*** Official "STAR TREK: NEMESIS" Discussion Thread (1 Viewer)

[Dave Scarpa]

Steven Specifically what were you dissapointed in, I see alot of these statements but they never state specifically what they did not like

 

[Rex Bachmann]

Nelson Au wrote:

Quote:

There were a lot of NAMBLA jokes attached to this relationship, but I think it safe to say that the character is still supposed to be the same as before his---uh---journey.
Haven't seen the movie yet, but I would say Wes's absence from it can only improve the film, however bad it may be.
P.S. "Journey's End" has a number of scenes, or parts of scenes, that were filmed, but cut, for time. I assume Paramount Home Video will not be restoring them on the DVD of the episode.

 

[Dan Lindley]

Wes now may not be the Wes of old. Indeed, I think a Wes matured and acting in new ways may be of great benefit to all.

He is a good man, and a cool guy. He would have a lot to offer.

What was the part that was cut?

D

 

[StevenA]

Dave, the film failed for me in every possible way, unfortunately. Firstly, as with most of the TNG movies, it is not cinematic in the least, feeling like a very weak television episode. The characters make incredulous decisions that undermine their authority (for example, Picard expresses concern that the discovery of Dr. Soong's prototype "doesn't feel right", then proceeds to allow Data to download his entire memory bank into it and lets it have access to the ship's computers!).
And the biggest setpiece is the film is Picard intentionally ramming the Enterprise into another ship. This film should be titled "Star Trek: Monster Truck Show"
Add to this the disregard for the show's history (Lore etc) and an inane script, a dull villain and phaser battles which come off like second-rate Star Wars imitations (right down to the interior-Death Star-style production design) and we begin to scratch the surface of the reasons why I didn't like this film!! Sorry I can't be more positive. :frowning:

 

[Michael St. Clair]

A stopped (analog with dials) clock is right 2 times a day.

Apparently his credibility is determined by whether or not he likes the latest "Star Trek" movie. If he had raved about it, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Giving a bad Trek review didn't destroy Knowles' credibility, it was done long ago. And this discussion has been had many times, both on positive and negative "reviews" from Knowles.

I just saw the movie. I found it average and certainly not great (yes, most Farscape episodes were more cinematic). None of which validates Knowles, and I still pity anybody who skips a film because Knowles didn't like it.

 

[Sean Laughter]

Steven,

I thought it was made quite clear in the film that Picard rammed the ship because he realized it was something Shinzon wouldn't expect because Shinzon felt he knew every move the captain would make. In that light it seems to make pretty good sense to me.

I hardly see anyone questioning Mace Windu's lack of authority in bringing about thirty Jedi to face down an entire android army.

Picard also didn't intentionally give B-4 access to the computers systems, so I don't see how that can be held against him.

Though I do have to question the lack of respect for the prime directive in engaging in combat with the pre-warp species on the planet.

 

[Jeff Kleist]

Wesley IS sitting at the table w/Ashley Judd AND they are seen dancing in the background

HOWEVER MAJOR POINTS

1- What the hell is Worf doing there? In the script this is explained, that his ambassadorship "didn't take". Omitting this 30second scene introduces a MAJOR plot hole

2- Data's emotion chip..it seems to have vanished

3- Quantum Torpedos...what happened to them? Even when the lightballs are blue, they're still SPECIFICALLY photon torpedos, and outmoded technology. Considering the ENTIRE fleet was using them in the Dominion War (and the Enterprise last movie), no excuses!

4- Why was Wesley wearing a Starfleet uniform? As I recall, he resigned from Starfleet well before he left to go Travellin.

5- And I know this is more of a fanboy "spot the in-joke" dealy, but every ship that was coming to their aid had been destroyed on TNG/DS9. USS Galaxy, USS Hood, USS Valiant were the only ones I caught.

Most of the rest are covered by deleted scenes.

Be thankful they cut Troi's Mindf*ck attacks from 3 to 1. It was jumpy, but it spared us the suck they were in the script.

 

[Dave Scarpa]

Well Picard did what he did because the Autodestruct was offline (Did you hear that) His Mission directive was to stop shinzon all Other considerations meaning thier Lives was secondary (did you catch that scene) When Picard said that finding B4 did'nt feel right it was a forshowdowing of the Trap by the Remans.

I think a second viewing is in order.

I like Hardy's Shinzon it wa an interesting performance.

I Liked Nemesis, but here's the Catch I stayed away from the TrekBBS and all the vile spewing there before I saw the film. So I did'nt go in with Intense hatred on my mind. I Did not read the script a year ago. I think these things helped to not taint my judgement. I Don't see where this film merits this much hatred. It was immensly better than Insurrection. It had the production values of a movie not a TV show. This was not Star Trek 5.

 

[Scott Weinberg]

Is it possible that people just sincerely don't like the movie? Or are all the naysayers just people who 'read the script a year ago' and had an agenda of hatred already set in motion?

Frankly I'm STUNNED that anyone could recommend this movie with any enthusiasm, yet I wouldn't employ any broad, sweeping generalizations to describe those who enjoyed the flick.

Yes, I'm certain that anyone seeing this movie will remember the oh-so-creative way the Exposition Computer tells the audience "AUTO DESTRUCT IS OFFLINE!" Brilliant storytelling there.

Much as I celebrate anyone defending a series they admire, I think it's possible to do so while respecting those who disliked the film at hand. I'm not trying to be agrumentative, but the old "Oh you just WANTED to dislike it" argument gets really old after a while.

Live long and prosper (financially).

 

[Peter Apruzzese]

I can't disagree with anything Scott Weinberg says above. This thing is an unmitigated disaster.

 

[Sam Davatchi]

Wow! I read the reviews and it seems that this is a case of polarity. You are going to either like it very much or hate it, nothing in between! Seems more like the "Die Another Day" case! However I believe that many people who loved DAD will join the other half in short time!

 

[StevenA]

Thank you Scott, an excellent summation.

And to those who are defending the Monster Truck Show sequence
I wasn't criticizing Picard's judgement, I was criticizing the filmmakers' judgement. Whatever excuse they came up with for having the Enterprise ram another ship
the bottom line is that, IMHO, it was a crude, hamfisted action sequence lacking any of the class or tension of the climactic space battles in The Wrath of Kahn or, to a lesser extent, The Undiscovered Country.

And, FWIW, I had not read the script beforehand and was desperately wanting to like this film.

 

[Nelson Au]

Jeff-

With all respects, were you kidding when you said that Will Wheaton AND Ashley Judd were seen at the marraige sequence? I looked to the far left, I saw Wheaton sitting at the table. But I noticed that there was a chair or gap between him and Gates McFadden. Either Ashley was in the powder room or she was CGI'd out. And if they are seen dancing, it must have been a very quick glance, I looked hard for them, but I missed it.

Nelson

 

[Bryan_P]

Peter,

I'm not sure it's possible to "love Star Trek" and call this film an "unmitigated disaster." This was the best Star Trek movie perhaps since The Wrath of Khan, and to call it a disaster simply shows you didn't want to like it in the first place. The acting was great, the story was sort of cliche but done in a new and interesting thematic way and the special effects were the best yet for a Trek movie. And Baird's direction was not nearly as bad as everyone has made it out to be.

Folks, don't let opinions like the one above stop you from seeing this film. It's really quite good and it will leave you waiting for the next one. And there will be a next one. Go see Nemesis and enjoy the best science fiction film of the year.

 

[John Haghighi]

Best Sciene fiction film of the year?
Really?
Seriously?
Your kidding right?

The only decent part was the battle sequences, but it no way near as good as Wrath of Khan.

Hyping up the movie will only leave those yet to see it disappointed. It is what it is an average movie.

 

[Peter Apruzzese]

I'm not sure it's possible to "love Star Trek" and call this film an "unmitigated disaster." This was the best Star Trek movie perhaps since The Wrath of Khan, and to call it a disaster simply shows you didn't want to like it in the first place.

This is 100% wrong, Bryan. I went in expecting to like it - I've liked the last three films (to varying degrees) and expected no less than that.

But this isn't the discussion thread - let's take it over there.

 

[Jack Briggs]

Peter is perfectly free to state his opinions in the review format this thread requires. Not everyone likes (or is going to like) this film. And I look forward to joining these discussions after I see the thing next week. (This is the first time I've not seen a Trek installment on opening day.)

 

[Jack Briggs]

Yes, of course. Aint-it-Cool is a public forum where people who have seen movies can submit their own (gasp!) opinionated reviews. No one there claims to be a professional critic, which the point of the entire enterprise.

Apparently his credibility is determined by whether or not he likes the latest "Star Trek" movie. If he had raved about it, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Listen, Jay: Whether Knowles thinks this thing is the best film since Citizen Kane or the worst since Plan 9 From Outer Space is irrelevant. What's relevant is that his amateurish dreck lacks literacy and credibility. And that's what I was criticizing. He wants so badly to play with the big boys, yet only demonstrates the need to take a remedial English course.

 

[Patrick Sun]

Spoilers! Spoilers! Spoilers below!
I think there wasn't any tension in the last act of the film in regards to their survival. The pacing had no flow to it.
The Riker fight was just ludicrously shot and fought.
That Brent Spiner had a hand in the story definitely brought Data's arc into the forefront of the story as it unfolded. As soon as that part of the ending unfolded, I was reminded of "He is our only hope" "No, there is another."
The "nemesis" by way of a clone was stretching it. It does raise the idea of nature vs. nurture, I suppose, but even that isn't done well in the screenplay. They must have trimmed too much of the Picard Shinzon hoe-down because you never really get that sense of dread from Shinzon, at least I didn't. I saw him as a punk ass kid looking to beat the man to be the man (I guess this somehow ties into the Monster Truck angle we got early in the film as they were picking up pieces of B-4).
I guess they trimmed out the part where Shinzon morphs into Picard (I saw it in the trailer many times, but not in the film at all, and the trailer should not have given away the Enterprise ramming into the Simitar ship, if you don't know about that shot, it would have more impact while viewing it for the first time around).
Like in my review, I'd only recommend it to fervent Star Trek fans.

 

[Rex Bachmann]

Scott Weinberg wrote:

all[/I]]Quote:

If these things don't apply to any given commentator, yourself included, why would you take them as a condemnation of "all naysayers"?
Of course, if you're talking about someone else's comments, I'll do an "Emily Littella": "Never mind."
P.S.: I've only seen the trailers and have read nothing except the standard public reviews and the posts here. I hope this movie isn't as bad as some make it out to be, but my hopes never run high for a Trek film, so I'm prepared.