Berman Can’t Figure Out Why Nemesis Failed February 28, 2007
by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Feature Films (TMP-NEM) , trackback
Before Paramount handed the Trek keys over to JJ Abrams, Rick Berman produced the last 4 Trek films (Generations, First Contact, Insurrection and Nemesis). In the latest issue of Star Trek Magazine, Rick Berman reflects on his time helming the Trek film franchise. Berman’s film tenure certainly hit a high point with the hit film First Contact which he describes as "a delight to work on from beginning to end." But it all came to an end with Nemesis which is the only real bomb of the Trek franchise. Berman considers Nemesis his "biggest and greatest disappointment," going on to say "I think Nemesis was a far, far better film than you’d believe from the way it was received." The former Trek honcho just cannot figure out why it didn’t perform as well as he (and studio tracking) predicted: "I, to this day, don’t quite understand what went wrong." .
…was it the release date?
Regarding the notion that releasing the film so close to the last Lord of The Rings film Berman was dismissive
I don’t thing that’s a valid complaint because if that were true we would have done better in other countries where it did not open close to that film and it did not do any better in those countries.
…maybe it was the choice of using the TNG cast again:
Berman noted that the studio wasn’t too keen on another TNG based film, but he felt that introducing audiences to a new cast at the same time as trying to introduce Enterprise "was not a good idea". He acknowledges that bringing the TNG actors back also had issues with negotiations over ‘money, participation in story and in script and approving other people to be involved in the project.’, but he still thinks it was the right call
I felt strongly that the tenth film should be another film with the Next Generation cast. In retrosect, perhaps I was wrong, but I still feel it was the right decision
…or could it be the director?
Berman does acknowledge that the choice of Stuart Baird as director had problems. Baird was best known as an editor and Berman notes that editors don’t deal well with actors and that Baird was no exception saying
There was conflict between the actors and the director, more so than usual. We had, for the first, a director who knew virtually nothing about Star Trek, which caused some struggle.
Berman does note that he only hired Baird after being ‘encouraged’ by the studio who he said had ’strong reasons’ for him to be hired. He does not explain why he did not fight that encouragement as he did their encouragement to bring on a new cast.
For more see Star Trek Magazine.
Loading ...
Comments»
Berman’s part of Trek’s past, now.
I’d rather have more posts about Stephen King and “The Dark Tower”–heck, even posts about Robert Beltran and Linda Park–than more of stuff about him, Anthony. As you mentioned elsewhere, other Trek sites cover this kind of thing in agonizing detail, and putting up Berman quotes here s just going to bring out the frothing-at-the-mouth types.
Berman’s percentage of decent episodic TV Trek was pretty much equal to the TOS shows. NEMESIS was simply not up to snuff in all categories.
If the studio wanted a “Next Gen” movie, they could have (and probably SHOULD have) used the DS9 or Voyager cast. Granted Voyager had already returned home by the time in which Nemesis was set, but you could’ve easily had an actual DS9 movie with 1 or more of the TNG or VOYAGER castmembers in cameo roles of the movie. To be perfectly honest, after Insurrection it was time to follow a different cast through the movies. I firmly believe that Star Trek XI should be set in a Post-Nemesis era following one of the former untold crews from the tvseries (DS9, VOY, ENT).
Also, the fact that they released Nemesis so close to one of the biggest movies of the year COULD have had something to do with the huge failure :P
Plus all the editing of the movie in scenes that should have been with to balance the story out, movie mistakes etc is probably contributing factors to the doomed movie.
It was a so-so film.
But then, a lot of “Star Trek” has been so-so and has been successful nonetheless.
In fact, a lot of fans have praised crap labeled “Star Trek” that makes “Nemesis” look like award material.
Whatever the other reasons for its failure may have been, by the time “Nemesis” opened the producers had worn out any reservoir of good will they had with the hard core fans, and most of the rest of the world had become altogether bored with “Star Trek.”
berman berman berman give it up man…hers is what we all need to take to heart and damit it jim i mean this..tng does not hold up in re runs..i can see an episdoe maybe teic the best of tng maybe 3 or i’ll even stretch it 5 times..i have seen spock’s brain at least 100 times and seen amusment evey time i see it..all the episodes of tos are timless that is priceless..the tng crew never ever had that magic and they never will 1996-1969 was a very special time..kirk out!
#4 – Good points.
People like to say Nemesis fared poorly because it was bad, but the thing is, nobody even showed up to watch it in the theaters to make that judgement. People had lost interest in Trek before anything like word of mouth could have had effect.
I just hope that with new people, new cast, fresh approach, peope’s interest is piqued again. And that LOST’s dwindling ratings won’t lead to people groaning two years from now when they hear the words “directed by JJ Abrams” in the trailer.
Yeah, whatever. Almost any episode of modern Trek other than possibly “Threshold” is more watchable than “Spock’s Brain.”
I thought we had consensus that the Berman era of Trek was over and we weren’t going to subjected to “news” about him anymore….
Seriously. The kind of plans that we have heard for ST:XI to revisit the TOS era could have been done anytime during his tenure. They were not. Enterprise probably came closest in spirit but failed in execution. You had nearly 20 years to “get Trek right” Mr. Berman. Time to move on.
#7 references #5, not #6.
That is all. :lol:
Hey Rick, plain and simple. THE MOVIE SUCKED. Nothing to do with the cast. You can’t make a light ship out of a garbage scow. Perhaps for the same reason you can’t understand why the movie failed is probably why you’re not running the show anymore. Of the four movies you overseen, First Contact was the only one with any balls.
Was the Voyager cast ever considered for a feature film? The 2 part Voyager episodes “The Year From Hell” would have made a good movie.
I am so hoping that on December 26, I can say in the lobby of a theater, “Hey Rick, that’s how you make a F@#%ING Trek Movie”
Gee, where are all those TNG haters railing against this article?
If Berman is reading this, I’ll tell him exactly why I think “Nemesis” failed. In a nutshell, it was trying to be “The Wrath of Khan” but it wasn’t. The basic elements of the plot plot strained credulity way too far.
First, Shinzon was supposed to be Picard’s arch-nemesis, but he came out of the blue with this deep hatred of Picard that the audience could not relate to. Add to that the incredible lapse of logic that explained his very existence. Shinzon was supposed to replace Picard as part of a Romulan plot to overthrow the Federation, but when political power in the Romulan Senate shifted, the project was cancelled. Logically, the Romulans would simply have killed Shinzon, but for some unknown reason the didn’t. That leaves a plot hole you could fly a starship through. In a nutshell, there was no reason for Shinzon to be alive, and no past emotional connection between him and Picard for the audience to grasp.
Second, the whole Data/B-4 thing was a terrible idea. We’ve seen other Soong androids before, but Lore was a compelling character who had his own agenda. B-4 was nothing more than a child, and worse than that, he was a bad plot device. Where the hell did Shinzon find him anyway? Additionally, B-4’s existence nullifies the impact of Data’s self sacrifice at the end of the film. When/if B-4 is able to access Data’s memory banks, poof, Data lives again. It was an obvious back door designed to keep the character around should there be another sequel, and it cheated the audience out of what was supposed to be a very emotional moment. Remember, when Spock died at the end of Star Trek II, we didn’t know if he’d ever be back. With Data, that option was already right in front of us.
Third, somebody (I’m assuming it was director Stuart Baird) decided to excise most of the character moments in favor of moving the story along. Trek fans go to these movies in order to visit with their favorite characters. They’re like friends you only get to see once every few years. We like to take some time to get caught up with them. Yeah, it might slow things down a bit, but that’s okay with us. Let us know what everyone’s been up to, then get us into the story. What we got in Nemesis were pale reflections of the characters we know, with the exception of Picard and Data, and they were busy dealing with their duplicates.
Fourth, the Argo Dune Buggy chase. There are so many things wrong with this segment of the film. It’s anachronistic, it feels artificial and forced and it flies in the face of principles that have been a staple of Trek since the beginning. Picard, Data and Worf wantonly firing on their obviously less advanced pursuers, possibly killing some of them in the process, then flying off with nary a thought about what they may have just done to the civilization of that planet. It was completely uncharacteristic of them and of Trek in general.
Fifth, The Remans. Though Remus had been mentioned in Trek before, the inhabitants had never been seen, so their appearance was a surprise. Grotesque, power-hungry, and unreedeming through and through, they weren’t villains but charicatures. Again, the audience held no emotional attachment to them, so the impact of the threat they may have posed was diminished considerably.
Sixth, Shinzon’s banal “attraction” to Troi. This polt device was just vicious and unnecessary. Again, it was designed solely to justify the problem of finding the Scimitar (Sinzon’s overly complex ship) while it was cloaked. Another empty plot device lacking true emotional impact.
Do you see the pattern here? The entire film lacked any emotional punch whatsoever. We were given only glancing views of characters we care about, and when we saw them, they were often acting very uncharacteristically. The villians were weak and unworthy, and their origins were unnaturally forced. TNG’s previous film outing “Insurrection,” suffered from a lack of action after the tour-de-force of “First Contact,” but it has a very strong story, a message that is pure Star Trek, and a wealth of chararcter moments. All of these are missing in “Nemesis.”
All of this is not to say the film is a total failure. I liked the Romulans in “Nemesis” and would have enjoyed seeing more of them. The musical score is beautiful and the FX are amazing. The scene when the Enterprise rams the Scimitar was brilliantly executed and a lot of fun to watch. The film is simply missing it’s heart, but that was more than enough to kill it at the box office.
So there you have it. No big mystery really. It is a shame, though, because with a few small changes in its plot, “Nemesis” could have been the film everyone wanted it to be.
Berman treated Star Trek the way a baby treats a diaper! Some of TNG episodes were good only because the cast helped to elevate the material!
Best answer – listen to the actors who were there from a YouTube presentation posted on this site very early on. Marina Sirtis and Levar Burton . . .
http://trekmovie.com/2006/08/01/sirtis-burton-want-trek-xi-to-be-a-tng-filmsay-nemesis-sucked-video/
Rick Berman – not one of my favorite people
Ooooooooooops. Sorry the video is no longer available. But the text is there.
The problem with all the Berman trek failures ( in my opinion)is the lack of continuity. I mean, here’s this character who is a clones, younger Picard –who is bald. In Picard’s younger years, he had hair–it was one of those Q episodes. Anyway, it was dull dull dull. First Contact was the best one they filmed for STNG.
I think if they would have gotten the continuity right on Enterprise, it might have lasted. But they always went back to STNG references of characters–such as the Ferengi (sp) appearing in one episode. Then the final they screwed up by making it a STNG holodeck program–what the ??
Then again, who am I to say–I just love the original series. It had a message of hope with it and a chemistry between the actors that no other series could duplicate.
Well, I don’t know too much about this style, but he produced “Generations,” which is in my opinion, by far, the worst Trek movie of all time. Kirk deserves better!
–
http://TalkTrek.com – On with the show…
This is where Dennis Bailey comes in to tell you that the original show was just as bad as the other shows :)
I would just like to say that this is probably the last time we will cover Berman and/or Nemesis, at least until we cover nemesis in our ‘review the old trek movies’ series.
so if you have something to say…get it out of your system now.
but try to stay on subject and not get personal
Personally I think part of the reason Nemesis failed was Insurrection. I think that film was actually less entertaining, especially for your non fan. After that film I think many casual fans and/or avg movie goers just gave up on Trek and didnt even give Nemesis a chance. This is probably why the studio wanted to move on to another cast before Berman decided to give the TNG folks another go.
Personally I do think that the TNG crew could have had one more great film in them, but after giving them two chances the movie going public arent open to it, even if they did make one.
I saw Nemesis and I can honestly say I do not remember anything about it whatsoever. Not one scene or even a vague recollection of what it was about. I do remember falling asleep in the theatre for about 10 minutes and wishing it would have been longer. I have not analyzed the career of Mr. Berman or Mr. Baird and their contributions to the world of pseudo-trek, so I can’t lay any specific blame at their feet. But there aren’t many movies I’ve seen that are less memorable than this.
#11 Buckaroohawk “why I think ‘Nemesis’ failed’.
Anthony is inviting comments as to what we thought of Berman’s Nemesis. Look no further than Buckaroo’s brilliant dissertation posted above. He nails it shut as to why that film stunk up the place. Well done!
#19 Anthony.
Thank you. This is old news and there are other things to talk about. Besides the non-TOS bashers will find another thread to “get it out of their systems” .
#11 Buckaroohawk has an excellent assessment with why Nemesis failed. The only thing I take issue with in that post is your praise for Insurrection. I feel, as does Anthony in #19, that Insurrection was a major contributing factor in the failure of Nemesis movies. Generations btw, if given to a writer like DC Fontana, would have been an instant classic of epic proportions, but I digress. The only decent TNG movie was First Contact. Insurrection was pretty terrible for a number of reasons, the first being that you had an humanoid alien race that looked like extras from a 70’s show. Then you had a planet with healing energy beams that could cure the Federation of pretty much all disease, and Picard fought against it. I was on Admiral Doherty’s side all the way. Then there was Data floating, oh boy. Then Worf’s zit, which was a cheap attempt at humor. And of course, the Pacman joystick that Riker used to fend of the Sona. And the Gilbert and Sullivan piece. That was pretty bad too. That really got rid of the mainstream audience in my opinion. John Logan’s script was too much like Gladiator. Not a Star Trek movie at all.
I agree with Anthony about Insurrection’s role in TNG’s decline. The fact the studio was willing to ditch the TNG cast before Nemesis was even shot, along with my observation that nobody even bothered to see Nemesis in the first place, support that argument.
In my opinion, Insurrection is the worst Trek film out of all ten. It really wasn’t even a movie, but more a sub-par episode, extended to two hours. In the past, Star Trek could recover from a bomb like that, but in today’s world with ticket prices being so high, and other major franchises to choose from, I don’t think the general audience was willing to risk a repeat of the Insurrection experience again. They went with Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings or Bond, but they decided that Nemesis could wait for DVD.
#22
I don’t think they will ever get it out of their systems.
#19
TNG didn’t get the send off TOS had in ST6.
It was first and foremost a bad script that captured nothing of TNG as a series except for a brief glances in between gratuitous violence and contrived sequences.
#23
Gladiator was a fine movie, but Star Trek was clearly out of his range. Once again, maybe it had something to do with the STORY. Although I’ll admit, that film was visually stunning in the theatre.
Certified Rick Berman hater and successor spin off series despiser chiming in here :
Rather than unleashing a full blown treatise going on and on about what everyone already knows, I’ll demonstrate some restraint and merely say my Trek mantra is glowing again and I am “very pleased” Rick Berman is no longer associated with the phenomenon that is Star Trek.
I’ll save all of my little quips,stings, pokes, and prods for the regular forums where I know I can at once offend, yet inspire discussion on slow news days. ;)
Besides, my audience of critics and harrassers would/could never forgive me if I got it all out of my system here with nary a word to say about it in the future.
Bye Bye Ricky boy, are there any plans for an updated version of “the red comfy couch” or whatever the hell that was you “produced” prior to ruining Star Trek?
You just tried to milk the cow too furiously for too long, Rick. People were sick of the ST:TNG era saturation.
Good point danno,
I grew absolutely disgusted and sick with 24th century era Trek, my God, a combined 21 seasons and 4 Motion pictures??? Whereas the 23rd century had 3 seasons and 6 motion pictures? You talk about untapped potential for storytelling.
How many times could we watch Worfs moody clinically depressed ass meander through two different series before it was nailed into our minds that yes he is a Klingon of duel heritage that struggles with that, or what about temporal spacial anomolies? I think between the three series they went through the entire catalogue of spatial disturbances!
Technobabble.
TOS avoided it and danced around it. TNG-Voy reveled in it.
I like science. I’m a behavioral scientist. I like solving problems and intellectual challenges.
But if I wanted to watch on a weekly basis uninteresting humans speaking uninteresting dialogue about uninteresting quantum spatial distortions, I’d tune into a ****ing episode of Nova or Cosmos.
Gene Roddenberry had a dictum EARLY on that the characters in a police drama do not stop to explain how a pistol revolver operates, and neither should the crew and characters of Star Trek explain too much about Treknology. Treknology should be viewed as mundane and ordinary, these people work around it and operate it DAILY, when I’m going for a drive with someone I don’t say “I’ll now insert the molded ignition key into the ignition key receptable, thereby resulting in electricity being generated from a battery power source resulting in pistons firing and engine ignition.”
One of the reasons Star Wars resonates with people and culture so much is that the technology was left vague and mysterious, spaceships were cars, they went, you drove. Guns were fired, sabers cut things, big ships fire big laser beams. Lucas didn’t sit down and articulate every single subtle nuance about every peice of fictional hardware and that is effective, it allows your imagination wonder.
Star Trek lost touch with that concept. Gene Roddenberry wanted the Treknology to be realistic, a natural extension of our present technology, but NOT to the detriment of the story and to people.
^^^^^ That is why you go from-
Scotty! can you fix it?
Uh don’t know Sir, she’s broke!
to
Status Mr. LaForge?
Sir the isolinear chips are misaligned creating a cascading power fluxuation, I can’t maintain structural integrity without rerouting the power couplings through a focused transient direct wave beam. Estimated time for repair 7.37 hours.
Proceed Mr. LaForge.
Kirk would have kicked his ass talking all that BS!
The stories for Insurrection and Nemesis were too thin, especially for a complex show like TNG, and frankly there was just too much Trek being done by the same people, it felt too corporate.
The movie failed because the only thing apparently guiding its creation was studio “tracking.” If anyone knows the Bill Hicks routine on test audiences from Arizona Bay you know where I’m coming from with this.
You can’t give a movie a soul by using marketing techniques. You’ve got to lay it on the line and push that envelope, as they say in The Right Stuff, especially when it comes to science fiction, because audiences can smell a formula brewing 5 minutes into the start of a movie.
This isn’t to say formula is automatically necessarily bad. Not so. A well-conceived formula can be a decent spine to hang a lot of other good stuff on in a movie. A great cast, a good director, even a stellar editor, composer, or set designer can make even the most formulaic stories at least fun to watch, enough to make you not feel like you’ve wasted your time.
Really great science fiction films must successfully meet the challenge of showing an audience something they have never seen before.
When something that is purportedly science fiction fails to do this effectively, you have a big, stinking bomb that really just isn’t worth the price of the stock it’s shot on.
You have a film that was made by formula alone, created without the intention of staking out any new emotional/intellectual territory, thus betraying the very purpose of making – or seeing, for that matter – a science fiction film in the first place. You have Nemesis, indeed. Everything is from off the shelf. The characters at this point are sadly off the shelf. The sets are off the shelf. Even the ideas in the story are completely off the shelf.
Star Trek II is also very formulaic science fiction film. You have the vengeful villain, fighting the classic hero over control of terrifyingly wonderful technology. And that’s basically it, if you reduce it to its most fundamental aspects. But Star Trek II is a success (and still a great movie 25 years later) because it’s so human at the same time. That’s the overriding characteristic of the film that brings people back to it. Nemesis by comparison has no such meta-counterpart, at least that isn’t lifted from, and done better by, Star Trek II. Even though Bennet and Meyer were also working essentially “off the shelf,” and on a smaller budget, they seemed to have felt their film should actually be about something, if what made it onto the screen is any indication. The result feels less like formula and more like something approaching modern mythology. When the credits roll, everything old seems new again.
Nemesis, by the end, if you made it that far, at best, feels contrived through and through, from the Picard clone, to the buggy chase, to B4, to Troi’s “mind rape,” precisely as #11 outlined. THAT post is dead on, man.
Tracking, indeed. It used to be called filmmaking, not beancounting.
I’m gonna start off with this since we’ve been told to get this stuff off our chest. My God I’m sick of the Berman, TNG et. all bashing. Two bad movies and one bad series and all of a sudden everything from the last 20 years is crap? If you’ve hated Trek for 20 years why do you continue to venture these websites? A little bit of critisism is fine and understandable as “fans” but ripping on all Trek except TOS? It’s 40 friggin’ years old! Move on! …okay, I’m done, and I’ll never speak of it again.
On Nemisis, I think others here (especially Buckaroohawk) have already hit the nail on the head. Following Insurrection (It’s up there w/ Star Trek V) you need a movie w/ heart that’ll get good reviews from both critics and fans alike. Nemisis had lame villians, missed opportunities, and stuff that felt all wrong. It wasn’t the TNG cast, it was the fact they didn’t write a movie for the TNG cast. It wasn’t all bad, it had some good moments, but good moments w/ a lame plot do not make a good movie.
It’s because some of us are Star Trek fans Kevin. This a Star Trek website.
Contrary to popular belief by a select few evidently, once upon a time there was a thing called Star Trek, for 20 years actually, and there wasn’t a
Star Trek: The Next Generation
Star Trek: Deep Space Nine
Star Trek: Voyager
Star Trek: Enterprise
Star Trek: Mchappy meal
Star Trek: Rides Again
Star Trek: Worf strikes Back
Star Trek: A series focusing on random background extra number 7
There was just Star Trek. Captain Kirk. Mister Spock. The U.S.S. Enterprise. It was good. It inspired two generations. It put characters and words into the pop culture lexicon. It made studios millions.
People that think Star Trek started with TNG, whether by age, or preference, are missing probably 80 percent of the whole picture.
I agree with Kevin and have often said that berman basherrs tend to forget the good years of TNG, DS9 and FC.
btw I know that Paamount want to avoid the same prroblem with STX
to avoid the INS -> NEM problem I am told that Paramount will promote this as a different kind of Trek film. they will play up the new cast and creative team to ensure audiences know that even if you didnt like the last few Trek films this one is different.
Previous posters are right…Nemesis failed was because most of Trek’s “casual” fans didn’t show up. Why? One word:
Insurrection
This movie was like a bad TV episode. Clearly the worst of Trek movies, without a doubt.
I remember convincing 5 friends to join me in watching First Contact back in 96. They refused at first, because they didn’t think of themselves as “Trek geeks.” But they loved it and certainly didn’t hesitate to join me again when Insurrection came out.
2 hours after walking into the theater to see Insurrection they wanted me to pay them back for their tickets and swore they’d never see a Trek film again.
Are they going to shy away from the roman numerals Anthony?
People generally start snickering when you reach the 4th or 5th film in a series.
I didn’t like the derivative , minimalistic titles Berman came up with for his films Star Trek: ADJECTIVE, Star Trek: VERB.
I think they should get back to big fat, bold, in your face titles that resonate and describe the general point of the film in a dramatic fashion.
The WRATH of KHAN
The SEARCH for SPOCK
Indiana Jones films never spared anyones tongue with those titles, nor Harry Potter.
Bermans films may have fared a great deal better had the marketing department convinced him to be a bit daring.
Star Trek: Generations
Star Trek: First Contact
Star Trek: Insurrection
Star Trek : Nemesis
Yawn
what about
Star Trek : Two captains and the horse they rode in on fight Malcom Mcdowell who wants to go home
Star Trek : Not your fathers Zefram Cochran almost dies because the Borg do some time travelin’
Star Trek: Botox aliens are hell bent on eternal youth! We apologize.
Star Trek: Attack of the Clones. Figuratively, and literally. Again we apologize.
#34 -That makes sense Paramount will go all out to promote this as a different kind of Trek film, and I expect that will extend to the visual look as well (otherwise, it’ll just undercut all their efforts). Again, that means no TOS replication.
Alright, I’ll beat a dead horse.
Doesn’t anyone else find it odd how when you break the basic plot down into a simple summary it speaks volumes about the quality of the film and the heart behind it?
Star Trek – a mysterious alien entity threatens earth and james Kirk reunites the crew of the Starship Enterprise to confront this threat
Star Trek- a genetically engineered superman escapes exile, discovers the galaxies ultimate weapon, and james Kirk has to kick the ever living shit out of his ass
Star Trek- Spock died. We miss him. He’s our friend. Let’s go get him.
Star Trek- A mysterious alien probe travels the galaxy to talk to a whale. There arent any. It pisses the probe off and James Kirk and crew have to go find some to appease the angry whale Gods.
Star Trek – Captain Kirk isn’t impressed by God so he questions him. We laugh.
Star Trek- it’s time for peace in the galaxy. The Klingon President is assassinated by conspirators and you know who and crew have to deal with the shit.
Star Trek- a wacky mad scientist wants to go home so he blows stars up, resulting in captain picard recruiting captain kirk who later falls off a bridge. Seriously.
Star Trek – alien zombies travel back in time to wipe out humanity. captain picard has to make sure vulcans see earth so we can get back to the point we know and love.
Star Trek- Again, botox aliens want to look young again so , oh hell nevermind.
Star Trek- captain picards clone is mad he is a clone and wants to hurt captain picard who is in no way responsible. In the process, the clone is willing to kill well, just about everything and everyone that, again are not responsible.
anyone see a trend or pattern here besides me?
39 – What happened to “demonstrating some restraint,” Josh T?
I haven’t been dogging on Berman! ;)
Star Trek – Derivative Occurances Aboard a Futuristical Spaceship With Lots of Pretty Explosions, We Promise
I think that was gonna be the next one if I’m picking up on the pattern correctly.
You are quite right to be skeptical and cynical about the upcoming film GSmarty, given the epic 4 turds that preceded. ;)
#43
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not knocking the next announced effort. I’m gonna withhold that kind of criticism until I actually see what these new guys come up with.
Derivative Occurances would have been the next Berman-helmed deal in all likelyhood. I admit to jumping on the wagon and following your lead and other cliches to that effect that are springing to my mind right now. Sorry if I was unclear in my prose there. Lateness and a desire to be mildly amusing often result in me just taking up bandwidth and not making much sense.
ohhhhh you mean the all powerful TIBERIUS CHASE and the Romulan War idea!
Wow, you talk about dodging a bullet.
I grew up on TOS reruns during the seventies I loved Star Trek then.
I marveled at the TOS movies great effects at least compared to the series.
I could not believe TNG series I was in late teens early twenties.
Got to enjoy Picard and crew after the BIG SHake up with the Borg.
I was mortified at first at the intro to Bab…DS9 then sisco lost the hair. I really wound up loving that show. The main characters had more interaction with each other even during the WAR. Well Lost in…Voyager did not thrill me either then the BOrg showed up to save..uhhh hmm well you know what I mean.
By that time the emotional impact of TNG movies were going the opposite direction. Generations was a cool flic to view a bad one to relish. Kirk dies in such an anticlimactic and useless way it underminded what I thought was a watchable film.
I liked Contact it had the Borg to give TNG another infusion of action. To be honest Insurrection was only poor to me because the rumors I heard of the script. Picard goes against the regulations , relinquishes his command and fights the federation because of his love of a woman. At the end he lives with her and bids his former crew farewell they leave wondering if they would ever see him again. I thought for sure they were going to break out of the confines of the TV show. However, they played it safe.A evil admiral with plans of exploitation is the reason why Picard is against the federation and his “love” interest was just another wanna be. There was nothing on the line. He and crew save the day and fly off like the TV show. They never get to evolve past the series. Kirk ,Spock , McCoy and friends had been seperated and reunited. Kirk had a son! He Suffered from midlife crisis.
It tooks Khan to remind him that he belonged in the captains chair again. That was just in the first two movies. God…there was some new things and challenges .
In the end TNG did not have the time to evolve from TV to movie stage. The irony in Nemesis was its attempt to shake up the status quo again. But by that time I just did not care. Voyager had wrapped up and turned the Borg into pussy..cats That was the sign for me that the 24 century had hit its limit. I did not even care to see another TV show. I was too pissed over the way Trek had lost its edge.It lost its magic. I thought for sure that I no longer wanted it in my life. It was like going to the first place you made out with your girl in the woods and see the trees torn down and the little pathways that led to the make shift campsite paved over and a house proudly stands in the very place you kissed her. I loved that place but it was no longer there and I had to let go. The return of the TOS to TV ,with new effects no less ,has reinvigorated my hope. I may not have the place where my girl bonded with me but I know that when I see her I still want her. It is good to have my first love back.
Id Insurrection hadn’t been SO bad, leaving a foul taste in everyone;s mouth, maybe nenesis migh have done beter. i sjipped it in the theaters, Only Trek g=film Ive EVER missed in the theater.
It’s not THAT nad, just bad.
And an awful film to go out on . TOS crew rallied after V and made Vi which was a freat way t ckise the chapter.
Nemesis failed because it was badly conceived, badly written and, unless the masses of cut material had any worth, horribly structured. Oh and the cast were all embarrassingly old for the sort of story they were acting in!
Like a lot of people, Insurrection lost Berman any good will I felt towards TNG and his other Treks.
I walked out of Nemesis and, in my head, removed all traces of Berman Trek from my personal ‘canon.’ TNG Trek and beyond became a separate universe that happened to share a name. Effectively I disavowed it!
For me Star Trek was now TOS, TAS, and TMP to TUC. From now on, the last time I saw Kirk was when he was sat on the bridge of the Enterprise-A with his real crew. It was very refreshing to regard TNG onwards as a separate universe!
And I know people go on about DS9 and Voyager movies, but the public never really embraced those shows and a movie would have been met with: ‘I probably won’t see that, because I never watched that series!’
TNG should have stayed on TV and had more changes of cast and more changes of production staff, like most ensemble series do. Trouble is, because Trek had an active movie franchise, they all stayed entrenched on the show in the hope they could get megabucks in the movies.
Anyway, with Berman gone, there’s the hope that TNG/Enterprise-era Trek can get some straight-to-DVD movies (a totally Manny Coto-run Enterprise film would be intriguing!) The later Treks really belong on TV. There’s nothing wrong with them not really being suitable for cinema. Warners have got into straight-to-DVD and we’ve got the new Bab 5 films, so we can but hope!!!
Let’s hope TOS-redux is wonderful on the big screen and some interesting people do some good stuff with small-screen straight-to-video Trek.
Yeah, I know Dennis Bailey is on here, but as long as we are talking about good Trek, in particular TNG… my favorite episode is “Tin Man,” the soundtrack from the score by Jay Chattaway is almost playing constantly when I am working on the computer.
The reason Nemisis failed in my opinion is simple. For a Trek, or any SF film to make real money it needs repeat business. As well as good word of mouth publisity. Nemisis had neither. The film was basicly bad. It had a few good moments but basicly sucked.
LLAP
For me the main problem of Nemesis isn’t the lame story, the huge plot holes or the cut character moments nor the action orientation.
Granted that are all serious problems which I dislike BUT that Picard WASN’T Picard at all cause he was so damn out of character that he acts like Rambo in driving at high velocity on a prewarp culture planet and loughing.
Then flying a shuttle thew the Scimitar although he knows not even how to control the damn thing and Data could have done that 1000 times better and knew.
And finally beam alone to the Scimitar and shoot some warrior race dudes alone who cannot even hit the Scimitar while staying in front of it.
There was even a scene where Picard is shooting with two pulse rifles at a whole bunch of these Nosferatu/Orc dudes while Data is like R2D2 opening the door.
That Picard is humorously yelling at Data isn’t much help – damn was that stupid.
Again there are Riker and Worf shooting whole generations of the Reman losers that I thought there were Star Wars Storm Troopers – Anything like this was not in any Star Trek movie before.
Now we can get to the story.
As said here before ;) cause of B4 the whole Data death scene was more than unnecessary.
It would have been better to let him live than to cheat the audience in a way everyone noticed.
Without that backdoor it would have been cool but since it was Picards Nemesis I thought he should have been killed – that would have make an impact!
I would have put in the cut scenes especially the Picard/Data Chateau Picard scene and would have cut the Buggy chase and B4 stuff.
If this Shinzon dude should take the power over Romulus had shown how Reman troops taking power in Romulus at least briefly.
One big story problem is the Scimitar – where die he get this thing?
How could he build it unnoticed with a bunch of slaves without much resources, tech or knowledge?
There are many more huge plot problems but I will try to shorten my post.
There are on the other hand a couple of cool things on this one.
First comes to mind the terrific Enterprise/Scimitar crash which looks amazing and I haven’t seen anything like it yet.
I thought that Shinzon was way too much a badguy character but Tom Hardy has done a good job portraying him.
Also Patrick Stewart has put of some great scenes but he has not stand up to correct the flaws of Picards characterization.
Some of the Picard/Shinzon scenes were well played and written – I liked them.
The music was good and the Data flying in space scene was as much fun to me as the exploding screen of the Enterprise.
And a couple of good ideas/improvements like the forcefield for the warp core (about time ;)) and the destroyed self destruction.
It is astonishing, and perhaps revealing of Berman’s lack of deep talent and insight that he does not understand what went wrong with this sad effort. As soon as Picard and crew got in that buggy and put on those Oakley shades, my heat sank with the weight of ridicule that started to build from then on. The casting of a villain with a wealy bad Monty Python lisp, a starship cwumpled…er crumpled like tin foil by a slow collision (yet immensely strong enough to withstand the accelerative forces of warp speeds and fields that can tear/space time) and that embarrising data/superman space flight…then there’s the plot holes as discussed on top of that and overall poor direction, and just too much of TNG era Berman flavoured Trek. Patrick Stewart and all the regulars’ great acting talent at least scraped the best they could from the dire direction and script.
I haven’t read all the posts yet so forgive me if this is covered territory…
Rick Berman was a decent producer and is responsible for some great Star Trek through the years. But he’s also responsible for some of the worst.
It’s not that Kirk died in Generations that was so bad, it’s that it was an awful death with no impact at all.
Insurrection is another stinker, and this is part of why Nemesis failed – low expectations…
But he’s kidding himself if he’s confused about Nemesis failing. It just wasn’t very good. Filled with super inflated egos trying to hog film time, by casting themselves in dual roles, and having clones of themselves control the Romulan Empire. There is so much that is cringe worthy about this movie… Reeeeeeeediculous.
Doug
It needed more dune buggies
Re: Josh T. etc. Esquire
You have made a topic about a lame movie very entertaining and made some very good points along the way. Thank you.
Rick Berman doesn’t get it. He wrecked the entire franchise, and he’s wondering what went wrong with the LAST movie he did? Sheesh.
I think it was just a matter of Trek fatigue. The shows never seemed to evolve. I could watch Voyager and get a TNG vibe. I could watch Enterprise, which I thought had the best characters (besides Archer) in years, and that bland music would kick in and I would get a TNG vibe. I’d watch Ds9, and just when things would get cooking, I would sense a TNG vibe. Modern Trek came out of an assembly line that seemed to have a certain playbook that was followed when it came to everything from direction to stories to sound fx and set design. After awhile, for your average movie goer and tv watcher, all these shows began to blur together and it was hard to differentiate one from another..and they just weren’t that good. By the time Nemesis hit the screens, the mainstream was lost and the small die- hards in fandom just couldn’t make it a success. I think the same thing applied to Enterprise and it’s ultimate downfall. As they say, familiarity breeds contempt….and modern Trek had became way too familiar and ultimately un-interesting.
#11. Buckaroohawk
B-I-N-G-O… Bingo… right on the money!
Josh T (et al)
Absolutely priceless… I’m crackin’ up… chuckles & chortles over coffee…
Your well-known loathing of all non-TOS Star Trek notwithstanding, I commend you on the right balance of humor and intelligence with the appropriate sprinkle of “bite” thrown in. Very entertaining.
I gotta be honest… I do enjoy reading your insights… just continue to keep it clean with no mean.
53. YARN – March 1, 2007
It needed more dune buggies
Actually, it needed less dune buggys, heck no dune buggys at all, especially the Argo buggy, it made it seem less credible to most viewers that in the 24th century, they still used wheeled buggies! Sure you need the shuttle to get to the surface, but you don’t need a dune buggy to get around, especially when hovercrafts by then would be considered old technology, whilst wheeled vehicles much more antiquated.
And one key failure to Nemesis btw, is the poor choice of release date, had they avoided Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (I’m pretty sure someone must have been aware of it’s release date ahead of time) then maybe it may have at the very least, recovered it’s budget expense. Heck most people will see a movie if there’s no other good releases around the time it’s released.
So regardless of the plot, in the first few weeks or it’s release, it should’ve garnered enough cash to get into the green.
It was quite clearly edited so badly that if there was a coherent script in the first place the final product was just a badly linked sequence of action scenes.
I saw a pictorial synopsis that best discribes Nemesis’s many overwhelming flaws that put it on a equal footing as The Final Frontier in the worst Trek movie ever stakes(so far)
found it… I don’t how best to post links here so …
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Nemesis/Pictorial-1.html
It wasn’t Trek fatigue. It sucked. Berman should have been fired 10 years earlier, and THAT is why Trek failed. It may be a case of too little too late, but as others have stated, Berman is the past now. His legacy will be as the guy who ruined Star Trek. The guy who was handed the golden goose and cooked it.
Berman never created anything on his own. He leetched a career off of someone else’s work.
Abrams has an advantage in that he HAS created successful things on his own. And unlike Berman, Abrams actually seems to care about the original series. Unlike Berman, Abrams is embracing it, not trying to destroy it.
Abrams may not be able to undo what Berman did. But I’m glad he’s at least going to give it a go.
Berman is no longer important. He is no longer news. And that’s probably the best thing to happen to Trek in a long time.
Enjoy your “Nexus” ribbon isolation Rick, I know I am… :P
The fact that Berman can’t figure out what went wrong is all the argument ones needs to make sure he never gets another crack at it. He’s out of it.
Rick, Let me offer a few reasons why “Nemesis” failed. There are a number of reasons but at the top of the list is that fact that the film had a depressing visual “sameness” that didn’t compel audiences into thinking there was anything fresh about it. The same production designer, the same writers, the same producers, the same made-on-a-studio-budget look and feel as everything Trek for the previous 15 years. This at a time when Lord of the Rings and Star Wars (for all their perceived faults) were offering expansive vistas, imaginative effects and densely layered imagery. These were films pulling out all the stops to wow audiences and Nemesis, in comparison, just didn’t offer enough “wow”. Compare the Romulan senate set, for example, to the visual of the Republic Senate in Star Wars. Nemesis simply looked CHEAP (despite all the boasts about it’s SCALE).
Another big problem was a script that seemed desperate to please fans and calculated to target demographics rather than tell a story. The moment I saw that damn RV thing, for example, I immediately imagined the production meeting at Paramount where you and a bunch of bean counters said, “Hey, is there a way we can get NASCAR fans to go to this thing?” The whole thing seemed written around vague directives like “we need a villain as good as Khan!” “It needs to be darker!” “It needs to be edgier!” It was a movie created by a group of people who seemed more concerned with keeping their cushy JOBS than in creating a great story. Nemesis seemed like a PRODUCT, not a movie — and audiences can smell when they’re being sold something inauthentic. Nemesis was inauthentic to Star Trek. It said nothing about the human condition, it offered no philosophy, it offered none of the Roddenberry magic that has made Trek a cultural icon for decades. Put simply, it was poorly written, directed and produced. The humor was lame, the visuals were bland, the plot was confusing, and the whole thing just smelled stale.
I could go on and on about why this film stunk, but I think my initial reaction leaving the theater sums up how many Trek fans felt. As the credits began to roll, my wife and I quickly exited the theater. We didn’t listen to the music or hang around discussing what we liked about the film — we wanted to get the hell out of there. And my first comment upon getting outside was to say, “God, I used to LOVE this show!”
If Abrams’ movie fails – not likely, but possible – trekkies will immediately line up twenty deep to share their carefully-considered expert opinions on exactly why. And it won’t mean anything then, either.
Here’s my two quotloos’ worth…
Nemesis is a muddy film with a good film somewhere in it. Yes, the director made BIG mistakes. Levar Burton recalls Baird constantly calling him Leroy. Is that a slip of the tongue, or a director who just doesn’t care or respect his people? I think it’s the latter, judging from the sheer number of continuity gaffs in this movie. We have a NEW twin android with never a mention of Data’s OTHER twin android. We have sensors that now give exact locations of things a buzillion light years away. We have an evile superweapon that takes long enough to activate so that the plot can dance right around it.
But, I think the most telling part about Nemesis’ failure is Berman’s insistance that “studio tracking” predicted a success. He flew this one by the numbers and it shows. This is a formulaic movie. There is nothing new here. Don’t even get me started on how old the cast looks while playing the same young roles. Fat Data? Troi in a nightie (why couldn’t they have done that years earlier???? And then there are the endless ‘fly-by’ shots, edited as if they were the first we’d ever seen. My little daughter turned to me in the first half hour and said “This is boring.” And it was.
So much for brevity. Ha. I feel strongly about this question.
My first post, so I’ll be brief:
Berman doesn’t understand what Shakespeare knew 400 years ago.
Good story drama requires good AND evil for conflict.
Trek movie success has correlated directly with that formula.
TMP – boring story – sold because of honeymoon period
TWOK – great story – Kahn was good at evil.
TSFS – so-so story -
TVH – great story – no evil …exception to rule
TFF – What if Paramount threw a movie and no writer showed up?
TUC – good story – decent drama
Gen’s – patchwork story – tedious
FC – good story – Borg was ultimate evil (until Voyager PC’d them)
Insurrection – was there a story?
Nemesis – Nothing says plaguarism best like ripping off your own history
(kill/rebirth of Spock/Data).
JJA understands good drama, XI should be rewarding.
Berman doesn’t, as can be seen in much of his work.
#64 “trekkies will immediately line up twenty deep to share their carefully-considered expert opinions on exactly why. And it won’t mean anything then, either.”
And the opinions of self-appointed experts working on fan films are the most meaningless of all.
Sorry guys but I agree with an early poster–no one gave it a chance. I went on opening day to the 7 PM showing. I was one of four people in the room. The big mob was at Maid in Manhatten.
At one point when Stewart and Hardy were talking (and talking) I became aware that the film was boring me. So it was not without flaws.
The death of Data hurt the film. The lack of involvement by the supporting cast, especially Geordie, hurt the film. But Insurrection hurt the franchise a lot more.
I love TNG but the last two films were not great. Yet it may not have mattered. Too much lousy Trek (DS9, VOY, ENT) killed the franchise and Nemesis had no chance.
And Berman needs to wake up and smell the Tranya. He’s done.
Nemesis was just a very bad story. It was a rehash of stuff from the other trek films thrown together to make an incoherent story. The villian was pulled out of a hat. Basically the movie was Voyager with the TNG cast.
The Berman Era had its ups and downs, but ask yourself this: Is Star Trek better off than it was 20 years ago? In terms of its vitality, no. But, if you’re the type of fan that wants massive amounts of content, then yes. However you approach that question, Abrams has a lot of work ahead of him in bringing the franchise back to strength.
To clarify, my comment above was not a knock on TNG or DS9- I was focusing on the over-exposure of the franchise.
Nemesis;what happens when you make a movie for fanboys…the few fanboys that TNG had went to see it and no one else.
Lord Garth sayith Rick Berman go get JJ a latte and have his Bentley washed and shut up. Lord Garth is tired of even discussing his extremely lame vision of Star Trek and grows nauseated at those few who still defend him. Lord Garth feels Babylon 5 carried on the real meaning, vision and feel of Star Trek during the Next gen era. Rich Berman, Lord Garth proclaims you be banished as a topic of discussion and spend the rest of your days in hollywood obscurity. All of us have much more happy and positive things to discuss as real Star Trek is finally back where it belongs
Lord Garth also gives kudos to Josh T and will have Martia dance for him!!!
PS this is what will happen if you make Trek xi for trekkie canon freaks and the people who can’t separate the actors from the characters.
I dunno, Rick…maybe it sucked because…
IT HAD NO FREAKIN’ GOOSENECKS™ in it!!!!
Nah, it would have sucked even with Gooseneck Viewers™.
Not even Goosenecks™ could have saved Nemesis!
*waves hand over keyboard, hears sound, and logs off*
Lord Garth.You’ve replaced Hitch
#47 Dave-
One cannot blame Nemesis’ failure on Insurrection. I’ll always agree with Frakes when he comments that he thinks it was a wonderful film. It was also the one thing that many tight-ass trekkies seemingly don’t get- ENTERTAINING, which NEM was not. And to anyone who thinks Insurrection “didn’t have a story,” I’d ask simply- were you paying attention?? Nemesis had a horribly written and a nonsensical plot. It, thankfully, also breaks the “odd/even curse.”
HA!
WHAT I REMEMBER ABOUT NEMESIS IS THE THERE WAS A HELL OF A LOT MORE PEOPLE IN LINE FOR LORD OF THE RING THAN FOR NEMESIS AND THIS WAS ON THE FIRST DAY!
Wow I am going to post although I am not sure anybody will read this far down the post chain… Anyways. The reason Nemesis failed… are you ready… to much Star Trek! I think it was Berman or Braga themeselves who said it in the recent history channel special that everyevery hour of the day 24/7 there is a Star Trek series or movie being shown somewhere in the world. Hmmm let us think about this from the standpoint of not die hard fan boys (movie looks hysterical) and try and step back. I can go to my television at most times of the day where I live and find TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY or ENT to watch. Point blank Star Trek hit an incredible high in the mid 90’s they had a movie in the works (Generations) which combined both crews. They had just wrapped TNG after a 7 year run with a wonderful ending. DS9 was on the air and had some steam to it and in order to launch a new network they were creating Voyager. Wow look at all that going on at one time. Naturally the general public could care less when Star Trek Nemesis comes out. I am a teacher and the majority of my students where like didn’t that movie come out already or hey I saw that on TV. No one was like oh yay a new adventure with Picard and Co. save the die hards who will go no matter what in the hope of greatness on the big screen. Other factors played into the gradual decine in the populatiry of Star Trek to this point as well. I am going to say is right now and I know some people in here are going to get very very upset with me and probably decide to respond harshly. A big failing of Star Trek is called Canon! Here is the deal you have wrapped your claws so tightly around this thing called canon that whenever some truly new and interesting concept comes along you want to kill it with a bloody knife called the internet. This new movie will probably be a Kirk/Spock young days academy movie and it might have the romulans in it as well. Romulan war maybe? Well I can already see people taking shots at the Kirk/Spock prequel concept all over the internet because its quote “So far from cannon that its almost Star Wars-ish”… Well I say this in the most loving way get a clue. Star Trek is dieing and if this movie tanks at the box office we will never get new eppisodes outside the remastered which I am hoping they treat all the series at least TNG to as well. The movie will TANK and with it Star Trek will be a memory. I love the great bird of the galaxies vision I love it. The man was a genius he created TOS and TNG which are two shows very similarly themed in two different era’s and that was that. You can not keep making movies and TV shows (Enterprise) with that same formula. You can’t! In this day and age Sci – Fi has gotten edgier and sexier than ever before. If you want proof of that look at the hugely popular Battlestar Galactica (Which I love far more than and series save maybe DS9 & TOS and yes I love Star Trek). Regular people who are not the die hards that made up the miniscule numbers for Nemesis don’t want tight spandex suits anymore and flamboyantly unreal plots. Real people want to see REAL drama, not the drama from TNG but more the core character drama from DS9. That is why DS9 didn’t do so well. “Its to dark…” “They aren’t on a ship.” “Half the cast isn’t starfleet.” are just some of the complaints about DS9 which I find to be some of its more enduring aspects. TV shows have become serialized and long drawn out plot arcs are good look at every popular show on television. Dark and edgy is good look at every popular show on television, and by god man you need to change to formula every so often to make it new, fresh and more than just recycled. You canon fodder people which I will forever refer to you as complain about Nemesis being to much like Khan but then when they try and do something new and inovative like put a series on a station instead of a ship you go ballistic. Well here is the deal and I hope you are getting this. The well of Star Trek as it was in the 60’s and 90’s is dried up. You have done everything concievable in that universe by god you have almost 700 hours of TV and movies to prove it. Move on now… Move on… It is time to make drastic changes if you want this franchise to live (Gene Roddenbery might roll in his grave) but that is what you need. Do a movie or series after Nemesis by several years in which we see all that we have established as sacred being lost. Blow up the Earth if you have to (sorry Gene) and show us what happens to our quaint little Trek if starfleet is turned into a rag tag group of ships just trying to protect what they have left. Hell maybe you could introduce a new villian who is truly evil not just “misunderstood” as trek tends to do with its villians. Maybe you could do something completely off guard and make it a close ally / member of the federation who does it. You don’t need to keep re working old ideas, that is why Nemesis tanked and I hope to god above that J.J. knows this because Berman sure didn’t. Please, please, please give us something fresh hell I will write it for you as I write and direct independant film. And to the fans I am sorry but if you want the franchise to stay alive you need to stop whining about canon and let them be creative for a change.
Aaron Ringewold
Writer/Director
Stage/ Independant Film
P.S. Sorry about all the typos I know must be up there I got real heated in my typing and frankly I don’t care or wish to pretend to care. Have a great day live long and prosper.
Thank you # 79….
P.S. I love you die hards I just feel a change is needed or Star Trek will not generate new fans it needs to stay alive.
Aaron
Nemesis failed because it was bad! I suspect the usually when a Trek film comes out some people would see it more than once perhaps once on their own then once with the family but when they didn’t like it, why would they go again and subject the family to it?
#81-Your comments didn’t make me angry, but as a teacher, don’t you think you should at least spell words correctly? A lot of what you say is true. I will say this: if the movie has a huge budget and if all this hype is as big as I think it is going to be, if the movie bombs, Star Trek is OVER! DEAD!!! In the eyes of Paramount, it will no longer be feasible to invest money in. That will be a horrible moment. Let’s hope it never happens.
As I said Jim I was in a hurry and wanted to post I didn’t take the time to even read it over before posting. I got that heated… I know tisk tisk bad science teacher bad… :)
Last night I had this major diatribe as to why nemesis failed- then the server crashed!
In a nutshell:
Not too much Trek- it was just sucky Trek.
The TNG crew wasn’t the problem; it was a TNG film after all.
Lord of the rings wasn’t the problem: after all, a Jennifer Lopez chick flick made more money than Trek 10.
The problems were the B4 sub plot, the B4 Easter Egg hunt, the mis-cast Shinzon, the failed attempt to re-gurgitate The Wrath of Khan by someone who apparently has more creative energy when it comes to Gladiators, the Bad Guy ship starting to have a Death Star moment right before it goes Genesis, Data’s attempt after attempt to sacrifice himself, the over the hill Enterprise crew going head to head against a race far more tougher than the Jem Hadar… and this week’s morality lesson: aspiration.
There was just so much working against this film… and none of it had to do with anything outside the picture itself.
Nemesis failed pure and simple, it was Star Trek in name only. Fans and
non-fans alike love a good film, This movie has not a single frame of
memorable dialogue or visuals. The script wasn’t any good and neither were the production or direction. It failed on all accounts. This is what happens
when you let suits make actual decisions instead of making them sit in a
corner and nod their heads. Berman made this film for himself not the fans.
He did the same to “enterprise”. No matter how bad it got he couldn’t figure
out why the fans no longer wanted to partake in what he was serving. Not
wishing to take constructive criticism he let the lastest incarnation destroy
itself and then stand back and blame it on fan fatigue. HOGWASH!
He and the others at Paramount made very bad decisions and wouldn’t
admit it. Its a pity that Star Trek and the fans had to suffer for someone’s
ego. The proof is that Star Trek will survive no matter how numbskulls
like Berman try to kill it.
If J.J. Abrams can somehow and in some way mix the first two Trek films together stylistically, conceptually, visually, and spiritually, and find the connective appropriate balance between the two, we will have a Trek film of epic proportions that should make some waves at the box office.
Star Trek: The Motion Picture – unprecedented visuals unmatched in many ways even today, an epic almost Homer inspired odyssey, a serious take on Trek, not campy, a positive message
Star Trek- The Wrath of Khan – Jeopardy. Drama. People drove the story, not events unlike the first film. That’s not a criticism, just an observation that the narrative was the polar reverse. Very human characters that we can relate with. Fantastic dialogue.
If you combine ththose attributes of those two films, it should be the right balance to appease any type of Trek fan, and even a movie going audience that enjoys entertainment.
Also, I hate to say it, in direct contrast to canon and continuity buffs, but make the film a one off encapsulated self sustained film. Don’t make a film hanging on and hinging on potential sequels. Don’t get caught up or mired in what happened 17 years ago in episode 32 of such and such, just tell a story , make it alive, and make it entirely dependent on itself. That approach isn’t disregarding canon, but there is also no need for established canon to jump out at you every 7 seconds pointing itself out and confusing John and Jane film goer.
Lord Garth does not trust those named John who spell it Jon.
Jon Jonz , the Martain Manhunter is also like Lord Garth formerly of Izor, a shapeshifter.
Sorry I offend you so
Just read post #29, hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha that’s the best and sums it up far better than any of us could. Josh T for Imperial Senate!!!
The center of Trek is “charm”. Affection for the characters. You may say what you want about Insurrection, but it was loaded with charm and heart. Nemesis was caricature driven, instead of character driven, and more than a little forced.
Make Voyager movie !!!!
There’s a game you can play where you can ‘end’ a film before it starts. Shallow Grave is an example: hide the money and phone the police to say your roommate’s dead! The ambulance takes away the body.Then you split the money and leave the country!! No one has to die!
Nemesis is another example: Shinzon escapes Romulus/Remus and tells the Federation he’s a clone of Picard. He says he needs a complete blood transplant to survive. Jean-Luc says ‘ok’ and, across a few weeks donates eight pints of blood, assuming the Enterprise doesn’t already have a store of it’s captain’s blood in case of emergencies! Shinzon walks off happy and can do whatever he wants! No need for Soong robots. No need for Data to die!
Ultimately the film is just plain silly.
BTW, I dunno if this post will appear: the posts from my work PC only sporadically appear at the mo!!
Don’t make Voyager movie – please!!!
There is so much hate toward Rick Berman going on here, give the guy a break. He kept Trek alive the best he could when Gene died, thats a pretty daunting task and he did a damn good job giving us three additional Trek series. Some of the crazy fans are so ignorant, want everything perfect, and need someone to blame for mess up’s. Just live with it and enjoy all the Trek we have gotten for the last 40 years! So in the end, THANK YOU RICK BERMAN!!! Thanks for all you have done for Star Trek!
I won’t thank Berman for what “HE” did for Trek, I’ll thank him for the talented people he hired to write the stories. Gene got Next Gen off to a good start, so there wasn’t much he could have done to screw up that roller coaster…although, Next Gen did start to show some later Trek series characteristics in the final season.
I found that after Next Gen, Trek tried too hard to be hip and cool. I really hated the emphasis on coffee…Klingon Cappuccino was an eye roller. They played the characters as if they were contemporary folk in jumpsuits. I always believed that Kirk and Picards crew were future humans…not so with later seasons of DS9, Voyager and Enterprise.
Actually, I’m surprised that nobody blames Gene for the downfall of Trek. He is the one who chose Berman afterall.
I have to laugh at the venum on this site. Too much Trek yeah yeah, by people who are on record as hating anything that is not TOS.
I’m not a big fan of Bregga and Berman but they did keep Trek alive, I’m of the opinion they should have handed the reins to someone else, proberly around the time of Voyager. But don’t forget they alone were not the cause of a lot of the problems that Trek had. Paramount itself was one of the biggest challenges Trek has always faced. And another problem Trek has also had to contend with is so-called “Fans”.
That message is border line rude trevok. You should never presume to call some one a “so called fan” whom you have never met before in your life. You don’t know how many shelves of Trek stuff they have on display or don’t. Just a thought.
Aaron
Mr. Berman can’t figure out why Nemesis failed? Perhaps that’s why Paramount finally released him from his duties as head of Star Trek. Please, plass this message along to Mr. Berman. Nemesis failed at the box office because you made a terribly derivative film. It was uninspired. It didn’t just borrow elements from Star Trek II, it stole them wholesale. Star Trek should be about creativity, not endlessly re-hashing the same tired plot devices. It’s a shame because I love Patrick Stewart and Brent Spiner and the Next Generation cast. I’d love for them to get the proper movie they deserve.
Many of you, especially Josh T, etc. really have to THANK Berman for what he has done. I mean,what else would you find to rant on?(with restraint of course) #26,28,29,33,36…
Berman kept things alive and good Trek going, as Trevok in #99 said… not good all the time but as much as TOS I’d say.
Not all of you like it, oh well.
Here is a question for anyone else to respond too -since we are talking about nemesis and have already listed 70+ notions of why it failed- Did anyone else feel that after watching the trailer for Nemesis for the first time that Lore was going to be back in the storyline again.
The first time I saw that shot of the 2 Brent Spiner’s that was what i remember hoping for, a fitting conclusion to that story arc (since how they tried to finish it in TNG the series was very, very weak). Play up the “Cain and Abel” aspect of it all if u will. Have it where Dr. Soong’s greatest mistake (Lore) ended up being responsible for the death of his greatest accomplishment (Data).
#59
“Actually, it needed less dune buggys, heck no dune buggys at all, especially the Argo buggy, it made it seem less credible to most viewers that in the 24th century, they still used wheeled buggies!”
On the contrary! Wheels help movies. Think of all the movies you have seen that have wheels in it. I dare you. You can’t have a car chase without wheels and what is a movie without a good car chase? I imagine that the Enterprise would have also have wheels on it, although I imagine it would be a tripod-type arrangement. Look, people like Trek and they love ATV’s . Add the two together and it is a sure-fire formula! I mean, Haven’t we always wanted to see Capt. Picard bouncing around in a 20th century dune buggy firing plastic rifles? I know I sure have. They just needed more off-road adventure to make it work. Well, that and more obvious “homages” (no one dared say plagiarism) to STII. NOTE: Your irony sensor is apparently out of alignment so allow me to say I am only joking here.
As for the gripe that everyone was lined up for LOTR on opening day, let’s just say that the fact that the film wasn’t that good didn’t help things either. People sensed that there was a better film to see and guess what, they were right. Regardless of whether it was the poor marketing, the strong competition, or the “evil sell-out” fans, the film deserved to fail, which it did. Heaven forbid that it had actually made money resulting in them churning out more Trek films just like it.
Lord Garth™ is one of my favorite characters from TOS. I’m honored to have been mentioned in the same category as the witty individual playing him on the interweb.
and to whoever said, “Nemesis seemed like a PRODUCT, not a movie — and audiences can smell when they’re being sold something inauthentic. Nemesis was inauthentic to Star Trek. It said nothing about the human condition, it offered no philosophy, it offered none of the Roddenberry magic that has made Trek a cultural icon for decades.”
perfect.
BEST!!
=h=
http://www.darkhorizons.com/news07/070301f.php
Maybe there’s hope for those of you who like TNG and beyond after all. Hopefully some solid new producers and writers could come in and do something interesting with the other Treks.
Perhaps an Enterprise DTV film entirely run by Manny Coto . . .
Oh poor Berman. How does someone who seems to not get most things manage to get to be so rich? I knew I should have taken accounting. But hey, even I can come up with a better reason for Nemesis failing without hyperbole or silly guesses, like maybe it was the director or release date. Here goes…
Nemesis wasn’t a so-so film, it was a B-Movie. Sure, it had great FX, but so did Wing Commander. The problem with Nemesis was that it was boring unless you were 12. Good guy, bag guy, big running battle. Everything else was backdrop.
That movie is a renter at best.
Besides, no one cared for Insurrection too, mainly because it was just like an ep of TNG. Just as the audience had seen the B-Movie (when they were 12) so too had they seen TNG.
Movies cost, like, $10 a ticket. Goddess help you if you get popcorn. $$$
The competition in the movie house for a small audience paying big bucks is tough. Nemesis wasn’t worth it for the average movie goer.
imho… of course. I live on an island!!! :D
Erm . . . is there a problem with the site? My comments keep on failing to appear. Have I done something wrong or has the site suddenly developed good taste? :( ;)
Lord Garth thanks you Hitch and promises to send my dagger wielding, mute Andorian and Tellerite henchman after our enemies. Now Marta dance for our friend lest he think we are inhospitable.
No. 105 Hitch: and to whoever said, “Nemesis seemed like a PRODUCT, not a movie” perfect.
That was me. And thanks. Great minds… ;-)
“The former Trek honcho just cannot figure out why it didn’t perform as well as he (and studio tracking) predicted:”
Bring fort de cluebat. Dis is the Treker heart. Dis is the Treker soul. It is, our way.
Poor writing, poor casting, poor science.
It starts with the crew picking up signs of positronic output half a galaxy away while they’re not even scanning for it. If it’s that easy to detect, the location of Data and the Enterprise need never be in doubt.
Then comes the horrible, screw-the-Prime-Directive buggy chase.
And it gets worse from there.
I hadn’t been so disappointed in the writing of Trek since Generations. It was a sad, sad way to wrap things up for such a brilliant cast. Frakes might have salvaged this.
Nemesis for being the Next Generation’s Last Big ha-rah, was less then epic. It was more like a two hour TV episode. The look, ,the pace and the acting all sucked. It was like lets just get this done. Off road race? Only Two Romulan Warbirds? Mighty Romulan senate looking like a town hall?
NO Federation ships? Vampires with bad manicures? B4? Troi’s google eyes? Pa-leeeeeese! Just too corny and lame for a Trek fan let alone the mainstream.
Sounds like only (some ) Next Generation fans saw this fanboy movie.
Nemesis was the the strongest Next Generation film. It was more dynamic and pulled off some hard things. It wasn’t as good as a TOS film (oh say Trek 2 or 6), but it was better than the awful 9th title. Rick Berman was the best thing to happen to Trek. He was able to manage Gene’s vision in a way that would work for a few hundred episodes of Star Trek television. I put Berman on a pillar higher than Rodberry. JJ is just putting a small an insignificant film that may work but will be the least remembered title. Rick rules bitches.
Nemesis needed a Mini-Shizon™ sidekick for the Bad Guy.
“I won’t blow up the Earth for a MILLION TRIBBLES! BAHAHAHAH!
# 90 Josh
I’ll give you credit when it is due.
I agree with everything you said in that specific post.
That’s outstanding!
I can see it now!
Star Trek: The Next Generation
Generation Next
Paramount Home theater division presents
a Rick Berman production/ in association with Brannon Braga entertainment
Starring Lou Diamond Phillips as Captain Vladmir Yon Boogles,
Louis Gossard Jr. as Commodre Wes “Buckly” Torbonimeire’
Jean Claude Van-Damme as Mister T’ highs
and introducing Corey Feldman and Corey Haim as the Andorian Power twins
special sneak cameo by Val Kilmer and the guy that did all “the substitute” films
Maybe that’s a fate deserving of Rick Berman
Nemesis was a rip of The Wrath of Khan, they killed of one of the major characters in no idea of ever bringing them back, meaning when the film came out everyone saying it was the last film. The last film should end happy note not on a sad one.
Actually, truth be known, I feel sort of sorry for die-hard TNG fans, truly now, they deserved MUCH better than Rick Berman to shepard their favorite show. Just the same way I feel sorry for Republicans, having to swallow their pride and reason, and continue to support George Bush and his crusade on Islam.
I mean it when I say, it truly must be a very difficult thing being an unabashed apologist. I certainly wouldn’t want the job and constant self rationalization, wow.
I submit that we cannot understand the failure of Nemesis without coming to terms with the fact that First Contact — the supposedly good TNG movie — was as unsuccessful a film as the rest. The joys of Picard and TNG simply have not translated well to the big screen.
I know everyone was glad to see a little ass-kicking. But listen, people: How can a movie whose conclusion is the farmer from “Babe” listening to Steppenwolf…a movie whose Troi and Riker get drunk for cheap comic effect…how can this possibly be worthy of the same film series that gave us the chills of Space Station Regula One–or Admiral Kirk on the ridge of a dying planet lamenting, “My God, Bones, what have I done”–or McCoy’s cleverly-conceived encounter with 20th century medicine? Of all that great screenwriting?
As a TOS fan, I have gradually come to a grudging acceptance of TNG as good television, but the movies have never captured what made episodes like “The Inner Light” or “Yesterday’s Enterprise” worth watching.
“Assimilate This?” Is that really Star Trek?
I suppose it couldn’t last….not about the politics, but about the Berman bashing.
Don’t feel sorry for fans of TNG. As a TNG fan, I don’t feel sorry for the product we had….because there was nothing wrong with the product until (1) they pissed off pretty much all previous Trek fans in Generations and then (2) pissed off TNG fans when they tried to change the spirit of TNG to appeal to non-TNG fans — reference, Nemesis. Still, that wasn’t the death knell of Star Trek….it was just bad product in the theatre. People can moan and whine all they want, it won’t change my enjoyment level of VOY or ENT.
Anyway, if Trek XI can manage to respect Canon by leaving established Canon alone, then I say more power to them. No need for constant references, etc. I don’t think many people will be sore if we don’t see Goose Neck viewers or 60’s bridge replicas. But a little license for creativity and modernization aside, that modicum level of respect for the history of Star Trek really needs to be there. Continuity and history is a strength, but if they can add to it without walking all over it, they’ll succeed in making the “Trek Universe” better.
Not this again… Why did it fail?
I agree the death of a major character, Rehash of TWOK, I never saw Worf as a TNG character anymore and I thought it was a disservice to the character as he was last seen on DS9. Its just a matter of coincedence that Worf happens to be run into the Enterprise for the last three films. .Thier was no hope. And a good film should have alot of hope even a Star Trek film. I think its way past time we move away from Goth Trek.
I had a choice during the month of December and I went to see LOTR first and because it has been nearly 4 years since INS I just didn’t care anymore.. I hate to say this but Two Towers looked cooler.The audience was getting older and the way they told thier stories was no longer challenging to its audience.
I felt what also went wrong was the scope of the film. I feel to rise of the challenge Star Trek should be epic. After 5 shows if you have a villain he or she needs to be grander in scale. Threatening just Earth just doesn’t convince me anymore and tells me the optimistic vision of the future just sucks.
It used to be a case these films were being thrown out every two or three years. The anticipation was there.
Paramount should hold the responsibilty for this outing as well for authorizing this garbage. Somewhere along the line they read the script thought fans would come out in droves and signed off on it.
I had high hopes because John Logan who had worked on Gladiator was doing this. After this and Star Trek V… I came to a conclusion Star Trek Fans should not be writing Star Trek films. Frivolous with Space battles and fan boy wet dreams moments who have no concept of writing a good sci fi story that challenges the audience and makes you think.
In my view Hollywood doesnt care that Science FIction is a metaphor.
I felt Nemesis has its moments but a bad script overshadowed it.After getting the DVD for 10 bucks the only thing that works is the deleted scenes. Berman is one of the worst people I’ve heard doing a DVD commentary, his voice puts you to sleep.
Not that I condone violence in any shape manner or form but using a tazer on this guy so this guy gets why Nemesis failed would be good start.hes going to be 90 and its STILL going to confound him what went wrong.
I agree with 121, TNG deserved better movies than it got.
well stong feelings all around. Nemesis was the first trek movie that I found I was bored half way through. I think that the producers, come up with a good story – except they wrote it in such a way that it was obviously based on ST2 WOK. WOK worked, NEM didn’t. They tried too hard, and editing it way to much. John Lennon worked that out….take a year and a day for an album and never be happy. Knock off a single in an hour, release it a week later and its a hit.
A big part of that for me was the ‘Braga style’. Braga has a distinct way of trek story telling. HisTNG episodes and the first few voyager eps were great, but then they style got old, and repetive for me. Not that there wern’t good stories and exceptions – Many Coto is evidence of that – just that Trek ooozed of Braga and Berman and it got old.
I am convinced Trek will be back, and more successful than ever. I hope Ira Stephen Behr gets to work on his Ds9 movie before everyone is too old to star in it. Kirk and Spock returning is great and it can all be good to re-energise the franchise. Peace
I can’t say much. I never saw Nemisis, nor Insurrection either, I had lost interest by then. In fact, I have barely skimmed this article, I don’t have much interest in dissecting Berman… I think Star Trek needs new blood regularly to keep from stagnating. Let’s hope Abram’s gives it a good shot in the arm and then get’s out before it gets stale again.
#60: Thanks for the link, that was absolutely hilarious. A great satirical synopsis of a truly awful movie.
Star Trek: Nemesis was an excellent edition to the Trek Universe, the problem was that it was put up against LOTR: The Two Towers, this wasn’t a smart move at all! I really feel that who ever made that decision at Paramount should take a step back, and learn from this mistake! Nemesis was a great movie!
There are many people who are giving specific reasons why Nemesis failed…dune buggys, Data, Wrath of Khan ripoff…etc etc. But in order for story points and plot development and other nitpicks of that nature to ruin a movie, they have to be spread by word of mouth. Well that takes time…and sadly, Nemesis sunk on its opening weekend. Word of mouth didn’t kill this movie because no one went to see it to begin with! Which only leaves the fact that no one wanted to see it, which only means the appetite for modern Trek was no longer there. The demise of Enterprise supports that. It could have been the best Trek movie ever made….but if no one has an interest to see it on it’s opening weekend, then it cannot and will not succeed.
It wasn’t the bad story, or the dune buggys, or the actor’s meddling with the script that killed Star Trek. Modern Star Trek killed modern Star Trek. Over the last two decades, the “sameness” of all the new Trek series has smothered the mainstream, plain and simple.
Please excuse the off-topic.
As you read and comment about the Enterprise and her crew, would you please take a moment of your time for another Enterprise.
Enterprise, Alabama USA and the area around there took a major hit on the city from a tornado. The school took a direct blow, killing many.
Your thoughts and prayers for them I am sure would be greatly appreciated.
Ok, you’ve all forced my hand: I’m putting my worthless 2 cents in the ring…
I see a lot of you going into great detail on what was wrong with the last Trek movie. Although most of the analysis of the movie is quite correct, it assumes that there was an audience there to watch the movie and subsequently find these faults in it.
The issue was that the audience never showed up – not even many of the Trek faithful.
For that reason, I agree with the “Too Much Trek” crowd. Although seriously flowed, Nemesis was not an order of magnitude worse than its predecessors. I think the potential audience for the movie had simply had enough of rather dissatisfying Trek shows and movies over the course of several years. Very little of it was *horrible*, but there wasn’t all that much memorable or worthwhile there, either.
And my final bit: why is it that every TNG movie felt like a TNG episode with better special effects?
#129: Great minds…
The word ‘Bad’ got taken out of my “Too Much (Bad) Trek” quote above. I think it’d be a different story if we’d had lots of exciting, innovative Trek being produced, instead of rehash after rehash.
#130: Other than the usual options (Red Cross, etc.) have any donation or relief sites been set up?
#134
I’ve not yet heard… but I think it would be fitting that a Trek group of some sort gave or donated relief to a city named Enterprise that really needs help.
I don’t think it’s global warming, I think the Cetacean probe is rapidly approaching Earth!
Womp Womp Womp Womp
131. omf – March 1, 2007
The issue was that the audience never showed up – not even many of the Trek faithful.
**********************
I don’t think that was the case; I think they showed up, but didn’t give the film the repeated viewings that larger films need for success.
I just wanted to mention that my appraisal of why Nemesis failed was never meant to be a rant against Berman himself. Thankfully, it doesn’t seem that anyone took it that way.
Personally, I have no real feelings toward Berman one way or another. Overall, I think he was a capable, if passionless, caretaker of the franchise. The only thing that bothers me is his apparent inability to look critically at the movies he oversaw. Enough time has passed that he should be able to watch Nemesis and know precisely why the film did not succeed. It’s all right there. If he can’t see it, then Trek is definitely better off without him now.
And thanks to those who responded to my earlier post, way up there near the top. I appreciate the feedback.
“Berman Can’t Figure Out Why Nemesis Failed”
And this reason alone is why we should rejoice that he’s not doing Trek any more.
I definately think it had something to do with the other films it was released against. Two 300 million dollar blockbusters tore through “Nemesis” like a Borg cutting beam. Oh well. I do hope we ‘ll see the Enterprise E fly once more. But I doubt it.
At least they’re relaunching Enterprise in book form.
With the level of FX work present in Nemesis I will be buying it on BluRay for sure.
I would love to see a “Phantom Edit” of Nemesis. Somewhere in that mess is a good movie dying to come out.
“Berman Can’t Figure Out Why Nemesis Failed”
Agreed. The title of the story was sarcastic comment alone. AP, you can’t get out of that dude.
Like saying neener neener neener to “Anna Nicole Can’t Figure Out Why She’s DEAD” Come on man. The snake may not want to acknlowedge that it’s a snake, but does it not bite with venom nonetheless?
Much in the same way that Berman is alot like the developmentally disabled like that the retarded do not understand their retardation.
However…
wait no however. and NO pontification here my friend. Lets get to the facts:
Berman says that Nemesis wasnt sucksexful. You have over 125 posts and box orafice agreeing with him. I don’t want to make way, Manny, because there is not a bad guy coming through. The Star Trek womb is so effing polluted… lets hope that our new baby ain’t a crack baby.
See what I am saying AP?
BREAST!!
=h=
Berman milked the franchise dry. He should have said “Voyager’s home. Lets take a break so we can get some time to process the old stuff, and make some good new stuff.” If anything is to be learned from the fact that no episodic Star Trek was produced from 1974 until 1987, its that it took that long for people to be ready to see something other than TOS, TAS, or a movie. And it took that long before a new group of writers was ready to step in and make it their own.
What we need now is to take a break. 20 years of non-stop Trek is a lot of episodes. That’s a lot of story, and I’m certainly not tired of it. I want to live with what’s made before warping to the same old crap repackaged. If its not going to be fresh, I don’t want it, and Berman is no longer capable of delivering fresh Trek.
To use a B5 analogy, Roddenberry was Lorien… the first one. Berman is the Vorlons… his time has past, and it’s time for him to get the hell out of our galaxy.
Nemesis wasn’t bad. If it had come 10 years earlier, it actually would have faired pretty well. It failed because it came when we needed to boldly go in a new direction, instead of the same old same old.
They should give Captain Kirk the Enterprise-E, my GOD can you imagine the havoc that man could cause in the universe with that ship. Kirk would be kicking much to do about ass all. Day. Long.
Paramount just announced tthis week that they are going to start making “direct to DVD” movies of old franchises (with Star Trek being one of the ones seriously being considered by them.) That gives hope hope of a TNG movie being made (if Stewert and all where willing). Voy, Ent or DS9 could also be made as Direct to DVD.
Personally, I would love a Sulu film!
I think there is one fundamental issue amongst all of this here that is being severely neglected and overlooked-
whatever happened to quality over quantity?
Yes, we have 10 motion pictures, 5 live action series, and 1 animated series, for a combined 28 seasons of television Star Trek, 20 hours of motion picture, and 2 seasons of animated Star Trek. But the question is, is that a GOOD thing?
You talk about milking a fat ass heffer. I mean damn.
Isn’t oversaturation part of the problem?
So now we are getting reportedly a Generation Y new animated series if it goes ahead, a new film, and now the prospect of direct to DVD films.
You talk about shitting all over the legacy of a once proud and noble intellectual property. How much milk can be suckled from this fat ass heffer before she falls over from dehydration???
Just when I thought Paramount MAY have actually learned a bit from the past 15 years, here they go whoring their Fat ass heffer out again to squeeze her for every red cent she can muster.
Gene man, wherever you are, whatever you are doing, don’t look. It’s horrible, and I apologize sincerely.
God BLESS George Lucas for not selling off Star Wars and keeping the property HIS and HIS alone.
Nemesis, just wasn’t an enjoyable Trek film to watch. It had no soul and no charm.
“sadly, Nemesis sunk on its opening weekend. Word of mouth didn’t kill this movie because no one went to see it to begin with! Which only leaves the fact that no one wanted to see it, which only means the appetite for modern Trek was no longer there. The demise of Enterprise supports that. It could have been the best Trek movie ever made….but if no one has an interest to see it on it’s opening weekend, then it cannot and will not succeed. It wasn’t the bad story, or the dune buggys, or the actor’s meddling with the script that killed Star Trek.”
Let’s suppose that there is a universe in which NEMESIS was not a lousy movie. Suppose it was, as you say, “the best Trek movie ever made”. If this were the case, it would have performed better on subsequent weekends and would have done very well on DVD. Word of mouth would have gotten out. Critical praise would have piqued the interests of fans who were afraid that it would be another lame “Insurrection” style Trek film. It would have inspired a following.
Part of the reason this film failed, a good part of the reason, is that it deserved to fail.
I’d like to hear more about these direct to DVD movies??? This is the first I heard of it. I’d rather see a television mini series event personally. I think this has more weight than a direct to dvd release…
It would be a bigger event – 3 nights – 2 hours each, like Roots or the Thornbirds or now that I think of it, the BSG mini before they launched the series. Big ad sales event, because it’s a one off with a built in audience, and then big DVD sales. It’s a different format for Trek and allows the producers to explore all areas, without the huge commitment from a cast that would be required from an ongoing series.
Doug
To anyone that felt insulted by my last post, I must say I’m sorry. But then again maybe I was a little too close for comfort where some people are concerned.
I’m with you doug.
Whew, I just knew this was going to be another l-o-n-g thread Anthony.
J.J. Abrams and writers, we’re relying on you, I hope you are taking notes…
Oh, and that goes for you too Paramount…and by the way a release date in the RUN UP couple of weeks to Christmas would have been great, and far better than an actual Christmas DAY release. Me and mine would have liked that better for the sake of family commitments.
Holy litany of comments Batman! Simple question, simple answer:
Bad writing (which cannot be compared at ALL to First Contact) put in context of miserable writing throughout the rest of the franchise. Oh – like its been pointed out already: quite a few disconnects with established character traits and “trek history.” Bad, bad bad. Given that.. where’s the motivation for the fans?
#147. Josh T
I can’t argue with your over-saturation assertion…
However, there are so many reasons why viewer-ship dwindled through VOY and ENT. The television landscape changed dramatically with the proliferation of cable and satellite content, alternate source material for home viewers, fractious viewing habits by the public, the internet… tunz ‘o’ reasons.
I won’t comment on the “quality” question of any incarnation of Star Trek because it is sooooooo subjective and whatever anybody enjoyed or didn’t… well, who gives a flying one, ya’ know? It’s over and done with.
The one thing that I think you are off the mark on is your apology. Hysterical hyperbole and rhetorical redemption aside… Gene Roddenberry isn’t owed a thing.
For every accolade, honor and kudo that Mr. Roddenberry deserves for his original vision, in the end he was a Producer/Writer who wanted to make money. And given his uneven career, Star Trek loomed the largest for that prospect. He was embittered from his exclusion in the Trek movie franchise and that led him to TNG (And let’s be honest, the first two seasons of TNG, with the Great Bird at the helm, were hardly the most stellar.)
Had he been in better health with more years in front of him, there would have been as much (or even more) Star Trek whooshing across our television and movie screens. ‘Cause in the end he and Paramount would have opted for a very common denominator that they both shared a love for… cash, greenbacks, dough, moohlah, credits, quatloos… well, you get the point.
Good, bad or indifferent, the TNG movie franchise stalled because NEMESIS performed poorly. Hell, ENT would still be around if the projected revenue allowed them to make money even with the deficit financing inherent in the television industry.
Just one Star Trek fan’s thought…
#157
I am not going to dismiss your arguement whole heartedly, but I think it is a little “simple” in its notion of Roddenberry’s goals within his work. Yes, Roddenberry’s career was mixed on results, but I could point u to about 1,000 other producers who have the same history when it comes to what could be termed success.
He did TNG for the basis that Paramount approached him to, not as some afterthought of emotion rangling over not having full control of the film franchise (though he did have creative consulations on all 6 TOS Trek films and many things were changed within the scripts upon some of his requests so I dont believe u can actually say he was excluded either.)
And, one of the main reasons things such as Voyager or Enterprise failed was due to the fact that the balance of the “Real” between the Science Fiction became greatly disproportioned in the later serious and TNG films. When TOS and TNG managed to balance both of these elements well, giving enough attention to both, the episodes were exceptional (ie. Amok Time, Doomsday Machine, TWOK, TVH, The Inner Light, Best of Both Worlds Part I, Brothers among a good selection of others). Voyager and Enterprise, as well as TOS in season 3 and TNG in some of their episodes from seasons 1-2 and 6-8, Began to look more for the gimmick of what to do in a Sci-fi story rather than what would be the next step in the lives of the people/ characters the are writing for.
The main difference between the TOS films and TNG films was that the creators behind TOS attempted to address such a progression while paying attention to elements of the show that came before. The films were 10+ yrs after the TOS series. The audience knows this, so address it. Make it part of the story, confront the elements of heroes who were once in their prime moving through life now facing the elements of Life, death, love, and anger that encompass such a journey for humanity.
What the creative team behind TOS films did was that they acknowledged the bad with the good without attempting to over indulge themselves within the elements they were creating (excluding of course ST V). They did not focus on trying to do something that they felt everyone else merely find “cool.” They attempted to tell the progression of the characters and their relationships within tones of what happens within our own real world among our friends and family, only difference is they added a little sci-fi and action to accompany it. But the characters were its center.
The TNG films, Voy, and Ent are moved from that basis to the concept more of “What can we do for a Sci-fi story this time” when they should have been asking themselves “What could we do for a character story this time”
#158. acb
Certainly, I don’t think that Roddenberry was solely an immoral, money grubbing Hollywood huckster-hyphenate. He was as complex as any of us are. He was an intelligent, thoughtful man who had things he wanted to say about the human condition throughout his career with varying degrees of success.
In fact, I have had the honor to have been in his company twice and on both occasions he was warm, earnest and generous with his time.
But to be candid, I was on an eighteen hour shoot yesterday and really didn’t have the energy to write a long, well balanced appraisal of Roddenberry, the Man and the Myth. :)
There are those that look at Roddenberry as the Second Coming. Undoubtedly, their dry-cleaning bills are high from the wrinkles caused by all the genuflecting. There are those that look at Roddenberry as a guy who had one great idea and that idea only flourished because he was bright enough to put lots and lots of talented people around him. The implication being his was the lesser talent within the Star Trek creative community. I tend to think, as is usually the case, the truth occupies the middle ground.
Simply, my point was two-fold…
1.) For those that subscribe to the former… He was, after all, a Producer in Hollywood. ‘Nuff said with all good humor. ;) Jokes aside he, as Berman and Paramount did, would have, to use Josh’s colorful metaphor, milked the hell out of that fat ass heifer. Would he have been a more skilled teat-puller? Perhaps, but who’s to say?
2.) This site would be commenting on last night’s episode of Star Trek: Pick A Name or the last several movies after NEMESIS had Paramount continued to make money on the franchise. The Entertainment Field produces tons of gems and tons of crap, but the one thing that guarantees the continued production of both is profit.
So although I may agree with many of the points you brought up as to why Star Trek failed critically, at the end of the day the reason it stopped being produced is because it didn’t… produce money, that is.
And for the record, and for what it is worth, I always enjoy your commentary.
One last note regarding the creation of TNG and Roddenberry’s role as a creative consultant…
Roddenberry very much wanted to capitalize on his creation but truthfully he had been relegated to second class citizen in the Trek movie world. Given that Paramount had already invested in intellectual property as a result of development of Star Trek: Phase II, both Roddenberry and Paramount were very much of a like mind to garner whatever sizzle they could from the name.
For Roddenberry, as someone who created the phenomenon, the notion of being the individual who gets ASKED what he thinks vs. being the individual who TELLS what he thinks… hmmmmm, big difference.
For the love of all that is holly, will somebody please, please bring back Deep Space 9? That is all!
106 – Best idea in ages I’ve been advocating DVD movies on StarTrek.com for a couple of months. I hope they were listening
#159 Herbert
I completely understand and also believe the notion of the “middle ground,” both for Star Trek and what it took to actual accomplish as well as everything else encompassing this big blue orb we live on. I feel some people do put Roddenberry on a pedastal that is rather higher than neccessary. I do feel that he played both sides most of the time in terms of the creativity for the show and that of the producer profiter. Over the course of the past year though, I have taken time out to go back and read and watch commentary discussing Gene and there did seem to be a difference between what he attempted to let in to the work and what he would not compared to what Berman and the others have chosen to be their focus for Trek.
I suppose I just feel that in comparison with Berman and the others who followed, he seemed to have more of an insight into what portion of the creativity was needed to help the material as well as sell it. That’s not to say that every great idea was his though as it can be attested that many of the best were as you said “from the talented people he put beside him”. But i think he helped keep “the beast” that Trek is steering straighter through minor influences he attributed than letting it steer off the way Berman eventually did.
And for what it is worth as well, thanks for the compliment on my commentary. I can say the same for u and a handful of others who actually attribute genuine ideas and opinion supported with an actual reason for them makes it worth checking in here everyday to see what has been posted. It helps make it worth rummaging through the random and rather ill-thought out rants that can happen here.
ps: Hope the 18hr shoots run smoothly. I know how they can get.
there will never be a direct to dvd star trek movie, they sold all the sets, props, and costumes
So they make new props for direct to DVD movies which they can then sell off at a latter date. Never under estimate Paramounts greed.
Forget direct to DVD movies! Forget The Next Genertion! Forget Voyager, Enterprise and every other idea brought up here and for the love of God himself, Please, Please bring back Deep Space Nine! That is all…Again!
Berman can’t figure out why Nemesis failed ?
So in other words he still doesn’t get ‘Trek’ ?
What else is new ?
- W -
* When ‘Trek’ is more about things then it is about people, we have a serious problem with it *
DS9!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
They aired ST-First Contact the other nite and a friend who was watching it
with me ask what was the last Star Trek movie. I said Nemesis. There was
a pause and he said I don’t remember it. I said you big dummy you went with
me to see it opening weekend. I told him the plot and he said he didn’t recall
anything about the film. So you see it left so little of an impression that what
was retained was vague at best. So what Mr. Berman had created had no
substance it lacked cohesion and quickly faded away. The people for whom
the film was produced did not get what was anticipated, they were left with
what might have been. Berman did the same with the last tv series. He left
the fans with nothing and wasted potential almost beyond imagination.
I concur with #11, Buckaroohawk.
I’d only add that making the Remans look EXACTLY like Nosferatu didn’t exactly help transport my imagination to another place and time. Though, I suppose this criticism is just symptomatic of the general lack of creativity and imagination that went into Nemesis.
As for Mr. Berman, I mock him thus:
“Well, golly, I hired a first-time director, who knew nothing about Trek, and, couldn’t relate well with the cast, and, just can’t fathom why he didn’t turn in a fantastic movie.”
Go home, Mr. Berman. Spend the rest of your life spending the bucketloads of money that you sheared from Trek, and, never speak of it again, unless it’s to appologize. You’re no Gene Roddenberry.
———————–
re: #82, hey Aaron, I enjoyed reading what you had to say, but, how ’bout some paragraph spacing next time? You’re killin’ me, man.
The reason I couldn’t, and, still can’t, get into DS-9, is because it’s tooooo sloooooow. It’s too soap operatic. It’s like listening to women go on about clothing, and, the minutiae of their days (sorry ladies, but, it’s the truth). TNG episodes were idea-driven, for the most part – Philosophy, Science, Social Issues, Psychology, Morality, Literature. DS-9 episodes, on the other hand, were mostly plot-driven. “We need to get this, to do that, before such and such happens.” BOOOOORING. It doesn’t hold my attention at all.
Voyager was a slight improvement, in that I could watch the episodes. But, by that point in time, the franchise had been fully Bermanised for while, and, the symptoms never went away – formulaicism, re-cycling, lame, hackneyed dialogue, etc…
“Too much Trek” is a straw man. The fact is that, if Nemesis had been as good a film as TWOK, people would have seen it, spread the word, and, gone back for seconds. It’s as simple as that.
Even with the letdown of Insurrection, word of the fantastic new Trek film would have gotten out after openning weekend, and, everyone of us would have dragged our friends to see it. Plus, the critics would have given it high praise, piquing the interests of the non-fan masses.
And, is it really so hard to stick to the canon? When directors make film adaptations of classic novels, are they excused from sticking to parameters of their story’s world? No, and the canon only makes the story more powerful and compelling. LOTR is a fine example of this.
If we fans, who aren’t getting paid a cent, manage to be cognisant of the canon, then, it’s not too much to ask of the director and writers that they spend a few days studying before undertaking their film. They’ll only be better off for having done so, and, so will the film.
the reason why Nemesis failed is because it shouldn’t have been made.The reason why it was made is because the people who were in charge were bad decision makers.
The reason why Nemesis failed is because it sucked. (Profound.)
How many times must the Enterprise SAVE something big: the Earth (I), the Federation (II, III, IV, V), Galactic Peace (VI), an anonymous planet (VII), human civilization (VIII), and a California Life Style (IX) ? X comes along and saves Galactic Peace again. Gee, I wonder why it failed since it was so original?
#69 Let me get this straight. You dont like DS9 because its plot driven. OK and you think Voyager was an improvment! Wow…just, Wow. Please, I have to know, no disrespect intended, does anyone else feal this way? Its boring cause it has plot! I just dont know. I mean any one who has watched it well tell you it had more consistant action than all the other series put together and better done then youll find even in Star Wars, plus it had plot, plus it had character development, plus each character on the show got equal time, to include secondary characters. You my friend, need to watch the whole thing. Many a friends I know felt like you and after watching the whole thing agreed that all the other series dont hold a candle to it. Voyager an improvment over DS9,,,, Wow!
#172, No.
My guess is that I don’t like DS-9 because it’s ONLY plot-driven. There are no thought-provoking ideas, or, so few of them, that I’m not willing to sit through the endless back-and-forth of people standing around, melodramatically exchanging cliche’d exclamations with each other.
If the drama were treated in a more sophisticated manner, then, perhaps it would be enough to compell me, notwithstanding the lack of mental stimulation. But, it isn’t.
It’s not “boring because it has plot.” It’s boring because it has LITTLE MORE THAN PLOT, and, the plot that it does have is not enough to hold my attention. Saying that DS-9 has “more consistent action than all the other series put together,” is just not realistic.
I’ve tried and tried to get into DS-9, and, I just can’t stand it. I watch the show, and, my overwhelming feeling is to shout at the screen: “DO SOMETHING!! QUIT STANDING AROUND, BLATHERING ON ABOUT STUFF THAT I DON’T CARE ABOUT, AND, DO SOMETHING!!! DISCUSS THAT BORING DROSS ON YOUR OWN TIME!!! DANCE, MONKEY!!! DANCE!!!”
(just kidding about the “dance, monkey” bit, but, the rest is sincere.)
And, even when they DO do something, I don’t care much more about it, because I’ve no emotional investment in the characters or in the arc of the series.
All of the DS-9 characters having gotten “equal time” is very lovely and egalitarian, but, it doesn’t do anything for me. I wouldn’t have wanted Uhura and Chekov to get as much time as Kirk and Spock, nor Crusher and Troi as much time as Picard and Data. And, in any case, I actually LIKED all of the TNG characters, with the intermitant exception of Troi, who’d get on my nerves now and again, but, I’d tolerate it.
And, I said that Voyager was a SLIGHT improvement over DS-9. “SLIGHT.”
I didn’t much care for Voyager’s characters either, but, at least they DID stuff. They had lame, formulaic dialogue, but, I can usually suffer through it, because I’m interested in what’s going to happen. Janeway was really hard to bear, incidentally. That conspicuous cast-iron bitch persona, combined with her irrational adherence to the Prime Directive, even at the risk of the lives of the crew, as well as everything else I mentioned, were eventually enough to put me off of that show as well.
But, I made it through more seasons of Voyager than I did DS-9. And, I can actually STAND to watch the re-runs of those Voyager episodes that I missed during its initial airing…or, many of them, anyway. I’ve tried my best to get through episodes of DS-9, and, I just can’t. It’s just too boring. Every now and again, I’ll see a DS-9 episode that I KIND OF enjoy, or, at least parts of. But, it takes real discipline on my part to sit through the entire episode, in order that I might see those scenes that I enjoy. And, that’s just too much work to be mildly entertained.
I’ve noticed that people who really loved DS-9 happen to be avid readers of fiction. Lit. people really loved that show. I’ve never been a big novel reader, and, I’ve little patience for a novel that doesn’t compell me within the first 20 pages or so. I’m sure it’s just an issue of taste. I mean, it doesn’t make any sense to say that you’re WRONG for enjoying DS-9. Hey, people enjoy soap operas as well, and, I can’t stand them.
DS9 was a fine show and if you didn’t like it… that’s your opinion.
Anthony, please make more of these kind of threads… areas where the less-open-minded may come and maim and kill people with their words. It seems to sap them before coming into a thread that matters and spewing off-topic dreck about the Treks they hate.
I know you encouraged people to take advantage of the opportunity to speak their mind. I am all for opinions. This is mine.
May we have another Marina Sirtis thread to keep the kids busy?
…The answer as to why Nemesis was a flop is two-fold:
1) Brent Spiner had too much input on the script, which neutered it because not only did it simply try to TWOK the script, he biased it in favor of killing off Data so he wouldn’t have to wear the contact lenses ever again.
2) Berman simply needs to look in the mirror.
#173 Well dude. I can respect your attitude towards the show. You are right about one thing. I do love to read. And you are also right, that people who do love the show, really really love it, as do I, which is why it is a bit of a head scratcher to those of us that do when we here from people on your side of the fence. But seriously, it does have more action than all other shows combined, and I know this only cause I have watched and loved all of the trek series since the original originaly broadcast. After all, Picard 9 times out of 10 used diplomacy to avoid battles and to me, thats boring. Peace Out.
Star Trek 5 is a better movie than Nemesis. In fact, ST 5 was not bad for the first hour. It was in the second half that they ran out of money and ideas on how to resolve Shatner’s impossible script. Nemesis was just bad from beginning to end. The story –idea– is not bad though. I think the idea of the Romulans cloning Picard as pretty cool, but the clone didn’t look or act anything like Picard, and it was all executed poorly from writing to directing to the release date to….everything
Lets face it RB took over for GR producing TNG. Then he was handed the entire Trek franchise by Paramount. The problem was he isn’t an inivator. He was basicly an accountant what Trek needed was someone with true creativity running it.
I would have loved to seen JMS’s idea for a trek series created [any one that hasn't read it go to http://www.bztv.typepad.com ] .
In any case I beleive JJ has that creativity and I look forward to XI.
LLAP
#176, Cheers.
What I’m wondering is if there’s not a way to please both of us. Did you like DS-9 so much better than TNG, that you wouldn’t want another series like TNG? Or, did TNG, which was fantastic for me, also comprise what you liked about DS-9?
Cygnus. Well, let me tell you. Growing up, I was a huge starwars fan. huge. My father however loved startrek and really wanted me to get into so that we could share it. I could not however get past the cheesy 60’s effects what with how great they were in star wars. Well, then TNG came out and sudennly I was loving Trek. I then gave TOS another chance and fell in love with that two. So No, I dont hate TNG in fact I love it, My love for Trek started with it. My Sisiter also loves it. but heres the thing. I loved star wars more not because it had better effects, but because its characters, ecpecially Luke had a full character arch, somthing that is sorly missing in TNG. I love action, but I love character developmet even more. Action without substance is not exciting to me. Now, along comes DS9. It had everything that starwars had, character wise, and although the action didnt really start to show up till later, when it did, OH boy, I hadnt seen better space battles since Return of the Jedi. This was star trek that i love as much as star wars and more than any other trek. Now, I do see were your coming from, it isnt like a soap opera, it is a soap opera. That being said, most of the show can not be seen out of order like TNG because you wont know what the hells going on. So when you see two people just talking, as you mentioned, it may seem boring. But if you had been watching every episode, and really know what there talking about, these dialoge moments in the show would go from boring to uterly facinating. I love it when a small detail from ten eposodes ago, becomes a major new detail in another. TNG did not do this and left many plots unresolved or unimportant in the long run. You also said that all characters getting equal time was no big deal to you because you said that you would not want to see an episode devoted to Troi, or Beverly, Riker Wesley or Gordie any way. I agree. but thats only because those characters are so mind numbingly dull and there dull because they were never given screen time or any develpment beyond there initial introductions. Picards a great chracter because a lot of time was given to make him great. Imagine if the same time was given to make every character on TNG just as great to watch as picard. They did with a couple, Data, Worf (thats it though). Thats what you have with DS9. Every character is great. They took colm Meany (Chief Obrian ) a waisted character on TNG and made him great. Lastly another plus for DS9 was that like star wars did with Darth Vader it had a great villian in Gull Dukat. This was not a chessy cardboard villian like most of those one time only villians on TNG. this was a real 3 dimentional villian that at time you simpathised with. In my opinion a better more fleshed out villian than Khan. the other Trek series really hurt not having a regular villian. Thats why the Star Wars prequals arnt as good. Each one had a new villan instead of a constint one like the OT. Any way dude, I wish youd give it another chance, Im sure if you watched it from begining to end youd come away feally realy good about it. Even if you still didnt like it better than TNG i know youd say it beats the hell out of Voyager. to bad were not niebors. Id lone you my DVDs. In answer to your question though, No I would not like another series like TNG, both Voyger and Enterprise were like TNG. thats why thay failed. TNG did what it did right, no need to do it again. DS9 rocked because it was different.
Oh, sorry. I should have spaced some of my paragraphs.
Well, Darth Dogg, my coming up pretty much paralleled yours. I was obsessed with Star Wars when I was a kid, but, never really cared too much for Star Trek TOS. I remember tuning in for the series premiere of TNG, when I was about 13, and, I thought it was lame. I didn’t care for the story or the characters. I thought that bald-headed nerd of a captain was a joke, and, Troi annoyed the hell outa me.
So, I didn’t watch another episode for about five years. Then, one day, my high school Literature teacher showed our class a TNG episode, in aid of illustrating a theme from a novel that we were studying. And, from that point on, I was hooked. That episode was worlds better than Encounter at Farpoint.
I religiously tuned in for every episode from then on. Though, a year before, I had been home sick for a week during a TOS marathon, and, watching it had opened me up to that series. But, when I got hooked on TNG, my interest in TOS greatly increased.
I’ve since gone back, of course, and seen all of the episodes from TOS at least once, and all of TNG many times over. And, when I read about the new series, DS-9, I was totally stoked. I remember being giddy with excitement as I watched it in a college rec. room with a bunch of fans. But, it was rather disappointing.
No matter. I was sure that the series was just off to a slow start, as TNG had been, and, I excitedly showed up for the second episode. And, for the third. And, the fourth. And, the fifth. But, it wasn’t getting any better. At some point, I came to the sad realisation that the producers of the show actually wanted it to be as it was, and, that it was not just off to a slow start. And, that’s when I gave up on it.
I caught some episodes during the last two seasons that weren’t bad, by which I mean that I was able to sit through them and be entertained. The whole storyline with the Dominion being hooked on Ketrocel White, by which the Vorta were able to control them, was interesting. And, Gull Dukat was a good villain. The storyline between him, his daughter and that Cardacian tailor was good. The loss and re-taking of DS-9 by Sisko & Co. was also good, as were the dog fights.
And, there was one episode that I truely enjoyed – as much as a good TNG episode – and, that was the one where the crew go back in time to the original Enterprise, and, become entangled in The Trouble with Tribbles.
But, even at its best, DS-9 just didn’t compell me to tune in for it. I’ve since tried, as I mentioned, to go back and watch the entire series several times, but I just don’t enjoy it. Those first few seasons – forget about it. I can’t bear it. The last few, as I mentioned, have some episodes that hold my attention, though, barely, at times.
I appreciate your offer, and, I’m sure I’ll be seeing plenty more of DS-9 on TV, as I’m drawn to anything Trek, even if it sucks. If Generations, which I LOATHE, came on TV right now, I’m sure I’d get off the computer, and go watch it, cringing at the same spots that I always do. I might not make it through to the end of the film, just as I probably won’t make it through to the end of many (or most) of the DS-9 episodes, but, I’m always hopeful that I’ll see something in it that I haven’t before. The richness of TOS, TNG and some of the films, provides a sort of undying flame that I optimistically hope will illuminate the less brilliant Trek, if that makes any sense.
NEMESIS FAILED BECAUSE IT WAS A REHASH OF MATERIAL USED IN PREVIOUS FILMS – LIKE SOME SORT OF “BEST OFS” COMPILATION OF CONCEPTS. APART FROM PICARD AND DATA ALL THE OTHER ACTORS HAD NO REAL MEAT IN THEIR SANDWICHES. IT WAS ABOUT PICARD AND DATA. THE REST OF THE CREW WERE MERE GUESTS. Also it had too many inconsistencies and the fans don’t appreciate that. errors = someone didn’t care enough to get it right. Star Trek is a billion dollar franchise – someone should have bothered to get it right. Its a big investment to look after. Well, they didnt and the result was what happened.
#48:
> … I know people go on about DS9 and Voyager movies,
> but the public never really embraced those shows ….
They are not forgotten; they have their fans, but …
FWIW, Amazon’s Trek DVD bestseller list is
dominated by the movies, TOS, TAS, and TNG.
DS9 currently starts at about #20 in the list, along with Enterprise.
Voyager currently comes in last, it is nowhere in the top 30.
Not a surprising pattern I guess. (You can also check each
individual product’s ‘Amazon sales rank in the DVD category’,
which gives a somewhat different view.) It’s unwise to read
too much into Amazon’s published sales data (their calculations
are not fully explained), but it gives an interesting glimpse into
the apparent sales pattern. (And I was interested to see that the
TAS DVDs seem to be selling well; though I’m not a TAS fan, yet.)
Anyhoo, it is more likely we’ll see a TNG movie than a DS9 movie.
These kinds of decisions are driven by one thing, the word starts with M,
or you can make an S and draw a line through it, like this: $$$
Now let’s all take a break to celebrate and appreciate
the true meaning of Star Trek:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=5gyWav1Jul4
…Berman considers Nemesis his “biggest and greatest disappointment,”…
So do I, Rick, so do I. Biggest and greatest disappointment from whole Star Trek. Even bigger and greater disappointment than Voyager was. :-)
I’ve been watching Trek for 40 years.
Insurrection always puzzled me-the theme of ‘eternal youth’ was already covered with a slightly different twist in Generations, wasn’t it??
Nemesis could have been a much better film, for reasons already discussed above.
In my book, these last 2 films pale before any of the Original Cast films. I know that STV is flawed but it has its moments. One of which is when Dr. McCoy relives the death of his dad. This scene really hits home, as I recently lost a parent due to cancer..the pain that one can go through losing a parent can be extreme.
The ShaKaRee sequence, especially the special effects with George Murdock as the Supreme Being, are among the most compelling and awe-inspring I’ve ever seen in Trek. A million times more emotionally charged than the last two Generation films, despite the flaws in STV which I admit exist.
As to Deep Space 9, I just finished watching Past Tense Parts 1 and 2.
The two-parter makes some really strong, and needed statements-timely as more stories surface of war veterans not getting the government assistance they deserve.
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Nemesis/Pictorial-1.html
It’s really hard go through a thread like this: People stating things they’ve heard a hundred times. Blaming people and situations that they don’t personally know, but it’s what someone else said in some article somewhere. Rick Berman may or may not have been actually responsible for some of the failures of the Trek Franchise, but it’s clear he’s being used as a scape goat here.
Film and television content is always a collective effort. It’s almost impossible to blame any one person. It’s just like sports teams: people always bitch about why their favourite team isn’t doing better. They blame the coach, or a single player, or the owner, when the truth is probably that the team isn’t working as well together as it should.
Nemesis was a failure commercially and critically because it was a bad movie. It was bad on every level. Not only did it not really deliver on any promise, it didn’t even make any promises, except for lavish visuals and some big names (the editor of Superman and the screenwriter for Gladiator). No one involved creatively with the film asked themselves “what do the audiences want to see?” In fact, I’m almost certain they didn’t even think of what even THEY wanted to see.
Most good movies have good character development, a good plot, and if it’s an action movie, good action sequences. It doesn’t have to be Oscar material to be enjoyable, but it has to be enjoyable. Nemesis had none of these qualities. In fact, none of the TNG movies had anything remotely original or uplifting. First Contact’s saving grace is that it had some decent action sequences and that it incorporated some elements that had created successful Treks in the past (time travel, humour, huge space battle sequences, the borg). FC was at least enjoyable, but not on par with some previous Trek films, and this is a TNG fan talking!
Everyone just took the fans for granted.
There’s the business side of it. The studio isn’t run by artists, it’s run by businessmen. Businessmen don’t necessarily understand art, but they all understand success. That’s why they became businessmen! The easiest way to acheive success is to imitate the mechanics of something already successful. They don’t care if the writing’s good, so long as they got Patrick Stewart on screen with people in uniforms pushing buttons and calling each other by rank.
In fact, the only reason there’s a Trek franchise beyond the original series is that Paramount wanted to ride the Star Wars wave, so they made TMP. How much more clear can it be that studio heads don’t care about what the audience wants, only about what they’re willing to pay?
Trek fans were tired of Paramount reaching into their pockets in exchange for nearly nothing. That’s why Nemesis failed, and that’s why Enterprise got an early retirement. I think the general public and Trek fans made it clear that they didn’t want more of the same.
Also, everyone here has a favorite show which they use as an example to explain what the “bad” trek movies and shows are dissimilar to. We freaking get it! You love TOS/TNG/DS9/VOY/ENT more than the rest! There are so many reasons to have a favorite series, not the least of which is nostalgia, which is hardly an objective point of view! Are you also going to tell us what your favorite colour is, and why?
I really don’t understand. Star trek is supposed to have such a smart premise and such a smart audience, but some fans are clearly dumbasses.
ANY Trek show can be converted into a successful film. The only condition is that the quality be there. The actors have it in them, and most are underused. I have never seen a single bad actor cast in Star Trek, and they’re always cast for the right role. It’s the writing, and writing is affected by everyone from studio heads to producers to the director and to actors. They could make five more TNG movies, each a blockbuster hit. All they need are good ideas, and it seems that THINKING is something people are allergic to. They’d rather just go through the motions.
You’re not going to be seeing any quality Trek until all creative people involved realize that Star Trek isn’t a soap opera. They need to smarten up, and so do audiences.
Look at that picture of Berman, what with his crossed eyes, and anyone is actually surprised he can’t figure out why shit stinks?
It’s kinda like Bush, and his apparent inability to figure out why Iraq is a mess.
Hey! have we ever seen Berman and Bush at the same time??
Hmmmmmmmmmm
#188, “Rick Berman may or may not have been actually responsible for some of the failures of the Trek Franchise, but it’s clear he’s being used as a scape goat here.”
The buck stopped with him. He was Gene Roddenberry’s successor, only he wasn’t qualified for the job, because he lacked Gene’s primary contributing trait: imagination. That’s my best guess, anyway.
Notwithstanding the hither expressed love for DS-9, which did come in the reign of Berman, most of what Berman churned out was unabashedly lacking in imagination. Voyager, Enterprise, Generations, (OK, I’ll put First Contact in the DS-9 side of the ledger), Insurrection & Nemesis – Berman was the HNIC for all of those projects. Res ipsa loquitor. And, Berman looks like a goat to me.
“The studio isn’t run by artists, it’s run by businessmen. Businessmen don’t necessarily understand art, but they all understand success. That’s why they became businessmen! The easiest way to acheive success is to imitate the mechanics of something already successful.”
Yeah, THAT’S why we all hate Rick Berman. BECAUSE he’s a business man, and, not a creative, imaginative, inspiring, artistic leader. BECAUSE he sold Gene Roddenberry’s dream for a lot of cabbage. BECAUSE he’s the commerce that rapes the art. BECAUSE he’s a tool, basically.
#188 “The buck stopped with him. He was Gene Roddenberry’s successor, only he wasn’t qualified for the job, because he lacked Gene’s primary contributing trait: imagination. That’s my best guess, anyway.”
Successor? Maybe, but there’s only one Gene Roddenberry. It’s ridiculous to think that any replacement would
If the buck stops with him when it comes to failures, it also does in the successes. If Voyager, Enterprise, and Nemesis blew because of him, then he deserves credit for TNG, DS9 and First Contact. Now, doesn’t THAT sound ridiculous? I heard someone here blame Jonathan Frakes for Insurrection… but didn’t he also direct First Contact?
Granted, I believe the failures in Voyager and Enterprise were because they were trying really hard to reproduce a TNG type show, but without the TNG premise or the characters. I’m sure Rick Berman had a lot to do with that, but not everything. Amidst the crap, there were good Voyager and Enterprise episodes, how did those slip through the cracks?
It all goes back to the writing. It’s where most things succeed or fail. (as a side note, RON D. MOORE RAWX!)
I also think the actors of the more recent shows were less vocal regarding their characters. I remember an old interview with Robert Picardo where he said something along the lines of “I don’t know. They just pay the bills.” I know Shatner, Stewart, and Brooks all voiced opinions regarding their characters, so did many of the other cast members. The older actors owned their roles. They influenced the writing and even explained to writers, directors, and producers what their characters would or wouldn’t do.
I’m almost certain Scott Bakula wasn’t told much about his character. I’m sure the writers didn’t know who his character was, and no one brought up any complaints. I like the guy, but he was running on autopilot. Just looking at some of the stories, I’d say they were banking heavily not only on his Quantum Leap fame, but his Quantum Leap character.
As for Gene, I don’t think he had quite the level of creative input people credit him with, at least later on. He worked hard to maintain his part in the Star Trek legacy, and deservedly so. He created a wonderful original show that persevered despite all its obstacles. He had some great ideas, and some not so great. The only movie he had a major influence on was The Motion Picture. Hardly a badge of pride when paired up with its first sequel. By the time the fourth movie was made, Leonard Nimoy had a greater input on production.
Roddenberry may have also created TNG, but his power over the show itself was never really defined, and I doubt it was much beyond that of consultant. Paramount owns Star Trek and they don’t care about what Gene Roddenberry wants. If they allowed him to develop the show, it’s because they knew his name would be a selling point. I’m glad he got to do it, but let’s be real as to why he got the job. They were afraid to piss off the fans by getting Aaron Spelling or someone else.
As I see it, fans have singled out Rick Berman because they need to blame something or someone for the decline of Star Trek. I just wouldn’t be quick to put it all on his shoulders. He did his job, but so did everyone else.
sorry, I meant #190
Also, when I mentioned Nimoy having input, it wasn’t a complaint. I like the way the man thinks.
By the way, in another example of throwing names around, I keep hearing that Shatner and Nimoy may be in some way contributing to the new movie. It’s all rumours at the moment. If it does happen, though, it’s going to be only because Paramount can cash in on their names.
Personally, I’m not crazy about this prequel stuff. I know they’re going to want to retcon the costumes, because lord knows they don’t want to have people walking around in yellow blue and red pj’s, looking like they’re stuck in the 60s. Then there’s the decision of casting Kirk and Spock: do they get someone who bears a resemblance (a la Brandon Routh), or do they simply go for acting chops (a la James Cromwell)?
Gene Roddenberry died during Season 5 of TNG, I believe. So, at most, Rick Berman had the wheel of that ship for the last three seasons. And, by that point, the show was humming along nicely, with all of its successful mechanisms in place. So, I suppose Berman can be given credit for staying out of the way, and, not ruining TNG. But, he doesn’t get credit for what we all love about that series. He doesn’t get creative or artistic credit.
So, you’re left with DS-9, which some people love, but I was greatly disappointed by, and First Contact, which was the best of a bad bunch of movies (admittedly, a solid effort) as Berman’s crowning achievements.
Before Berman: TOS & TNG series, and the TOS films.
Anno Berman: DS-9, Voyager, Enterprise and the TNG films.
Is a common factor beginning to emerge?
Of course no one could replace Gene. But, his presence and creative input definitely added something. Perhaps what he most added was an artistic standard to live up to (though, we all know that it wasn’t always lived up to). Gene was a man of bold ideas. Ideas are the raw material of fiction, and, Gene’s IMAGINATION was the source of those bold ideas.
Trek was his invention. His creation. His baby. And, everyone knew that. Roughly half of the TOS films were cheese, but, the other half were much better than what Berman oversaw, DS-9 and First Contact notwithstanding.
When Gene died, what Trek needed was someone to carry his torch. A visionary. An artist. A creative, imaginative leader.
And, what Trek got was a bean-counter. Money good. Ratings good. Earn money good. Spend money bad. Copy formula, make ratings go high, make more money good.
But, when your spirit and heart aren’t in a project, it definitely shows. Knock-offs of good art don’t fool the likes of us. The lack of inspiration was the elephant in the room for those 15 years of Bermanism.
Someone’s gotta be held to account. I don’t buy these appologetics of, “well, there were so many people involved…” Hogwash. Spielberg, Kubrick and Scorcese always manage to make good films, even with “so many people involved.” Even with Spielberg’s decline (beginning with AI), his flops are still better than the average success (his most recent, “Munich,” was excellent, btw.) Ditto for Scorcese. So, why is that? Why do some filmmakers always make good movies?
Because they’re artistic visionaries. They see an image of what they want to make, and, they’re good enough leaders to get what they need out of their crew. And, most importantly, they’re brimming with imagination.
And, then we have Rick Berman. Bean-counter extraordinaire. Earning money good. Spending money bad. That one earned money. Make this one look like that one.
As for Kirk & Spock, chops vs. looks…
Always go with chops over looks.
You might pick chops, and I might pick chops… but they’ll be stumped by the decision, I promise. They might have the choice of an incredible actor, but end up picking a Nimoy lookalike for fears of rocking the boat some more. From the look of their poster, they want the audiences to know that the old Trek is coming back, despite the fact that the original cast are in their 70s. Talk about living in the past!
Then again, “Superman Returns” was essentially a direct sequel to a 20-year old movie, and it wasn’t too bad, which is probably what Paramount is thinking.
It IS Rick Berman’s job to make sure the spending doesn’t go out of control. He’s the guy that gets the budget. One can’t hardly blame a producer for this. Besides, I don’t think what these shows needed was more money. They had larger budgets than most tv shows out there. There was enough money for the shows to have taken a nice shape, and in some cases they did!
Roddenberry might have died at the begining of the 5th season of TNG, but he did little more than create the show and produce the first season, and probably with a lot of concessions to what Paramount wanted. After season 1, at best, he gave his opinion on decisions already made and scripts already written. Not to mention, Berman had creative input on the actual development of the show, he was entrenched before a minute of TNG had been shot.
Also, there are tons of examples in tv land of shows where an exiting creator/producer (usually someone with major creative input, possibly even writing the scripts) negatively affects the quality of a show. I don’t really see that with TNG.
I love DS9, and it was conceived and executed for 7 years, smack dab in the middle of Rick Berman’s watch. His name is listed as show co-creator. I don’t credit him with the show’s success, though.
The job of artistic visionary generally falls on the writers. The virulent appeal that DS9 has on its small group of core fans is entirely attributed to the writing. DS9 has some of the best Trek episodes in the past decade or so (”The Visitor”, “Far Beyond The Stars”), and some of the most horrible (”Paradise” aka Sisko-in-a-box, “Meridian”). I can’t really blame anyone but the writers for the good and the bad.
A lot of people tuned out after TNG and DS9. The producer credit stayed the same, it’s the writing credits that changed (or diminished). In fact, Enterprise’s fourth season had a fresh infusion of writers, and some decent episodes were made there, but it was too little too late.
Spielberg, Kubrick, and Scorsese are unique. You can’t bring them out in this example. They’re certainly not what you would call the average director. They are nothing less than geniuses! They believe in going forward, which for the most part means no sequels. Okay, so there’s two Indiana Jones squels and a Jurassic Park sequel by Spielberg, but I don’t see 4 spinoffs and 700 episodes of anything in his body of work.
Paramount hasn’t hired anyone in the caliber of those directors to work on anything Trek. The closest they’ve come to is Robert Wise. This guy made a lot of movies that are going to be classics forever, including a very influential sci-fi movie, but TMP isn’t one of them.
Paramount is responsible for having pumped out 700 episodes, 600 of which were produced on Berman’s watch. If you want to blame the sheer volume of Trek out there, you got your answer.
Those 600 episodes, however, vary in quality, from great to abysmal, and Berman was roughly equally responsible for all of them. The names that changed the most during the production were the writers. Yeah, Berman made horrible decisions, but he was hardly the only one.
These final movies failed because everything was so predictable. How often can poor Enterprise be crashed or destroyed? The characters were beyond thier capacity to grow and hence became predictable as well.
I would make exactly the same case for the TV versions of TNG and especially for Voyager (a temporal rift or anomoly per episode!) DS9 grew stronger towards the end (IMO).
I might be in the minority, but I really liked Enterprise. The show was not predictable, the stories and the crews struggled not having the “end all of technology” to solve every problem, the graphics were great, and, as a former carrier aviator, I even liked that Enterprise actually resembled a ship with real ladder wells etc! It was a real good show IMO, more like the original with imperfect actors and characters, while TNG, DS9, and Voyager (yuck) were trying to be to perfect.
Thanks for listening.
Tom
These final movies failed because everything was so predictable. How often can poor Enterprise be crashed or destroyed? The characters were beyond their capacity to grow and hence became predictable as well.
I would make exactly the same case for the TV versions of TNG and especially for Voyager (a temporal rift or anomaly per episode!) DS9 grew stronger towards the end (IMO).
I might be in the minority, but I really liked Enterprise. The show was not predictable, the stories and the crews struggled not having the “end all of technology” to solve every problem, the graphics were great, and, as a former carrier aviator, I even liked that Enterprise actually resembled a ship with real ladder wells etc! It was a real good show IMO, more like the original with imperfect actors and characters, while TNG, DS9, and Voyager (yuck) were trying to be to perfect.
Thanks for listening.
Tom
I don’t know about you, but, I got a hankerin’ fer some Doublemint gum.
Well, Digital D., if Berman had as much creative input as you say, and Gene had as little influence as you imply, then, I don’t know what went wrong.
It would still seem that Gene’s genesis of the show had a great deal to do with its success, even after he’d stopped producing it. And, that Berman, as the HNIC, after Gene’s passing, would have had the responsibility of hiring good writers. I totally agree with you about the importance of the writing. But, someone’s gotta see to it that the people doing the writing are living up to the great standards of the past.
Gene Roddenberry is credited as a writer on some of those early TOS episodes. And, he envisioned the series. Same deal with TNG. I’ll give Berman credit for not ruining TNG, while he was “entrenched” in it, as you say. But, that’s about all I can give him credit for, from my perspective. Maybe if I was as fond of DS-9 as you are, I’d feel differently.
All I know is that Trek, before Berman got the wheel, was much better than Trek after he got the wheel, as far as I’m concerned.
The TNG films all shared a flaw that began in a minor way with Generations, was worse in First Contact and escalated out of control in succeeding films: the attempt by the Star Trek franchise to transform Picard/Stewart into an action hero. Where TNG the series excelled was when Picard was the moral center of the tale. His certainty in the face of challenging ethical, political and social issues saved the day — not his ability to fight. Indeed, the thing that differentiated TNG from TOS was Picard’s reliance on his intellectual powers and moral certitude. Throughout the TV series, Picard, unlike Kirk, was never known for his physical prowess. It was a rare display when he defeated a foe by personal physical means. By contrast, the movies were built around a final denouement that required acts of physical heroism and derring-do by Picard/Stewart. This is where the franchise lost its nerve when bringing TNG to the big screen. It coddled that aspect of the movie-going audience that requires action heroes, while assuming that existing fans will go to anything with the Star Trek name on it. Picard/Stewart is pretty long in the tooth in Nemesis and yes the physical action by Picard is necessarily physically limited. But a NEMESIS? — what better completes an action hero identity than having a NEMESIS? it was the final exhaustion of a concept devised purely for TNG movies that ultimately went horribly wrong. What would have been the solution? Good writing. A good writer could have made the movies an even better version of the best of the TV series. A good writer could have served up drama and tension without the protagonist and antagonist ever getting involved in some space-age barroom brawl. Instead, Paramount threw away the core of the TNG story line in favor of cheap pandering to the action hero mentality. And so, ironically, it was lack of courage that killed the TNG movies. Nothing more, nothing less.
Cygnus:
I’d love to think Gene Roddenberry had everything to do with the success of TOS and TNG, and that Berman had everything to do with the fall of all things Trek. It’d be simple. It would give me a specific person to be upset with.
Roddenberry created the TOS and TNG characters, and much of the series’ “bibles”. He had a good hang of what characters might or might not do. He knew the future his show was supposed to represent. He also took a lot of credit for things that he didn’t come up with. Some of the best TOS episodes were the brainchild of a writer. I’m not giving Roddenberry credit for Mirror Mirror, or City on the Edge, or The Trouble With Tribbles. Those episodes were the product of someone else’s creative writing!
All I know is that DS9 was pretty good, and it got better just as soon as TNG ended and some staff went over. This staff wasn’t there for Voyager when it started, nor did they really move on to it when DS9 ended.
Despite what it might sound like, I don’t like Berman. Having read some articles, and major parts of the DS9 Companion, I know Berman can be a negative element. He was opposed to some of the good ideas that came out of the DS9 staff. They still fought for their ideas and got most of them through. In the end, the staff and the more involved producers got their way because they actually cared about their show. They never took their audience for granted and ensured that DS9 would continue strong for 7 years.
Yeah, you can blame Berman for some of Voyager and Enterprise, but you can’t put it entirely on his shoulders! What about the guy who handed in a crappy script full of technobabble? How does this guy not get any of the blame? Or, if you’re an actor, and you’ve got a starring role in a major tv show, how do you read that script and not ask the writers, “what the hell is my motivation? Who is this guy supposed to be?” If you care for your career as an actor or a writer, how do you give less than 100%?
Like I said before, people single out individuals when a sport team fails, but it’s a team sport! Everyone from the owner to the coach to the players to the trainer to the guy who takes care of the field has a part to play!
wookie:
I liked the concept of Enterprise, but not the execution. They had some interesting episodes in the 3rd and 4th seasons. Otherwise, it had more than its fair share of anomalies, technobabble, and senseless, gratuitous time travel. I felt like I was watching Quantum Leap, but without the purpose! Its only saving grace is that it wasn’t as bad as Voyager.
In fact, the #1 voted episode of Enterprise, “Twilight”, borrows heavily DS9’s “The Visitor”. They were reinventing events for the sake of nostalgia, and their results were a pale imitation. The show certainly lacked in originality.
The sets may have been pretty, but the writers were out to lunch.
I didn’t know more about any of the characters at the end of the series than I knew at the begining. Same goes for the Voyager characters, except maybe the Doctor. He seemed like an interesting idea. I think he’d have been GREAT on TOS if they had thought of it. They could have had him arguing with McCoy, and then Bones would say “he’s worse than than a godamned Vulcan!” and then shut him off.
no one:
The reason they turned Picard into an action hero is because they didn’t know what else to do. Poor writing once again.
I gotta say, Patrick Stewart is running out of franchises. X-Men 3 didn’t quite pull it off like the first two movies either…
Nemesis is begging for a special edition and re-shot scenes.
Zero complaints about the VFX. In fact, I loved the gritty, almost alien look to the E’s interior. It’s a shame we’ll probably never see it fly again.
Sad.
To say Berman did not get Star Trek would be an understatement. I think the only thing he knew to do with Star Trek was to bleed it dry and cast it aside. Add to that Brannon Braga, and it’s a wonder Star Trek survived this long.
Napoleon said “Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence.” I think with Berman and Braga we got both incompetence and malice.
At least the break in Star Trek allowed us to get it away from them. Hopefully, Abrams and company won’t screw it up in the new movie. We will see.
Well, ascribing it to malice is a bit much. Even I wouldn’t go that far.
Monetary motives, however, I would tend to agree with. Berman may well have put his own financial interests over the quality and integrity of Trek, espeically toward the end of his reign. Either that, or, as you said, incompetence. I just don’t say any other way to explain so much dumbed-down, bad art.
His quality control paradigm seems to have shifted at some point, where we see the valuation of the superficial over the substantial, and, the appeal to our eyes over our hearts and minds.
As has been said, Nemesis looked pretty good. But, it wasn’t pretty good. Enterprise was the best-looking Trek show to date. Nuff said.
Though, to be fair, this shift has been happening in Hollywood, across the board.
#28, Josh T:
Don’t go bashing Cosmos, that was the greatest f-ing documentary ever commited to tape.
Anyway, I agree that the endless technobabble was a major failing of TNG/Voy. I think a major factor in the success of the new film will depend on an absence of technobabble.
Nemesis was not a bad movie – actually, I think it was a great moment for Star Trek. Using the TNG cast again is great for fans and people who don’t know the series won’t care if it’s the same cast. I do admit, the whole B4 thing was a little strange for me at first, but in a sense, that movie advanced the characters on a new level (especially Data and Picard). Thank tou Rick Berman for one of the best Star Trek movies and for all your work on Star Trek (VOYAGER rocks too!!)