A truly epic scale brought focus in a human way. Insurrection? A good episode, but not worth 8 bucks. The Search for Spock? No dramatic tension at all.
Sadly the 3 movies preceeding this one have all been duds. No disrespect to Frakes, who directed the last two movies and who did a decent job of turning badly underwritten scripts into something watchable, but there has been no return on the moviegoer's money since the Undiscovered Country over 12 years ago. Why does Berman feel he deserves the moviegoer's money? What has he done for us lately? All of the memorable Star Trek scenes have taken place in person to person shots, yet the past 3 movies have all emphasized spaceship crashes, explosions, and easy exits. "From hell's heart I stab at thee," was a beautiful line delivered by a man about to kill himself in order to destroy his enemy. To save the crew from the explosion a much beloved character is forced to give his life. The modern filmmakers took that to mean crowds like big, ringed explosions, and narrow escapes.
Hire writers that value human interactions over plot convieniences, know what a federation is and how to work one into a script, and can utilize pain and suffering to resonate with an audience. Underbudget the movie so that it is forced to rely upon plot rather than effects. Capture human responses to events, rather than jumping into scenes directly after the painful part.
And after all, if Star Trek goes on a 20 year hiatus... who cares? There will always be science fiction epics about man's interactions with the unknown. Star Trek has been dominating that scene for too long now, keeping more original shows like Andromeda or Babalon 5 relegated to the backwaters of TNN. Perhaps it is time, like Kirk dramatically stepping down for the captain of the new Enterprise, for the series to be laid to rest... for now.
This Sig is a mnemonic device designed to allow you to recognize this author in the future.
Could they slap a Star Trek label on the show Firefly and keep it around (as it was before it got canceled)? I'd love to see where 2-3 seasons of that show would go -- excellent writing, compelling story lines, and "realism" (kinda like Star Wars:A New Hope - things were allowed to be dirty).
It was a sad, sad day when Roddenbery died. The philosopher captain, the morality dilemmas, humans as good people free from conflict -- these were all the themes he wanted for TOS. They wanted a cowboy show but he still managed to get a black woman on the bridge, a russian, the incredible spock character, all kinds of examination of what it means to be human. He finally got what he wanted with TNG. The philosopher captain, the android struggling to be human, the moral dilemmas, the quest for understanding. These are all themes that came out from roddenbery.
/any/ other TV, /ever/ because no one else has been principled, visionary and good at producing TV at the same time.
People who think that these themes only developed after he died, should really go and watch Encounter at Farpoint again. After that, the series struggled for a while. It finally hit its stride in season 3, and 3 and 4 were the best. After his death, the loss of his vision was slow because is was imprinted on the cast crew writers etc. By the time it ended, I wasn't watching any more because the spirit was gone. Voyager made an attempt to revive it, well, they had a female captain, that's something but they never recaptured the spirit.
It was Roddenbery that made TOS, especially TNG, unlike
home page
(Assuming . . . reasonably faithful plotlines- no gay Wesley, no Wesley's really a romulan hybrid)
Well, that vast library of fan fiction is right out, then.
I don't normally write reviews about Star Trek films, as I usually don't feel strongly about them -- I consider them to be an entertaining way to waste a few hours and some of them are even somewhat decent -- usually the even-numbered ones. However, after having my intelligence insulted for two hours straight as I watched this abomination that is merchandising in action, I felt compelled to warn others that might want to waste $10 and 2 hours of your life that you'll never get back, and say "stop!".
Star Trek Nemesis succeeds at being a 2-hour rollercoaster of action that is about nonsense. Nothing in the movie makes the least bit of sense, and the more you try and think about what you just saw, the more you realise that Paramount has just given up, and they figure if that if they make enough stuff blow up, the fans will still buy the crap at the conventions.
Okay, so here's the plot (what little plot I could pick up). The Enterprise finds some pieces of an android that looks like another "Data". It is another Data, but it's a crude prototype of Data - more like an autistic child. This actually has nothing to do with the plot (much). The plot is, The Enterprise gets sent to Romulus, because the Romulans want to talk peace. Actually, they don't, but they have a new government, one that is controlled by people from Remus, which is a twin planet of Romulus.
Now, listen carefully, here's where it gets complicated (and apparently, two more pages into the script, the writers forgot everything they tell us here). The Remuns are slaves to the Romulans, mining Dilithium, but their planet doesn't rotate, so they live only on the Dark side because the light side is too hot (huh, isn't Romulus in nearly the same orbit? (nevermind!)). Okay, so, these guys look like Nosferatu and they have extreme sensitivity to light (feel a plot point coming? Uh, no sorry, it was just gas...).
Anyhow, their leader is a guy claiming to be a clone of Picard, and all through the movie, you're told these two look very similar. Except that they DONT look similar at ALL! (close your eyes, now they look similar, right?) I mean, yeah, they are both bald, but that's about it.
Okay, so these guys also have a spaceship about the size of the Enterprise times 4, armed to the teeth with 80 gazillion photon thingies and 27 bazillion phaser guns and stuff. It also has a cloak. This guy sez he wants peace and to free his people on Remus, and he needs the help of the Federation. And Picard doesn't trust him.
Wait a minute. This guy just overthrew the Romulan government and controls a spaceship big enough to defeat 5 Borg cubes, hasn't he ALREADY freed his people? (don't think, don't think!).
AT this point, the copy of Data comes back into the story, and downloads some data from the Enterprise into himself. The Real Data is onto him of course. In the meantime, Jordy figures out that the spaceship is one giant weapon that can shoot a ray of some kind of super deadly radiation -- so deadly, the a human will die instantly from even the tiniest exposure to it (remember this point, because the writers forget it as well).
So, turns out the bad guy Picard clone is with Romulan hard-liners that want to destroy the Federation by killing everyone on Earth with this Radiation. And, using the data from the copy of "Data", they can cloak, fly by Federation fleet ships and Radiate them too.
Oh yeah, and Docter Crusher figures out that the clone is dying unless he gets a transfusion of blood from Picard -- how this is crucial to the plot, I was never able to figure out.
So the Enterprise takes off and races back to Earth to warn them of the doom that is about to befall the Federation unless they act quickly. However, Picard is captured but escapes with the help of the Data Copy, who turns out to be the "real" Data, who switched with the copy and provided the bad guy with false information about the Fleet. Picard and Data make their escape rather easily (and pointlessly -- it feels like this part of the movie got made to fill up some time).
Foolishly, the Enterprise flies right into a section of space where long range communication is impossible (but just about everything else works), and it's here that they get attacked by the cloaked ship the bad guy has. Now the movie goes from just plain silly to downright insulting stupid.
The Enterprise can't target the bad guys because they are cloaked. Nevermind that Scotty figured out who to do that several trek movies ago, the Enterprise gets the shit kicked out of it because the bad guys have that super-duper array of weapons and they can fire while cloaked. Some bad guys beam onto the ship, presumably, to take Picard becaue they need his blood. So, do they beam onto the bridge? No, they beam into some hallway. So Worf and Riker go to stop the bad guys.
Now, the bad guys are sensitive to strong light, remember? If Riker had said "Computer, raise light level in hallway to 250 percent" and blinded the bad guys, I would have never written this review. But Noooooooo, instead, we are treated to a stupid firefight in the hallways of the Enterpise, and yes, the bad guys are using lazer guns that shoot bright beams of light and cause blinding explosions to everything those beams touch, and not a single bad guy has any vision problem with that!
Meantime, two Romulan warbirds show up. They are here to help the Enterprise kill the bad guy. They don't want to have the blood of everyone on earth on their hands. Sure, sure.... Great, first Star Trek ruined the Borg, now they ruin the Romulans. The Romulans are now nice guys. Yeah.
The Bad guy dispatches both Warbirds pretty quickly, and then, in the one cool scene of the film, blows out the front portion of the bridge of the Enterprise, sucking Esign Red-Shirt into space before a force-field seals the breach. The Bad guy de-cloaks so he can gloat. At this point, the Enterprise has little power and no weapons. So Picard orders ramming speed.
Now, if both ships had been destroyed and the movie ended with everyone dead, I would have said this was the best Star Trek film ever, and I would not be writing this review. But Nooooooo, instead, the ships do a little damage to each other, just their front sections are crumpled and intertwined. In fact, they do a nice effect to show you that the two ships SEEM locked together. But I guess the writers forgot that as well 2 more pages into the script (can I even call it a script at this point? Maybe I should say "Napkin")
Now, if Picard had lead a team of commandos through the damaged sections and into the bad guys ship, since they are now joined, I would not be writing this review. But Nooooooo, instead, the bad guy just backs out, and the Enterprise just sits there and is "stuck to space" because the two ships come apart. Okay, you've just have millions of tons of metal crashing into each other and the two ships come apart like they are greased. Hasn't anyone in California ever been in a car accident? (forget it, don't try and think, this is a Star Trek movie)....
So, the bad guy now has his ship crippled, none of the weapons work -- except, of course, for the big radiation gun. That's undamaged. Sure.... So, he decides the fire the big gun at the Enterprise. But guess what, it takes 7 minutes to charge up the big gun. Can anyone say Death Star? When are the bad guys going to learn that your main weapon should always be ready to fire instantly? And isn't everyone tired to death of this type of plot?
So Picard beams over to kill the bad guy and stop the weapon. Except that the Transporter dies right after, so he's got no way of getting back. So Data decides to jump out an open hole in the Enterprise (caused by the crash earlier), and catches a handy-dandy protrusion on the bad guy's ship. Data's got some emergency Transporter gizmo that was shown earlier in the film.
Meantime, the Enterprise starts trying to get away from the bad guys so that they don't get fried by the radiation gun. So Picard beams over and does battle with the bad guy but loses his hand phaser as they roll and tumble about. After Picard kills the bad guy with some sharp piece of spaceship, Data shows up, beams Picard out and then points his own hand-phaser at the radiation beam just as the ship is about to fire.
Wait a minute. These guys were fighting right next to the Radiation beam building up to fire. Didn't they say that the slightest exposure was instantly fatal? Sorry, my mistake. I guess I was listening earlier to the dialog instead of just ohh'ing and ahhh'ing at the effects.
So Data shoots the radiation beam just before it fires. The ship instantly explodes. Data dies. Isn't the Enterprise still in danger from the radiation? Ahh forget it, there's no science in Star Trek anymore.
Everyone drinks a toast to Data, and then Picard has a heart-to-heart talk with the autistic version of Data from earlier in the film. -- i.e. the cheap copy of Data. And that's the end of the film.
Bad. Bad. Bad. Bad.....
What's so sad about this film is that there were several germs of ideas that were never followed through on.
#1) Germ of an idea one is that with this clone, Picard was supposed to be doing battle with himself. Several times, each one says about the other "I know how he thinks" -- except that they don't. Neither predicts the other's moves in the slightest. This germ of an idea was handled FAR BETTER in the Original Series Episode "Balance of Terror" and was done with one one-millionth of the budget.
#2) Germ of an idea number two is that both the Picard Clone and the Data Clone can't seem to rise above what they are, and do more than is expected, and become "human", even though Picard makes impassioned pleas to both to do so. Neither does so, so the audience learns nothing from this exploration of our humanity. What was the point of introducing this concept if there's no follow through? Data shows a glimmer of hope at the end, but what they should have done was have the Data clone progress throughout the film, so that HE rises to the occasion and sacrifices himself to kill the bad guy. That would have made a nice irony as well, since the bad guy built the Data clone, and if his creation had killed him, that would have made for a better script, and I would not be writing this review.
#3) Germ of an idea number three was all the build up about who and what the Citizens of Remus are like, and how harsh their world is, and how they are slaves, and how they are sensitive to light, etc. Yet, there was zero follow through on that, and in the end it seemed like a waste of time to even talk about it in the film. For that matter, how the hell did a slave civilization build a spaceship bigger than god without anyone noticing?
Ah screw it. The MOVIE SUCKS -- PLAIN AND SIMPLE.
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
When I read the review of this, I could not even want to watch it. The plot stinks. The premise has so many contrivances that I can't just suspend disbelief.
This Picard clone grows up in a Romulan slave mine and ends up becoming the leader of Romulus? Would any self-respecting Romulan ever accept a former slave, or a human as their leader? It is far more likely that the clone would never get out of slavery.
This just has no credibility as a plot device. Since politics in the ST reality is just a mirror of today's geopolitics, just try this idea and see if you could believe it. Imagine some nation like China making a clone of a caucasian US Navy captain, and put him to work hauling dirt. Then when the Chinese leadership gets decimated, they have this caucasian clone take over. Name one person who would buy this for a minute!
Give me a break, Berman! Not even the Raelians believe anything that stupid!
The biggest problem with Nemises: Councellor Troy lived, Data died. Data was one of the best characters on the show! If they wanted to kill someone it would have been a perfect opportunity to kill off Troy. They love affair between Troy and Number 1 was always so lame--neither of them could act. I hated when they had whole episodes devoted to them.
That and there were whole parts of the movie that were never explained, like half thought-out ideas. E.g. what was the whole mind meld/sex scene/mind healing all about?