Who KILLED Star Trek: Insurrection?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 7 фев 2025
- Star Trek: Insurrection started out as a completely different story. Let me tell you how endless rewrites sent Picard and the TNG crew from battling Romulans and Starfleet to the lacklustre jaunt it became.
#startrek #startrekinsurrection #startrekthenextgeneration #startrektng #sciencefiction #writing
Is any one person truly to blame?
Was there a good movie in there somewhere?
Let me know in the comments.
If you want to know more about what happened with Star Trek: Insurrection please read Michael Piller’s book ‘Fade In’. It’s an excellent insight into the crazy process of writing for a Hollywood movie. You can find a pdf version freely available on the internet with a simple Google search.
Want more videos like this?
Like, subscribe and share it with your friends!
![Seungmin "그렇게, 천천히, 우리(As we are)" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kAzmhLHePqU/mqdefault.jpg)
I was in high school when Insurrection came out. I always wondered "How come they didn't make the bad guys the Dominion?" I mean, it was all right there. Heck throw the Cardassians in as well since you're playing with themes of occupation and relocation. Keep the Duffy character as the "Captain Maxwell" type trying to shed light on what's happening. I mean, make it a sequel to "The Wounded." Duffy sympathized with Maxwell or served with him during the Cardassian Wars. Instead of the rag-tag band helping the crew, make it a third act cameo of the DS9 crew in the Defiant fighting alongside the Enterprise and Duffy's ship against a Jem Hadar battleship or a Cardassian fleet. There's your expansive, action-packed, cinematic, high-stakes film that should have been Star Trek: Insurrection.
Sounds like a good draft. I'd watch it👍
DS9 was still running at the time and I went into the theatre fully expecting some Dominion War stuff to feature in Insurrection. Instead we got a couple of throwaway lines about it.
I've read Rick Berman wasn't a fan of the stuff they were doing on DS9 - which would explain why Cardassians, Dominion, etc. were never in discussion for the movies.
@@Phintasmo Rick Berman hated good entertainment.
Having watched this, I can’t help but think that Patrick Stewart is the secret power behind the throne that destroyed Star Trek. Writers should be writers, producers should be producers and directors should be directors. When the lines between the three become blurred, the story becomes the first casualty and after that the characters. The golden rule of entertainment is that performers seek attention. Once an actor receives an inordinate amount of attention, something in their brain tells them that it is because of them and not the character they portray. This leads to a blurring of the lines between the character and the actor that portrays them. The captain in the TNG movies is Patrick Stewart and not Picard. The writers should have stuck to creating a good complicated story that focused on the plot and not given the characters the chance to live out their fantasy of dancing a rumba. The actors are a means to an end and not an end in themselves.
This theory tracks when you follow through to Star Trek: Picard.
Stewart had even more influence on that one and his portrayal was a far cry from the Picard we knew back in TNG.
@@Phintasmo I think you could probably name several franchises that were ruined by lead actors becoming producers. The first example I can think of is Due South. It started as a gritty police drama w dry humourand ended up as musical comedy.
He absolutely was because he was the (evil) mastermind behind Nemesis. He basically wanted to turn Picard into Kirk and it ended with predictable results.
I always heard Patrick Stewert kind of had a big ego and even during TNG they were always writing in things to appease him, usually shoehorned in romance or action scenes. So it wouldn't surprise me.
He was a big headed thespian act-tor! But he did give such a great performance as Picard that a lot of his shenanigans were forgiven.
I love that insight. And never give your actor 'right of refusal' on scripts built into their contract.
The original story idea for ST:Insurrection seemed intriguing, if nothing else because of the inclusion of the Romulans as the bad guys instead of the Sonaa.
In my opinion, the Sonaa--as a SciFi species--represent my VERY least-favorite SciFi trope: the small, loner group of antagonists that are somehow able to design, build, and maintain an incredibly powerful weapon/ship that out classes our heroes top-of-the-line weapon/ship, despite the antagonists having little or no access to resources, maintenance facilities, and lack the kind of massive technological base like the Federation has. The only better example of this in TNG lore is the next movie: Nemesis. Another powerful weapon/ship built in secret, with limited resources and manpower, but still manages to be a powerful adversary that nearly defeats the Enterprise. Why are the small bands of bad guys always able to build the big, bad, secret weapon?
The trope is so overused...so much so that we get it back-to-back in TNG movies. And don't even get started with the antagonist in Star Trek Beyond... (Thank goodness that's an alternate timeline.)
It never felt plausible that the Son’a ships would go toe-to-toe with the Enterprise-E.
Surely we would have heard mention of such a formidable empire before now?
Star Trek has to hand-wave this sort of thing a lot. Like why were Andorians everywhere in TOS but never seen in TNG?
@@Phintasmo That’s a good point regarding the Andorians, and that seems like a big miss on the part of the TNG writers. Andorians and Tellurites (along with Vulcans and Humans) were the founding members of the Federation. Why isn’t their presence in TNG bigger? Or in this case, why aren’t they present at all??
@@quantumsledgehammer1629 I'd guess the real reason is they thought the Andorians looked too silly. In-Universe you've just got to imagine they are around but they've always juuust left 10-Forward when our heroes arrive.
@@quantumsledgehammer1629 The film definitely would've been better if established "bad guys" the Romulans were the primary antagonists in the movie. The Sonaa always struck me as a "villain of the week" I didn't find them compelling or interesting at all.
I love Star Trek: Insurrection and I still contemplate it to this day!
On one hand, forcibly relocating people violates their rights and disrupts their way of life, which is fundamentally unjust. Each individual's right to live freely and securely should be respected, and any action that undermines this sets a dangerous precedent.
On the other hand, if the resource can significantly benefit a large number of people, some might argue that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few... or the one.🖖
Imagine if Tom Hardy was playing the young Picard in Insurrection and then played his clone. Crazy.
That would have been tremendous forward planning. They could have even had Picard talk about what kind of a young man he was during Insurrection - then see some of that manifest in his clone in the next movie.
I love Insurrection. I always watch First Contact and Insurrection back to back because I love them both.
It's ironic that today after the soulless offerings from the JJ verse, and everything trek with the name Kurtzman on it, that everything pre JJ verse is now Citizen kane trek wise.
Just goes to demonstrate how very careful you need to be in allowing who influences your project, especially when it comes to actors. The likes of Leonard Nimoy and Jonathan Frakes were the exceptions in Star Trek's case, but they ironically probably gave executives confidence letting Patrick Stewart have more say than he normally should. The original pitch sounds far more fitting for a movie, though I think what we really needed was TNG's own motion picture. Exploring something totally new/unknown they have to figure out on the fly, really pulling upon the sci-fi threads.
Plus Nimoy getting applause for directing the Voyage Home made Shatner want to direct number number 5.
@@Phintasmo Pretty sure Shatner had it written in his contract to direct a film. The one thing Shatner was similar to his character was his competitiveness.....
Just for Mckellen opposite Stewart in these roles this would have been worth it.
And they were discussing this BEFORE they paired up for Xmen!
that's why X-Men worked so well a couple of years later. Patrick Stewart was always the perfect Professor Xavier, and Ian McKellen opposite him as Magneto brought in the necessary gravitas of two old friends with opposing ideologies but not allowing it to make enemies of them (the Xavier-Magneto relationship has always fascinated me).
The irony of the guy who told Stewart not to take the Picard role back in 1986, playing a Vulcan admiral.
The whole process with which they wrote the movie scripts was flawed. It's giving it to one writer, who comes up with one story idea, then it's either accepted or not, then one script is written, then you start tinkering and tinkering with it based on all the feedback, then you supposedly have a finished script because you are out of time. It's so stupid, and it would be a miracle if a good script came out of that. During the TV show they had to come up with 26 episodes per year, so they had a room full of writers who came up with story ideas, the ideas that were deemed good enough were greenlit and were written into episodes, and out of 26 episodes maybe 5-6 were good or great, and maybe 1-2 ended up being all-time classics. So that just goes to show if you put all your eggs in one basket of one script, more than likely you're gonna end up short. They should've done it the same way for the movies as they had done for TV, a room full of writers pitching all their best story ideas, maybe the group votes for the best ones, write up the 3 best story ideas into scripts, now you've got 3 competing scripts to choose from. And if they all turn out great, hey no problem you've got the next films written already. One might have questions like "does the Writers Guild allow something like this for movie scripts" but since other franchises have since done this, like the MCU which has those writer retreats every few years where they come up with the next batch of films, and even another Paramount franchise, the Transformers, it's clearly something that is possible and allowed.
After reading Piller’s account of the studio process I’m amazed any good stories ever make it out into theatres.
Writers are notoriously low on the pecking order and lose all control quite early in the game. Maybe it would work better if they were respected more as collaborators throughout the process?
Instead it seems they have to bend over backwards to appease the power players - lest they be replaced with someone more accommodating.
The best thing about this movie was the Sonaa makeup. The worst thing about it was...everything else (including the Sonaa). Regardless of the various drafts that were considered for this particular movie, I find it utterly inexcusable that they never made a TNG feature film with Q. It's got to be one of the biggest missed opportunities in the history of movie franchises.
Q was a massive missed opportunity. Especially when they were deliberately looking for a lighter tone after First Contact.
I can only imagine they thought Q was too much a creature of the TV series and wouldn't deliver the big action they wanted on the big screen.
Q's powers with a movie budget could have been visually spectacular.
TNG had two things....Q and the Borg....they really didn't have anything else interesting....They used up Q in the final regular series, but they also overused the Borg in the regular series, and kept CHANGING what they did.....However, they still used the Borg for a film......Not sure what they could have done the same with Q, outside of trying to make a TRILOGY of movies, based on the Borg....The original movies used the KLINGON ship in all 6 movies.
The best thing about this movie is F. Murray Abraham. Too bad his performance is in this movie.
Ptah. Q is nothing but a lazy plot device.
i liked insurrection because it was like an episode. i liked TNG the series. and this was like TNG the series.
Its funny...Insurrection was the first TNG movie I saw when I was around 7 or 8 (so around 2005 or 2006). I loved this movie because it was my first time seeing the Enterprise E and it felt like I was watching a Season Finale or cliffhanger of TNG (Which I had only seen 10-15 episodes at the time). I watched this movie on VHS because it was all I had available and it was the first videotape movie I could remember buying with my allowance for around $5. I probably wore out the rewinder we had from seeing this movie so often that I had to use the VCR instead. I built Lego versions of the E and the Son'a battleships and duked it out between them just like the movie. Quite a spectacular series of battles too.
But now, almost 20 years later, after rewatching Insurrection and seeing all the flaws (especially after viewing the entire series at least once) it made me realize that despite knowing it wasn't quite as grand and awe inspiring as it was to younger me, I still love this movie. I know First Contact is the superior film and that Nemesis is a meme, but the forgotten one in between them is still one worth watching for me. Star Trek Insurrection may not be among the tier of Wrath of Khan or Undiscovered Country or The Voyage Home, but I'll always enjoy this movie.
When you see something as a kid it freezes your opinion in amber.
I thought Generations and First Contact were great when they first came out.
In later years I saw the RLM/Mr. Plinkett dissection of those movies and I agree with most of their criticisms - despite this I still love the first two TNG outings.
Insurrection? I think by then I was becoming pickier about my movies. I walked out underwhelmed. But if I'd seen it at the right age I bet it'd be on my Christmas viewing rotation.
It is not logical to allow your childhood memories to not realize this is a bad movie...I hate Picard as a love interest....I never bought it...I also hated they blew up the TNG D ship, just because the original did, and it made Riker look like an idiot....I hate Generations too, as you can tell.....The Borg was at least Borgy....That is all TNG had was the Borg and Q...
I heard it used to be called "Star Trek: Prime Directive".
That makes me want to have a movie where a coalition of Federation members tries get a humanitarian exception to the Prime Directive to give cures and medicine to other worlds. A political thriller with debates in the Federation council about what it means to be an ever more connected galaxy after the Dominion war in a new galactic golden age similar to after WW2. The movie could end with the establishment of a medical fleet and one of the ships is the USS Pasteur with Captain Crusher.
The Prime Directive always made for good story material. There were plenty of nuances to explore and the crew (and viewers) could often take either side of the issue without being on the 'wrong' side.
Brilliant video; I had no idea all this was going on during the writing process. Poor Piller!
BTW, Your edit is as much fun as the information... that shot of the Enterprise heading into the briar patch, AGAIN, after every rewrite had me laughing harder each time!
Ha! Thank you for that. I was hoping to capture the feeling of the endless loop Pillar must have been going through with all those rewrites.
A loop worthy of a Brannon Bragga 'Homage' to a Phillip K. Dick time loop, if ever there was!
Great video, enjoyed this immensely. In his autobiography, Patrick Stewart barely mentions 'Insurrection' and 'Nemesis', there's a sense of frustration and disappointment in his tone.
Glad you liked it!
Your comment prompted me to look up TNG autobiographies. I was shocked to find Stewart and Wheaton are the only ones who did it!
The TOS cast all churned out multiple books!
@@Phintasmoin Shatner's case, so many you want to yell "Kill Kirk already!"
Insurrection was the first Trek film I saw in the cinema, and I remember my initial comments were "weak storyline but worth watching". It had plenty of exciting moments that looked good onscreen, but overall something was missing.
I don't remember hearing about this original story before, even on the DVD bonus features. It does rather seem like the original idea for Insurrection combined the best (or at least the least worst) elements of both Insurrection AND Nemesis.
I've been saying for a few years now that Insurrection works more like just a regular episode. That same is true of Generations, if you cut all the connections to the original series, it could have been OK as just a regular episode.
As for Nemesis, well, the trouble with that one is simply that everything from it just comes from previous films (especially 2 and 6).
How could they think the Romulans were uninteresting? Every episode with them in it was a classic , as far as I'm concerned. I take it they never asked the fans themselves what they thought of the Romunlans. It would've been great at that time to see them on the big screen. This is an example of the wrong people who think they know star trek, in positions of influence.
I must add at this point, that i actually like Insurrection. But now hearing what it could've been.... i believe I would have liked the original script so much more.
Actually this movie is good because it gave us the "smooth as an androids bottom" scene.
Actually the best thing about insurrection was the Jerry Goldsmith soundtrack its sad that it failed as i like most of the movie i think making the Baku so human was my problem maybe having alien eye colours or hair colour as the use of prosthetics outside can sometimes look fake.
Star Trek conditioned me for so many years that I would have accepted a few spots or a nose wrinkle as being sufficiently alien - Anything!
The odd number/even number myth still holds if you include Galaxy Quest.
Excellent take! I must go back and watch GQ again.
100% agree, boring old humans and the villians are boring, Romulans could work too.
Could've even swung the other way the federation want to relocate these people but for some reason the romulans don't and it could be a big mystery, Revealing in the end that these people taught the romulans or saved them long ago in the past and while they would love to take the planet for themselves there is this bigger due of honor that even time hasn't done away with inside the romulans.
And Worfs bad guy, could end up saving worf in the end to really throw everything off.
Could've been fun to have that Starfleet debate but picard able to say "If our biggest rival wishes to keep them there in peace, it surely makes us look bad"
And yeah Picards best moment to me is his speech in first contact and when defending data.
yep, a movie about moving people.....Surprised they didn't have a spaceship UHAUL as a sponsor....
It’s really an unfortunate process where they had something that sounded more substantive and punchy, and landed on a rather bland and uninspired film. The Ba’ku are not an exciting or interesting people to hang the empathy of a plot on. I agree that adding Duffy would’ve made it more personal and engaging. The Romulans can be very complex and intriguing villains. They’re more intellectual than Klingons, but very cunning and treacherous. Great video!
I was so underwhelmed when I saw it in theatres. With DS9 wrapping up around the same time, I think this is where Star Trek lost me. I'm probably not the only fan who lapsed around this time.
I actually enjoyed Insurrection. I understand why a lot of fans hate it. Basically a worse big budget remake of Who Watches The Watchers. But I tend to like film adaptations of tv shows that are more in line with the TV show. The reason why is if stakes are high in a film we rarely get the time to stop and take in the world we are being presented with. I get that this is a very small minority opinion, but still.
I did like a lot of the little character-isms that were in Insurrection and keeps it from being the worst Trek film for me.
Basically, when you let the "captain" write their movie, you get Star Trek V, and Star Trek IX.
What I think the Generations movies missed out on was setting up a trilogy arc for the cast like they did for Star Trek II-IV. All the Generations movies were pretty much written as standalones. An idea that I just thought about is that after First Contact, the Enterprise crew returns to the 24th century that seems, on its surface, to be the one they remembered, but slowly they realize that it is not. Possibly, some Borg contamination that they did not anticipate. Picard and crew have to, once again, fix the timeline, but this time have the Federation and Starfleet against them since it is their history.
It would have been amazing if they'd hooked them all together somehow.
I really loved the sense of continuity between the TOS movies.
Good point...Shatner wanted to complain about television evangelists and Picard wanted to harp about brexit.....Just shows how important Nimoy as he believed in Star Trek, where as Shatner and Stewart are jus arrogant actors....I HATED Picard as a 'love' interest...It's not realistic...Without the BORG, TNG had nothing to do, and the cast is not that interesting..
I really liked the film..
It's watchable, but after it's done, it's like nothing happened.
This one wasn't great, but the tone of it most resembled the Next Gen series. First Contact was nothing like the series, especially Picard.
I’m in the minority that is quite fond of this one. I like all the Picard stuff and it just feels more intimate than the big action oriented ones
Picard has a good speech in the middle about how many people could be trampled on for the greater good before it'd be considered wrong.
There's certainly stuff to enjoy in it. I like the gag where Data checks how smooth Riker's face is.
@@chrisnielsen9885 none of the tng movies ever worked for me, I imagine it ended with All Good Things 👍
There is also a problem of theme. The world of Star Trek and the Federation is built upon technology and how technology can solve our problems. This movie forgets that and the premise is delivered by one of the Baku when he says, "We believe that when you build a machine to do the work of a man, you take something away from the man."
And, yes, absolutely, these guys were a villain of the week. And contrary to your point about the Romulans, I would argue that the Romulans were barely in Nemesis at all. Instead, you had another villain of the week take up all the stage time. Romulus and Remus were interesting because they were always billed as the homeworlds (plural) of the Romulan Empire. In Nemesis, we instead had our crew facing off against space orcs with an invincible ship.
Political intrigue and sinister plots is what made Star Trek VI work so well. I am not a fan of Rick Berman's weekly, lazy, formulaic, episode structure and you can see that same awfulness in Insurrection and Nemesis.
Absolutely! There’s something very un-Startrek about how it vilifies technology and curiosity in favour of pastoral navel gazing.
Star Trek has often sort of romanticized luddism though. "This Side of Paradise" comes to mind, but it subverts that by showing the spore induced euphoria is a meaningless existence. And DS9's Paradise where a deranged woman forces people to adopt her world view. Insurrection totally romanticizes luddism. BUT...reminds us that the space Amish exist at the mercy or those willing to take from or defend them.
@@scockery What they usually avoid quite well is the Dr Frankenstein stuff - that scientists cause trouble with their hubris and it's better that humanity not tinker with forces it doesn't understand.
I was in high school when the TNG films dropped (college/university for Nemesis). Insurrection was the only one I couldn’t be bothered to see a second time. It seemed forgettable from the day it was released.
@@PhintasmoThe Ultimate Computer
Personally i loved this film, ok it wasnt first contact as that film absolutely kicked ass but insurrection wasnt anywhere near as bad as it was made out to be and thoroughly enjoyable, my only 2 problems with it were the silly joystick scene which was utterly moronic imo and the fact that it was somewhat hypocritical considering the whole "relocate people without their knowledge using holodeck" was literally something the same crew did years earlier on the series... other than that yeah it wasnt quite as dark and intense as first contact but it had serious charm and another carbon copy of FC would have been completely forgettable imo
Pillar's original script plus the change of the Colonel Kurtz protagonist into an old lover (for whom Picard still has feelings) would have made for a much better script.
Original version is very TNG like and i think it would be way better than what they ended with.
I usually forget about this movie in the line-up...
Great video and intriguing for me to realise that even back during first contact Stewart was pushing for different things with his character which at the time seemed fine but after the abortions that were the Picard series where my respect for him evaporated just like getting more pieces of a puzzle once there put together its obvious that the rot had set in much earlier. The earliest itertation of this script sounded far superior
It was a disappointing movie that really started the end of Star Trek from 90's to the early 00's. But I think what really killed Star Trek back then, was Trek Fatigue. Just non stop Trek shows and movies at the same time. But I do think it was Nemesis who put the nail in the coffin.
I feel like I ought to watch Nemesis again. I saw it one time only and that was in the theatre.
I prefer what we got to the other ideas that morphed into Insurrection. I enjoyed it as a kid and I still enjoy it today. Obviously its no First Contact but its a good romp.
All I would complain about would have been the Name Duffy
Ad Astra is literally Heart of Darkness in space
That's a good one!
The Federation being the bad guys is one of many reasons nuTrek is bad, so Berman wasn't wrong there. I don't really hate him and Braga even though they made a lot of bad decisions in Star Trek under their watch, it's just that they too the audience for granted and got lazy. Much like Micheal Piller, they all made good contributions that made Star Trek good, but they all kind of lost something as the show went on. They complained about "franchise fatigue" when ENT was circling the drain, but to be honest the audience was only fatigued with the lazy, unimaginative writing. Season 4 of ENT being run by Manny Coto illustrated that the answer all along was to step aside and let someone else who had love for the franchise take charge of the stories, but TATV illustrated how petty and out of touch B&B could be.
As for Insurrection, I don't know if there would have been any saving that movie. To be honest I don't like any of the TNG movies, because they all go against what had been established in the show previously. While the first two drafts of the story are definitely better than what we got, they still would have suffered from the "long TV episode" syndrome in that they would still have had entirely too much going on. I think what should have been done would be to hire Nick Meyer on again, or someone like that in the sense that they had previously made good sci-fi come in and look things over, and come up with something else for the movies.
Yeah, Trek needed some kind of evolution at that point but all too often Voyager and Enterprise retreated to the familiar.
They should have recognized DS9 as the next step in Star Trek story telling.
The original insurrection story does sound more interesting and like the classic trek movie.
I still liked what we got though, it’s enjoyable and holds up what trek is.
I felt like they should have taken advantage of the dominion war though, at least use as a background point to add more weight and importance to the events happening in the movie
The movie could have begun with a skirmish between the enterprise and dominion fighters. And the whole Baku planet could have been wanted as a staging ground for Federation troops, and they need to invade and move the inhabitants. Picard having to fight that and be punished for it would have very interesting
I went in completely expecting it to tie into the Dominion War.
From what I gather Rick Berman wasn’t a fan of the DS9 story arcs.
Plus on some level I get that there’s a TNG movie audience who weren’t following DS9 - still disappointing though.
Stewart was right because the show was had an established audience from the get go, and general appeal to Sci Fi fans. The movies had to cater to normie cinema goers and the way to bring in an audience was action (see the TOS movies) and that ultimately is why it failed and was the official diagnosis by the autopsy into this movie. It failed because it tried to please everyone and ended up pleasing no one. I agree in principle about the crew being up on charges as the film ends, but it wouldn't have worked because it's just copying Star Trek III. What would be next for the TNG crew? Running around 1990s SF?
There are definitely echoes of STIII, but I would have been fine with that if they put a different spin on it.
Act 1 could be a 'getting the band back together' sequence as we pluck the crew from their civilian lives (lots of possibilities) for a new mission.
They could butt heads with a new captain and crew of the Enterprise?
I feel like its open ended enough to make a follow-through distinct from TOS.
Didn't George Lucas say something about history rhyming?
the only star trek movie that started by small thing: planting cabbage :D
"The baku are a race of children who look hundreds of years old"
That creates... uhh... implications as to how they reproduce, lol.
I always wondered why tf didn't they use the Dominion War as the plotline for insurrection, it seemed obvious to me... I am guessing there were some higher ups who were not too keen on crossing the wires.
The higher up always want Trek movies to be accessible to people who didn't know Trek or just knew the bare basics. And that's why they fell dumbed downso often.
Insurrection is perfect example of too many cooks in the kitchen. As bad a Nemesis was at least it was exciting during the 2nd half. Insurrection was mostly boring and the fountain of youth stuff was cringe worthy.
The experience of making this has me kind of tempted to revisit Nemesis. Haven't seen it since it first came out.
that bit about Patrick Steward perfectly explains why most of the TNG movies are just ok, and the Picard series was unwatchable trash
OK, I would like to call you officially crazy. Every idea I've heard about what this movie started out as, sounds AWFUL. I think the final product is in fact GREAT. Insurrection is just about my third or fourth fave Trek movie after The Voyage Home, The Motion Picture and First Contact. It's proper utopian, proper Trek. Some aspects of the Baku plot may be a bit silly, but I've come to terms with it. I think this movie works and I love it more every time I watch it; by now I rate it a 10 out of 10.
In fact, I can prove it: so many of the ditched ideas from the early stages of this movie - the Romulans, the death of Data, the impostor Picard - were then used in Nemesis, universally considered one of the worst movies!!! How much more clear can it possibly be???
Yeah, its a shame that when they finally used the Romulans it kind of sucked.
Doesn't mean it was impossible to find a way to use them right.
I think we have very different taste when it comes to the Trek movies - which is part of what makes picking these things apart really fun!
My top ranked would probably be 2, 6, 3, 4 and then First Contact.
Patrick Stewart sadly comes up as one of the people who sunk the principles of Star Trek
Loved the original concept. They should just have left it alone.
Im just an old curmudgeon but I'd rather watch Insurrection than Discovery or Picard.
Another case where ego driven uncle ricky was spotted dining with k Kennedy discussing how to kill a franchise
Timer shaving was a mistake.
This...doesn't sound better. its sounds complicated rehash of several other tv episodes of tng. honestly, thefinal version we got (with all of its flaws) sounds like a sleeker, better version of this.
Even though the original drafts sounds better then what we got they all seem bad insurrection is the Star Trek V of the TNG crew bad story, bad special effects the only good thing was the soundtrack
I’ll defend the special effects to some extent - the Sona made for some good PG body horror.
04:43...yeah no.
When you make a movie (or script) thats acceptable to alot of different people, it becomes good to noone.
Nemesis was slow, but Insurrection was cheap-looking and dumbed down. WHY do producers need to bring in outside love interests for the lead? Why can't we get some good Picard-Beverly scenes? Let them face aging v de-aging... and how that affects their relationship. Donna Murphy is wonderful, but she basically winds up on the pile with all the other beauties-of-the-week.
Yeah, the disposable love interest feels like more of a Kirk thing. I’m sure a lot of people at the time (myself included) were thinking “C’mon Picard, Beverly is right there!”
So Patrick Stewart is to blame for all the tedious action in the films?
A very disappointing movie !
It is the worst Star Trek movie sadly. I wish it never existed. Oh well.
I really really really did not like this movie.
Don't get me wrong, I admire Patrick Stewart, but he's starting get Shatner Syndrome. Thinking his opinions are more important than writers and producers of movies. Some other actors have written and directed episodes of TV series. But movies are different beast altogether. When step outside cannon and establish Story Arc your asking for failure. That also applies to Rick Berman too
All TNG movies are utter dreck🤢