NuKirk v Shinzon: Tom Hardy Signs To Join Action Comedy With Chris Pine |
jump to navigation

NuKirk v Shinzon: Tom Hardy Signs To Join Action Comedy With Chris Pine July 27, 2010

by Staff , Filed under: Celebrity,Feature Films (TMP-NEM),ST09 Cast , trackback

It looks like we may see the hero of the 2009 Star Trek movie take on the villain from the Star Trek movie before that. A new report says that Tom Hardy has signed on to the action comedy This Means War, starring alongside Chris Pine and Reese Witherspoon. More details below.


Pine v Hardy

Back in May Star Trek’s new Kirk Chris Pine signed up for the action comedy This Means War, which pits two spies against each other fighting over the favors of a girl (Reese Witherspoon). Terminator Salvation’s Sam Worthington was signed on to play the other guy, but he left the project leaving an opening. Now New York Magazine’s Vulture Blog is reporting that Tom Hardy, Star Trek Nemesis’ bad guy Shinzon, has signed on to replace Worthington. Hardy has been getting more buzz lately, for his role in the Christopher Nolan’s Inception, and Hardy is also cast as the next Mad Max.

“Inception” interview with Tom Hardy

This Means War has been in development hell in Hollywood for a decade with many different actors attached over the years. Pine is currently lined up to film the Star Trek sequel and the next Jack Ryan movie over the next year. If This Means War wants to get going, it will have to get started soon.


1. jas_montreal - July 27, 2010

I’d really like to see Malcolm Macdowell (kirk-prime killer) and Chris Pine in a same production. Maybe Malcolm will kill kirk again in a new production.

2. The Chief - July 27, 2010

I never knew Hardy had so many tats! I’m trying to recall Nemesis… did we see his arms in them?

3. Harry Ballz - July 27, 2010

Chris Pine and Tom Hardy playing two men fighting over Reese Witherspoon??


(wipes tear)

Talk about an unrealistic premise!

What, the loser gets her?

4. garen - July 27, 2010

inception was a good film. It is great to see Tom Hardy getting some high profile attention! good for you, Tom!

5. Newman - July 27, 2010

Yeah, Inception was a good film, and Hardy was great in it.

Too bad Nemesis was so terrible.

6. Jordan - July 27, 2010

I remember Rick Berman gushing at how Hardy will become a popular actor in hollywood. Who knew he was right about something.

7. Chain of Command - July 27, 2010

Good for him. Never really had a problem with Nemesis to be honest.

8. Hat Rick - July 27, 2010

Why oh why did it have to be an actor from Nemesis?

They could have cast Wil Wheaton instead of Hardy. Yes, even Wil Wheaton would be preferable to the tinge of Nemesis that is Tom Hardy, methinks.

Just joshin’. I’m pleased that the two are going to be working together, and much luck to them.

And I like Wheaton, too. Nice guy.

9. - July 27, 2010

Shinzon did nothing for me as a character but Hardy was great in Inception.

10. izmunuti - July 27, 2010

I can’t decide which actor is hotter… quick — beam me to deep space before I blow-up!

11. Lt. Dakin - July 28, 2010

I want to see Pine do the wood choping scene from Generations

12. set phasers to fabulous - July 28, 2010

i tell you what woud be great – as a result of this George Miller dumps Hardy and casts Mel as Max in Fury Road!!

13. William Forrester - July 28, 2010

I hope other Star Trek actors appear in this as well. and that Tom Hardy joins the Hollywood A-list and does more Hollywood mainstream movies. I remember first being introduced to him in Star Trek: Nemesis but the world took no notice of him until the last couple of years. I hope they release Warrior very soon as well in which he co-stars with the incredibly gorgeous Jennifer Morrison (who was also in a Star Trek movie), Hollywood legend Nick Nolte and famous wrestler Kurt Angle.

14. Damian - July 28, 2010

I liked Nemesis. I have always maintained that part of the reason for its failure is that it was released at the same time as 3 huge blockbusters (Die Another Day, Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings). I have always wondered if they held off for a few months, would it have faired better. I have to believe it would have. Sure it was not Wrath of Khan or Voyage Home, but certainly worthy of Star Trek, IMHO. Paramount did seem to learn a little lesson when they decided to hold Star Trek (2009) for a few months until there wasn’t as much stiff competition.

Tom Hardy was fine in Nemesis. I’m always glad to see Star Trek alum be successful. It only reflects positively on Star Trek.

#2–Schinzon’s uniform had long sleeves.

15. Lt. Dakin - July 28, 2010

Being in Nemesis probably slowed Tom Hardy’s rise to popularity instead of helping it.

More amazing how the cast of Trek 2009 has exploded since Trek. Not that they weren’t well on their way, but with tons of media coverage, it certainly propelled all of them.

16. JimJ - July 28, 2010

#11-Really?? I want to hear him say, “Dillweed!”

17. Jo Jo - July 28, 2010

Y’know, I sat thru INCEPTION beating my brains trying to remember where I’d seen “that actor” before. Now I know!

It’s funny, the star of the most hated ST movie appearing with the star of the most loved ST movie (after TWOK)!

Personally, I love NEMESIS – I probably enjoy it more than ST2009 – and I think Hardy’s really gifted & has tons of presence on screen. I think it’s cool, Hardy & Pine together! Maybe Hardy can kick some ass for Romulus ;)

18. Smart - July 28, 2010

I am so tired of all this NEMESIS bashing. I love it, too. More than ST09. It had soul, the dialogues were great. Picard/Shinzon scenes are among the best acted in the whole franchise.

I just wish Paramount would release a full extended edition with all 50 minutes of film reedited into the run-time. Then the film would probably beat FC in my all time favorite list.

NEMESIS was dark, epic and emotional. It was a great send off for the TNG crew and it does not deserve the bashing. Criticism maybe, but senseless bashing – no!

19. set phasers to fabulous - July 28, 2010

Nemesis was great right up until the wedding scene

20. VGer23 - July 28, 2010

I liked Nemesis too, but certainly not more than ST09, and certainly not because it was “dark.”

I can never understand how a Star Trek FAN can value a “dark” style and premise in Star Trek! Star Trek is the “anti-dark” sci-fi. If you like “dark” so much, what the hell are you doing watching Star Trek to begin with??

Not trying to be adversarial…just genuinely confused sometimes when I read that kind of stuff.

21. Shatner_Fan_Prime - July 28, 2010

#11 “I want to see Pine do the wood choping scene from Generations”

I liked that moment. Kirk smiles at Picard and says, “Beautiful day.” :-) As bad as Generations was in many ways. Shatner positively oozed charisma, as always. Some of my other favorite little Kirk moments from that film:

“The 24th century isn’t so tough.” (Cut from final edit of film)

“Scotty, keep things together for me til I get back.” “I always do.”

and of course…

“Risk is part of the game if you want to sit in that chair.”

22. Victor Hugo - July 28, 2010

“Star Trek Nemesis” was a regular trek movie, but it didn´t have the novelty and the “wow” factor of a “Matrix” or “Lord of the Rings” or “Spiderman” or a “Star Wars”. Tough competition.

Otherwise, a scene like having the big E crashing on another ship would have a bigger impact.

It would be a better movie with all the deleted scenes.

I liked the Scimitar..which looks like the Shadows from Babylon 5 and i liked the scene with the little ship crashing a giant window, like in Babylon 5, and the green nebula just like in…wait. :P

23. captain_neill - July 28, 2010

The one thing I hate on this site seems to be the Rick Berman bashing.

Anyway Tom Hardy was great in Nemesis despite the film’s flaws

I remain adament in my belief that Shinzon was a better villain than Nero.

24. Lore - July 28, 2010

All this Nesesis bashing and TNG fans wonder why there will be no new TNG projects. You should listen to yourselves. All this bashing is probably part of the reason JJ Abrams was given the green light by Paramount to create an alternate timeline.

25. Buzz Cagney - July 28, 2010

Tom making headlines today……………..

Perhaps not the biggest revelation of all time.

26. Ashley - July 28, 2010

There are legitimate reasons to bash Nemesis. I’m not saying I hated it, it was alright, but there were many flaws. Many elements seemed contrived for the sake of the plot and the character arcs and dozens of things were ripped from other Trek movies in an unappealing and cannibalistic way. It may have been enjoyable to some degree on the surface, but I don’t think it had much depth to it. I think their intentions were to make a movie as good as TWOK and retire the TNG crew as well as the TOS crew in TUC, but I think they just fell short and it shows. Some people might bash Nemesis because it’s popular and fashionable to do so in the Trek community but some might be bashing it because there are real flaws to it (in my opinion). To those criticizing the ‘bashers’, please keep that in mind.

27. Hat Rick - July 28, 2010

Well, I’m not necessarily calling for another TNG TV series. I’m calling for another Trek TV series, which could be in any era, including the post-Archer-but- pre-Kirk era. There are lots of great stories that could be told in that vast chasm of time when humanity is getting its feet wet, particularly in the Alternate Timeline (to avoid foregone conclusions).

And, any TNG-era TV series need not evoke Bermanism itself.

I actually love TNG. My ranking of Trek series goes something like this: TOS, TNG-DS9 (tie), VOY, and ENT. TNG and DS9 are both Berman-led productions. My slightly less than enthusiastic take on NEM certainly isn’t because I don’t like Bermanism or the universe developed under his direction. In fact, I think that aside from Roddenberry and a few of the TOS producers, who deserve primary credit for the Trek universe as a whole, Berman and some of the TNG-DS9-era writers deserve great credit for how popular Trek became in the 1980’s and 1990’s.

My problem with NEM is that it was too slow, too dark, too depressing, and it didn’t have the right balance of action, plot, special effects, and character development. To me, it just didn’t. The action was too slow; after the criticism of INS for lacking in the respect, many of us we looking for a return to ST:FC-style action and suspense. But instead what we got seemed as slow as molasses.

I’m not saying that the action wasn’t interesting, but something in the execution was lacking. That, and the quantity of it, perhaps.

The film was also physically dark. At times it seemed that someone had simply forgotten to pay the utility bill. It’s perfectly okay to have a physically dark film, except that, in combination with the slow pace of action, it was a wonder that people simply didn’t fall asleep. If a dark theater and slow action isn’t an invitation to snooze, then I really don’t know what is.

The plot, in the right hands, could have been compelling, but, again, it was the execution that seemed lacking to me. We see Picard paralyzed with indecision — weak, in other words, and incapable. This is not the Picard we have come to know and love. Picard has survived the loss of his own soul through the Borg; we know he is made of sterner stuff. So why would he be in such a state? And what happened to Riker, besides? The Enterprise-E seemed entirely powerless, and that doesn’t make much sense. Assistance from Romulan Warbirds seemed an afterthought, and didn’t do much to advance the plot. By the way, what happened to the Romulans after the entire Senate was assassinated? That whole thread seemed to have been forgotten, when so much could have been made of it. The story, as told, didn’t seem to be told well.

Characterization. Well, there’s so much that could be said, but I don’t have the time at the moment.

I don’t have any animus against NEM. I think it’s a good film, because it’s a Trek film. And I like Trek. But we also have to be realistic about where it ranks in the pantheon of Trek films, and how well it was received even by most fans in general. On that score, it was a disappointment.

However, I did like much of the score; I loved seeing the TNG crew again; I enjoyed seeing the Enterprise-E. There were many good things about the film that I enjoyed. I just enjoyed it a bit less than most other Trek films and episodes.

28. Hat Rick - July 28, 2010

About the link: I guess I’m old-school, but I do think that there is such a thing as having too much personal information out there in the ether.

29. Victor Hugo - July 28, 2010

27. Agree, watching Picard looking so fragile and powerless, filled with doubts over such a trivial routine matter, a silly clone, was sad and out of character.

30. Victor Hugo - July 28, 2010

28. This is what young americans like to say: “this was an overshare”

Damn tabloids.

31. Lore - July 28, 2010

I believe it became fashionable to pile on the Nemesis Bash express because the movie didn’t make any money. It didn’t make money because fans didn’t buy a ticket. Fans didn’t buy tickets because the plot and script were on the internet a year before the release of the film. If you know what’s going to happen in a film, why not wait for the DVD, which a lot of fans did.

32. Buzz Cagney - July 28, 2010

and add to that, as patrick has stated, there was a large degree of franchise fatigue around at the time. I think that undoubtedly true.

33. Hat Rick - July 28, 2010

It’s a symptom of my inherent Trek geekiness that I always feel bad saying anything even slightly negative about Trek.

Not that Trek is strictly comparable to friends, but it’s still, in a way, kind of like saying that I prefer one friend over another. You feel kind of icky saying you like one film or episode better than another, and you kind of hope that you’re not wrong about it or that you’re being biased about it.

You also kind of hope that the friend you have just praised, indirectly or indirectly, doesn’t do something embarassing, or conversely, that the friend that you (sort of) damned with faint praise doesn’t do something that makes you feel even worse, like send you a nice gift or card or something, or throw you a surprise party.

Hmm…. I think I may be abusing the metaphor. Okay, I’ll stop now.

34. nuKirk - July 28, 2010

Tom Hardy needs a Star Trek redemption… JJ get him in the next film as a different character! A good guy this time! Perhaps as Gary Mitchell or some other character…

35. nuKirk - July 28, 2010

additionally of note: observe the interview closely and see how similar tom’s mannerisms are to patrick’s these days… its eery really LOL

36. Red Dead Ryan - July 28, 2010


Its not just Rick Berman who gets bashed on this site. I always read comments bashing William Shatner, J.J Abrams, and James Cawley.

Bashing Shatner and Abrams gets tired and grates on me after awhile, but the worst is when people slam James Cawley about his hair or say how he should step aside from acting IN HIS OWN PRODUCTIONS which he pays for out of his own pockets and gives us for free.

37. Matthew - July 28, 2010

I have to agree with the people who claim Hardy did a decent job with Nemesis and doesn’t deserve any bashing; Hardy was a fresh face in my opinion and his acting in ‘nemesis’ was quite good mostly, especially when he’s having to compete with someone of Patrick Stewarts reputation – he did a damb good job actually I think…

Nemesis probably did poor at the box office because of the other major movies out at the time, such as Bond, Lord of the Rings and the second Harry Potter film.

Insurrection is probably a worse movie when trully compared to Nemesis, and yet ‘INS’ ended up doing over $40 million more globally than NEM. I just think the competition at that time was ridiculous for Star Trek to compete with – If Nemesis has opened in January 2003 it might have done a lot better that pre-christmas.

38. Hat Rick - July 28, 2010

In a way, it’s sad that the last two films the TNG crew were associated with were disappointments, possibly to different sets of fans. The TNG crew were in some ways the most mainstream, the most conventional, and therefore, for whatever reason, the “coolest” to be associated with to that point. (Kirk was always cool, but — for example — to be Spock wasn’t, particularly.) Picard also benefited from association with the actor portraying him, who had an impressive Shakespearean resume and had an English accent, besides. (Yes, I do know Shatner was a Shakespearean actor, too.) And you got the feeling that the TNG crew was supremely confident and competent, at least from their series, as well as nearly perfect and evolved. By comparison, the characters in DS9 had intrinsic flaws that, despite making them more human, didn’t recommend them as “cool.”

Face it: During the run of TNG, which, among the mainstream public, was “cooler”: Picard or Sisko? Riker or Spock? The very beautiful Dr. Crusher or the cantankerous Dr. McCoy?

And yet TNG’s only cinematic hit was ST:FC. Even Generations was only a qualified hit, in that it wasn’t universally critically acclaimed, and starred the TOS crew as well.

I think there is something to be said for the opinion that the TNG crew deserved better than to be remembered solely for INS or NEM. I think that they live on, in the minds of many Trek fans, as truly exemplary characters who are worthy of admiration. The fact that mainstream audiences abandoned them in their last two movies should not be a commentary on their merit, and simply a reminder that All Good Things must come to an end.

39. VGer23 - July 28, 2010


(I say this with great sadness):

Welcome to the typical Internet Star Trek fan.

40. VGer23 - July 28, 2010

#26 Ashley-

There is a big difference between mean-spirited, immature, cry-baby “bashing” and debating something / offering unpopular points of view like an intelligent and mature person.

Please keep THAT in mind.

41. LordBridges - July 28, 2010

Khan rip-off meets Kirk rip-off.


42. JohnWA - July 28, 2010


Come, come, Mr. Scott. Young minds, fresh ideas. Be tolerant!

43. Brian K - July 28, 2010

I quite enjoyed Hardy in NEM. I remember thinking at the time he was the only actor on the screen that even cared. The rest of the TNG cast were “mailing it in” in MHO.

I try not to be snarky, but in this case I just can’t resist. Don’t get me wrong here. As a Gay man, Tom can park his shoes under my bed any time….

But maybe he should consider using some of his income on fixing his teeth. I remember watching NEM and thinking “Romulans have bad teeth? That’s a new twist. We all know the Klingons do”. Now I come to find those are his real teeth, and not to mention those ears (they actually look half-Romulan).

44. Damian - July 28, 2010

What some saw in Picard as weak, I saw as reflective. Really, the whole theme was, would Picard be Schinzon if he were in his place. Picard vehemently denies it, but he also wonders at time, is he right? As far as the film being literally dark, they explained that the Remans were sensitive to light. The Enterprise was bright (the good guys), the Scimitar dark (the bad guys). Kind of literal symbolism. I thought the special effects were good for not being done by ILM. Goldsmith’s music was top notch as always. Don’t get me wrong, there were things that could have been done better. But I do believe, really, the reason it did so poorly was the stiff competition at the time. Paramount screwed up with releasing it when they did. It was never going to be a blockbuster, but it was never given a chance to be at least a minor hit for the time.

45. Hat Rick - July 28, 2010

44, some very good points, indeed. But, to be honest, I would rather think that starship commanders should be reflect on their time off and not while in the middle of the fight. I realize that Picard is a philosopher-king kind of captain, but, honestly, that was ridiculous. No one contemplates philosophy in the middle of a phaser fight. The fact that he did made the plot seem rather dumb, even if by other lights it wasn’t.

Speaking of lights, I realize that the Remans wanted darkness all over the place. But then, so did the Sith Lords of Star Wars fame, since they were both literally and figuratively into the “Dark” Side. (Notice that the Emperor’s Throne Room is quite literally dark in all the SW movies.) But Lucas’s cinematographers had always managed to keep the audiences OUT of the literal dark (though less so as the movies wore on). For example, I distinctly remember Empire Strikes Back as a very physically bright movie (possibly because much of it took place on a snow planet). By contrast, even though Picard in his rather odd jeep excursion sequence had to wear shades on NEM’s version of an alien planet, NEM still seemed dark.

Don’t get me wrong — I still like NEM. I think it was a grand experiment in style and it had its moments. I think of it as sombre, but also magnificent, in its own way. And Hardy’s performance was NOT bad at all. It’s just that the faults I mentioned, I think, could be seen, and we have the luxury of being honest about them now that cinematic Trek is in a healthy condition once again.

Given the question of whether NEM should have been a much, much better movie than it turned out to be, I would say yes, definitely — but in some ways I am, still, not aghast it was made the way it was. After all, it was a Trek film, and in that sense, any Trek film is better than none, notwithstanding its effect on mainstream audiences. And admittedly, I’m trying to be positive here….

46. Jack 2211 - July 28, 2010

34. Gary Mitchell might be interesting. Would he stick around?

I always found Kirk’s pre-Enterprise days kind of interesting, but maybe that’s been done to death in all the Treks (sudden appearances of old flames and old academy buddies). I guess there are three years of his new academy days that we don’t know about…

47. Buzz Cagney - July 28, 2010

#44 Picard was refelecting when he should have been saving his ship. Terrible stuff.

48. Pro-Khan-Sel - July 28, 2010

Regarding any gary mitchel story: How can you top being god?

Many say that nemesis was dark..I agree,

The brightest moment was the wedding,

The romulan high council gets killed, Then the movie got very depressing. B-4 charmed us, Then Shinzon becomes extremely ill, Troy is assaulted, The romulans come to the rescue, Get beaten up. A series of never ending bruises on the audience and even when the mood lightens for some humor, we are still feeling all the pain from being mentally beaten up for 2 hours. Like a Bad weird dream.

Plus side: Exellent special effects and sound

I thought tom hardy was exellent, but I never accepted the clone thing. That totally killed it for me, Shinzon looked absolutey nothing like Picard.

In Nemesis, Picard shows a picture of himself when he was at the academy, I laughed to myself, This is supposed to fix it?

Chris pine? He might want to be his own kirk, I hope he dosent repeat too much of his old kirk..please no wacky stuff like today’s shatner.

49. Hat Rick - July 29, 2010

I want to bag on NEM just a TINY bit more, because I think that it’s the details that count, and they bothered me a bit when I saw the movie. And because I love Trek and we can afford to bash it a tad now that Trek is on firm footing again.

1. The capital city of the Romulan Star Empire did not impress me. It was too small. It looked kind of like the Romulan version of Irvine, California. How difficult would it have been to make it look more like, say, Coruscant?

2. The Romulan Senate did not impress me. It was too small. It looked like the Romulan version of a fancy city hall. How difficult would it have been to make it look more, say, the U.S. Senate?

3. I still don’t understand what Donatra was doing in the movie. What was her sequence for? Was it a setup to have her be instrumental in a future detente between the Federation and the Romulan Star Empire? Was it so that she could have Romulan ale with Picard at some future point? I mean, what?

4. I didn’t like that, or how, they killed Data. (Oops — spoiler alert! Don’t read the following if you haven’t seen the movie: They killed Data!) The way that they found B-4 also seemed very contrived. Exactly why would Shinzon use the “follow the android parts” method to entice Picard to his lair? Can someone explain this to me? I mean, besides the fact that they wanted to give Data a chance to be resurrected in a as-it-turned-out-never-to-be-made TNG-based movie sequel.

I think there could have been a better way to resurrect Data, and that would have been to make him a hologram. In fact, Data should have always had a version him copied on the massive Enterprise computer core, and on some Starbase, besides. They were able to accurately simulate humanity with the Holodoc in VOY, so why not make a “Data” backup? (Sorry for the bad pun.) The excuse may be that Data’s positronic brain was simply too difficult to backup using nonpositronic technology, but this never seemed to affect the Holodoc’s personhood. So what’s the deal?

I could go on and on, but no one ever asks me about these things. Nor do they ask me to write the scripts for any of the Trek movies or episodes, because I’m just some nobody who loves Trek rather than someone who Berman happened to approve to write NEM or a similarly excellent screen treatment. (Grumble, grumble.) Life ain’t fair, I tells ya. Life ain’t fair.


50. Hat Rick - July 29, 2010

All right. I just read the Memory Alpha plot summary on NEM and realized that B-4 served as an agent for Shinzon, downloading information on the Federation and transmitting it to him. However, for this to work, Shinzon would have had to have relied on the Federation to permit B-4 free rein all over the Enterprise, as well as B-4’s ability to compromise the Enterprise computer’s safeguards against precisely this sort of thing. If Shinzon was sophisticated enough to implant a secret subroutine into B-4’s positronic brain that even Data apparently could not detect, I don’t know why he would bother with taking the risk that B-4 would fail at his task, and not simply, instead, beam the information directly from the Enterprise’s computers.

Recall that Shinzon possessed technology advanced enough to compromise the Enterprise’s shields, as shown by his ability to beam his own hologram to confront Picard in the latter’s ready room. If Shinzon had the programming expertise to decipher and repurpose alien (Federation) technology represented by B-4’s positronic brain in such manner, he should have been able to do the same to the Enterprise’s less-advanced, nonpositronic computers. So why the Rube Goldberg-like scheme with B-4 to begin with?

And wasn’t it awfully convenient that the Enterprise-E just happened to be close enough range of Kolarus to divert itself to pick up B-4?

I know, I know. Suspension of disbelief.

Look — I’ll admit that they made an effort to fit the B-4 thread into the rest of the movie. But I still think it could have been done better and more convincingly.

51. captain_neill - July 29, 2010

Anyone agree that Shinzon wasa better villain than Nero?

Not criticising Eric Bana, he did great with what he had. But I did feel he was a poorly written villain.


it is unfair about James Cawley’s bashing. He does great stuff with Phase II

52. Damian - July 29, 2010

I do want to be clear. For me Nemesis was a middle of the road Star Trek movie. There were better movies (TMP, TWOK, TSS, TVH, FC) and there were lesser movies (I don’t want to say worse because I loved all 11 to varying degrees). I loved the special effects, the battle scenes, the music, and some of the character moments (the supporting cast of LaForge, Crusher, and Troi did seem to have more to do in this one). Picard being reflective did not seem out of context to me. He has always been reflective to a point. He did turn the tables on Schinzon when he rammed his ship, something Schinzon did not expect. Picard had to consider his options when dealing with Schinzon. If he just went into battle without consideration, the Enterprise would have lost, because he would not of thought of Schinzon’s achilles heel. That he thought he knew Picard because he was his clone. This was when Picard finally realized once and for all, he is not Schinzon, and never would be. That is when the battle was won for the Enterprise. I also loved the Scimitar, it definetly looked bad ass. The Narada reminded me a little of the Scimitar, with the sharp points, the darkness and hostility of it.

I do agree with some of the criticisms with the movie. The Romulan characters, with the exception of Donatra, did not seem well thought out. There was certainly a lot of suspension of belief, but to be honest, as much as I loved Star Trek (2009), the suspension of belief was close to being disbelief with all the contrivances involved. I can’t really criticize Nemesis on that basis. The “A Time Too..” novels did a great job of answering some of the continuity issues (like how Ambassador Worf was a Starfleet officer again, the appearance of Wesley Crusher–the books ignored some of the deleted scenes).

#51–Schinzon was better developed. I think Orci and co. did admit that they wanted to concentrate on the Enterprise characters more, and as a result had to sacrifice some of Nero’s development. Nero was more similar to Khan in the sense that he was living off his rage and need for revenge alone. He was more one dimensional. There was nothing else alive in him anymore. Schinzon was driven mad because he believed he was a reflection of Picard. Obviously, the writers had more time in the movie to develop Schinzon, so I agree, in a sense, he was a better villain because he was more 3 dimensional. Both Bana and Hardy are good actors, and I think they did the best with what they had to work with.

53. Victor Hugo - July 29, 2010


Donatra is in the movie just to add a little female presence on it. Nothing more than that. Dina Meyer is a beautiful woman, too bad she was hidden under the heavy romulan make up.

54. Smart - July 29, 2010

@ Hat Rick:

Now I call this a review!!! Thanks for your detailed critique on NEMESIS. That’s how people who did not like the movie (or did not like parts of it) should preceed!!! Great!

Eventhough I do not agree with some points (I liked the darker atmosphere, the slower paced story and the action), I can understand how they could have bothered you.

If only more people who criticise the movie were like you!

Thanks again!

55. Hat Rick - July 29, 2010

Nothing wrong with that at all, 53. Great to see beautiful women in Trek.

I do think that Beverly Crusher and Deanna Troi could have been given a larger role. Troi was instrumental in finding Shinzon’s ship, but only because she was a telepathic victim. I don’t remember what Dr. Crusher did, other than stand around. I think her character was kind of wasted in that movie. Also, for that matter, what did Geordi Laforge and Commander Worf do in that movie? For that, I will have to re-read the write-up in Memory Alpha. I do remember that Laforge helped with the intercranial link between Data and B-4; and also, Riker got married to Troi. Talk about your supporting roles!

And, oh, I remember now — Irving Berlin. Worf hated Irving Berlin.

I think it would have been so much more exciting had Riker and Troi gotten married and then spent their honeymoon on a planet near where the Titan was based. Then, instead of Donatra, it would have been Riker to the rescue — in the Titan! (Yes, that’s a riff off a previous Trek movie. So? What’s one more?) Suspense! Also, something for Riker to do.

But then, Troi couldn’t have become the victim that saved the ship.

On the other hand, Data could have fulfilled Troi’s role. A holographic Data, for example, that had developed positronic superpowers that could detect Shinzon. (Hey — it’s science fiction!) Just when they thought that Data was dead and all hope was lost, the HoloData come to the rescue!

Ah, but they didn’t ask me before they finalized the script.

It would have been great….


56. Lore - July 29, 2010

AOL News is reporting a quote from Tom Hardy “of course I’ve had sex with men”. I suppose he picked a bottle of that Sulu cologne as well.

57. Hat Rick - July 29, 2010

54, I just saw your nice message. Thank you! It’s always nice to be appreciated.

58. Damian - July 29, 2010

#55–I thought the supporting cast actually had more to do in Nemesis than the others. In the previous 3 movies they seemed to have a total of 10 minutes on screen. Granted, their parts were still limited, however as will all the movies, the main characters get more screen time because of time limitations. In this case that would be Picard, Data, then Riker and Worf (Worf’s role was diminished here, I agree). It seemed Crusher, Troi and Geordi had more screen time here than previously.

59. Hat Rick - July 29, 2010

Interesting comments, Damian. I’ll have to think about that.

But how cool would it have been to have Riker fly in to the rescue with the Titan? (As I understand it, it would have been the same class of ship as Voyager, so it’s not as if there’d be completely new coding involved for the SFX.) The Titan angle would introduce a whole new thread for future TNG movies, based on Riker’s adventures in command, with Troi at his side.

As First Officer for a decade or so, Riker deserves a new ship and he it’s high time he got one. As I understand it, you don’t pass up command a million times the way he’s done and retain much respect in the real world. Worf got his own ship; why not Riker?

Remember the thrill we saw when the NuEnterprise charged in to rescue Spock and destroy the Narada in ST2009? We could easily have gotten a similar charge in NEM had they done that with the Titan. I think Nick Meyer would have been likely to do it that way.

I do remember that Crusher did one thing that advanced the plot: She said a few lines that told Picard what the medical deal was with Shinzon. But other than that….

60. Hat Rick - July 29, 2010

Fixes: “… the thrill we felt when the NuEnterprise charged in….”

“…it could have been the same class of ship as Voyager…”

There. I fixed it.

61. Damian - July 29, 2010

It would have been nice to see the Titan on screen. According to the Titan novels, it is a new Luna class vessel. It is illustrated in the 3rd Titan book I believe. I think it might be displayed on Memory Alpha or Memory Beta. The Titan books have been good so far, and it has an eclectic crew of many different aliens.

I agree the supporting cast’s role was not substantial. They just had more to do in Nemesis than they did in Generations, First Contact or Insurrection. Nemesis certainly could have been better. My contention is that it does not always deserve the flack it gets. I do wish TNG crew had a blockbuster send off (much like the Undiscovered Country was for the original crew). They had 7 good years on TV and they did deserve better. (at least they had First Contact–which can be considered a blocbuster for 1996).

62. Hat Rick - July 29, 2010

Good news about the Titan books. Perhaps they could make a miniseries based on them.

63. snoopytrek - July 29, 2010

is it just me or could hardy pass as a younger patrick stewart…i don’t know, maybe it’s just me…perhaps a latex nose? shave his head a little…??

you know, they could do something like that, with the two of them together. might work…hmmmm

64. captain_neill - July 30, 2010


First Contact is a blockbuster and I still prefer it over Star Trek XI

65. Damian - July 30, 2010

#63–Hardy played a clone of Picard in Nemesis, so they picked him with the intentions of looking like a younger Picard.

#63–First Contact definitly ranks as one of the best. The Borg were always one of my favorite villains. I have to admit I had mixed feelings about the Queen. There are times I miss when they were just a relentless collective. They seemed more menacing before. But I guess they ran the risk of them becoming too one dimensional if they did not shake things up a bit. They did a good job making the Borg extra creepy in First Contact, though. I’m with you. I enjoyed Star Trek (2009) and am thrilled it breathed new life into Star Trek. But it does not rank the top of my list, somewhere in the middle (The Motion Picture has always been my favorite).

66. Dee - July 30, 2010

#56… and ?…. Who cares?

67. Lore - July 31, 2010

Obviously someone did or it wouldn’t be a news headline. I suppose it wouldn’t be news if Zoe had announced she had sex with women.

68. Simon Hanson - July 31, 2010

There was competition for Star Trek XI though if i remember Terminator Salvation came like a week later. Sure it was rubbish but at the time everyone thought it would be good.

69. Keachick - July 31, 2010

This is about Tom Hardy being taken on as Chris Pine’s “adversary” in This Means War. It is not Star Trek! At first Sam Worthington was to play the part and I thought ho-hum, but then it was decided that Tom Hardy would do it instead. Yes please!

I don’t mind the film Nemesis – it has some good moments but it was the character of Shinzon who made an impression and he turned out to be played by a Londoner called Tom Hardy (I assume he is no relation to actor Robert Hardy?). I have not seen Inception but mean to.

According to This Means War director McG (yes, I know, everyone seems to think he’s lame, but obviously the studio doesn’t think he’s too bad and they are ones putting up the money), filming starts on 13 September this year in Vancouver. That gives Chris Pine almost five weeks to prepare – (the play he is doing finishes 8/8) – have a great big 3-0 birthday (8/26), buy his new bed and get some good shut-eye.

Anyway, best of luck with the production of This Means War and especially to Chris Pine, our (nu)Kirk!

70. t barboza - August 25, 2010

Tom Brady made Nemisis! longtime Picard fan here! Tom has the ability to be a leading man! Sick of Rocky, he looks 100. And arnie(i’ll be back in a wheelchair), and should at least impersonate a governor of a broke state! Heard rumors they will be making another Riddick movie, team Vin Diesel with Tom Brady! These Producers should earn their million dollar paychecks! I’m not a trekkie, love Picard(guys got class) my better half is a nut for star trek, I usually watched “Lost in Space”(crappy graphics then too, also on “Batman”) Speed Racer fan! is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.