Is Nemesis a Genuine Star Trek Film?

[ray gower]

A quote from TV Guide seems to really sum up all the negative comments over Nemesis and perhaps why this film didn't hit blockbuster status.

It's no secret why Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home (the whale tale) was a fan favorite. It had humor, nostalgia and intelligent cast interplay. Why did Nemesis leave us wanting? It zipped through the Riker-Troi wedding, a payoff fans had long awaited. Worse, the film didn't include a farewell scene for Picard and his crush, Beverly. The heart of Trek is heart, and Trek's best films tap into relationships.

That it is a complaint often pointed at the series as well, merely helps prove the point.

Star Trek at its best (TOS) has never been uniforms mindlessly running around between twinkly effects, though all the TNG films have trodden dangerously on the border.

Is this the film that had them stepping over the rubicon?

 

[Jay Jay]

When this film was first released I'm sure I heard people and even sure I saw interviews with cast members saying that even numbered films are the best and they were hoping this would be the same.

I think for die hard fans that Star Trek TNG will always be great.

Haven't seen the film yet but definitely going to see it.

J

 

[Dave]

I know that's how you feel Ray, you've said precisely the same thing regarding the ST series', especially Voyager and Enterprise, for a long time.

I tend to agree, although a film ought to have more action and effects sequences than a TV series, it shouldn't be at the expense of the characters. Beverly had practically no airtime, the Wedding was rushed over, Wesley and Guinan were filmed but not used, Riker's leaving was shortened, his replacement was cut out entirely. I would have liked to have seen all those things, especially if it is to be the last film, yet they aren't even planning to put them in the DVD.

As for special effects, that is a general Hollywood problem. How many films made last year had some genuine plot, something that used your brain cells? Don't blame that all on Star Trek.

 

[gr8scott]

I liked Nemesis for its spectacular special effects, but it was a - been there, done that, film. I'm sure you've all heard that Trek movies tend to be good on the even numbers and bad on the odd numbers... well this should have been a "good" one - but IMO it was simply a copy of one of the best ST films yet - The Wrath of Kahn. It was so similar in story that it was hugely predictable.

Yes, they seemed to rush through the different plots and subplots - or did they just try to cram too much in it?

Also, I thought that Wesley Crusher was suppose to be in this. Was I mistaken? Did anybody else here this before it was released?

EDIT: Dave answered the Wesley question. Thanks.

 

[ray gower]

Originally posted by Dave
I know that's how you feel Ray, you've said precisely the same thing regarding the ST series', especially Voyager and Enterprise, for a long time.

As for special effects, that is a general Hollywood problem. How many films made last year had some genuine plot, something that used your brain cells? Don't blame that all on Star Trek.

Suspect I am beginning to sound like a broken record on the subject.
For which I apologise, but ST is nearest what passes as my heart.
Promise not to mention it again for a couple of months at least?

And you are quite right. Trek is not the biggest culprit of the trend. Star Wars AOTC managed to go even further, leaving the relationships out where they form a major part of the story!

In my defence, I am not the first to campaign for real characters.
I think it was Orson Welles that said "It is characters that write a story, not the writer."
And Alfred Hitchcock when asked in an interview why his films were taken as the ultimate in suspense said, "I made the actors scared. When they are scared the audience will be scared."
There are a long list of other very well respected writers that have said much the same.

 

[ray gower]

If Star Trek is all about the relationship between members of the crew, then the answer is most emphatically, 'Yes'. As a film it was all about Picard, Data and Picard's alter ego. If anything it concentrated too much on it, leaving everything else out and it was becoming almost un-natural.

Not a huge action movie either which is good, though for my money some of the scenes were put in merely to disguise the fact that it was a good episode trying to be a film, or that the story was flagging.

It is often said that Trek would be better if it was darker.
Nemesis tries to be darker; you can tell, the previously brilliantly lit Bridge is now lit by half dozen 20 Watt bulbs in tastefully arranged and very diffused wall lights.:dead: (Why do they do that?). But I am not sure it really achieves it, dim lighting not withstanding. There is never any real sense of impending doom.

There is the set piece space battle, which is often commented on as the great centre piece of the film, and definitely not Trek as we know it. Thankfully it manages to be no worse than the one in First Contact.

And finally there is continuation. Most ST films have managed to convey the feeling that there is something continuing, another story to be told. This I think was the film's biggest failing. It didn't have an ending, nor did it feel as if there was more to come.

Is it a Star Trek film?
Overall, I think the answer is yes.
There is a good story behind the film, not necessarily well or thoughtfully executed, but well enough.

It is following close in the footsteps of Insurrection as they try to make it feel bigger and grander, without turning it into a Star Wars shoot-em-up. The temptation must be getting heavy at P/Mount.