Berman Can’t Figure Out Why Nemesis Failed

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.

Inline Feedbacks
View all 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.… Read more »

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 . . .

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! – 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 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.


I don’t think they will ever get it out of their systems.


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.


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!

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!


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.

Previous posters are right…Nemesis failed was because most of Trek’s “casual” fans didn’t show up. Why? One word:


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.


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


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. ;)


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.