Nemesis is better than Insurrection: Convince me otherwise.

[Vger23]

I think Nemesis, for all it's flaws, is head-and-shoulders above Insurrection.

INS was a colossal waste of time, just a big $55M "nothingburger." There are plenty of 1-hour episodes of TNG that are infinitely more epic and impactful that INS. At least NEM has some emotional content...something to debate...something to make you grab the edges of your seat. INS has boob and zit jokes and no energy whatsoever. Tom Hardy is a better guest villain than F. Murray Abraham was. The NEM visual effects were superior. The NEM space battle was superior. NEM had a better soundtrack.

So, since we've looked to compare other movies to show context and relative position, here's how I feel about them at this time:

1. TWOK
2. TMP
3. TSFS
4. TFF
5. FC
6. TUC
7. TVH
8. NEM
9. GEN
10. INS

(I obviously completely resist the idea of the "odd numbered curse)

Unfortunately, the TNG cast and formula (which I love) just didn't translate to the "silver screen" as well as TOS did.

 

[Tosk]

At least NEM has some emotional content...something to debate...

There's nothing in NEM that has been debated as much as the Ba'ku situation in INS.

 

[DonIago]

There's nothing in NEM that has been debated as much as the Ba'ku situation in INS.

Yeah, I was wondering just what significant debates NEM has spurred.

 

[Qonundrum]

Because "the needs of the many" is not supposed to be an excuse for fucking people over.

What does them not being native have to do with it? The Ba'ku have lived there since a hundred years before the Federation even existed.

It didn't help matters that NEM had Geordi still using optic implants, meaning all the work and hassle and bloodshed and trifle and truffles in INS was for... eh... zilch?! INS was already a misguided mess for which the original draft read far better (and didn't feel as tired to use so many gimmicks crammed into a single flick), but the implants really confirm what a waste INS was.

Even NEM, in removing the Remans and brushing up some of the remaining elements, even the super-dee-duper Schimitar ship being a new weapon, would have fit tons better. As it stands, both movies are just Schimitar. But NEM, as filmed, feels like it had more potential if cleaned up, compared to what INS, as filmed, was, and it had already been through rewrites and removing anything good.

 

[Picard1994]

Regarding the thread title. I can't convince you otherwise because I think you're right

 

[suarezguy]

I think they're both really disappointing and otherwise, overall really similar but Nemesis is slightly worse.

There are some notable improvements in that Nemesis has slightly more/more effective crew cast chemistry and doesn't have the forced unfunny annoying humor, and the latter is big improvement away from really bad flaw, and Data otherwise is used OK (despite the B4 plot also being pretty terrible), but the flaws and excesses it instead has are also really bad and there are still even more of them, especially excessive action (even though some of it is OK) and much worse story.

 

[arch101]

They are both bad, but Insurrection is worse. Partly because it could have been a great film, but ends up a clunker. Nemesis has lots of problems, too. But, IMHO, features the best large-ship battle of any Trek film.

 

[Riley]

I know I'm scraping at the bottom of the barrel in the Star Trek Movie universe, but I've always viewed Nemesis is not as apocalyptically horrible as some do, and I enjoy watching it every few years.

First, let me acknowledge flaws in Nemesis:

1-You seem to like the Nemesis you imagine with your own changes, not so much the existing movie beyond the score and one ship.

2-Saying Nemesis is better than Insurrection is like saying "drowning is a better way of dying than being being stabbed in the face."

3-Who's Troy?

 

[CoveTom]

I think my main problem with Insurrection is that I end up siding with Admiral Dougherty and not with Picard.

 

[Tosk]

INS is a flawed film and some of the messaging is muddled, but I worry about those that agree with the guy who wants to kidnap a society and forcibly relocate them because he wants their stuff.

 

[DonIago]

INS is a flawed film and some of the messaging is muddled, but I worry about those that agree with the guy who wants to kidnap a society and forcibly relocate them because he wants their stuff.

While Dougherty was clearly willing to go that route, I think it's a valid question as to whether that was the route he would most have preferred to pursue. He at least wasn't willing to go full-on extermination.

 

[Tosk]

He at least wasn't willing to go full-on extermination.

Bully for him.

He may have pulled back from his "at all costs" steadfast stance just before his death, but he was completely willing to have the Enterprise destroyed and everyone aboard killed to advance his plan.

 

[suarezguy]

One aspect of Nemesis I kind of like is that while being really TWoK reminiscent was bad it was maybe slightly better than being really TUC reminiscent, that aside from Data's fate the whole crew isn't breaking up and doesn't break up, only Riker and Troi do leave, the rest are shaken by the loss of 3, one much more drastically, but still continue.

And I do think the criticisms of why is Worf back on board, not an ambassador, was really nitpicky, it was 3 years later and even the one scene that established that suggested pretty strongly it would just be brief attempt. Insurrection is what does deserve criticism for having him just reappear without explanation (and really giving him nothing significant to do).

 

[DonIago]

Bully for him.

He may have pulled back from his "at all costs" steadfast stance just before his death, but he was completely willing to have the Enterprise destroyed and everyone aboard killed to advance his plan.

I don't disagree, but I guess I feel the movie kind of did him dirty, much as it did most of the counterarguments to Picard's POV. Ru'afo's obviously nutters, but there was room to give Dougherty a bit more nuance if the (final) film could have been bothered to do so.

 

[CoveTom]

Bully for him.

He may have pulled back from his "at all costs" steadfast stance just before his death, but he was completely willing to have the Enterprise destroyed and everyone aboard killed to advance his plan.

Was he? It's been a while since I watched the film, but I thought Daugherty was mostly trying to get the Enterprise to just go away, and did his best to keep Ru'afo from going too far.

INS is a flawed film and some of the messaging is muddled, but I worry about those that agree with the guy who wants to kidnap a society and forcibly relocate them because he wants their stuff.

So anybody who wanders through Federation space and lands on a planet gets to lay claim to that planet permanently?

 

[DonIago]

So anybody who wanders through Federation space and lands on a planet gets to lay claim to that planet permanently?

The statement as-written is also a bit reductive. Dougherty likely planned to benefit from the planet, but it's not as though he intended to keep it for just himself and the Son'a.

 

[Tosk]

Was he? It's been a while since I watched the film, but I thought Daugherty was mostly trying to get the Enterprise to just go away, and did his best to keep Ru'afo from going too far.

Ru'afo implies without actually saying it, that if the Enterprise does not want to come back willingly that they will have to destroy them. Dougherty hesitates and then finally agrees.

So anybody who wanders through Federation space and lands on a planet gets to lay claim to that planet permanently?

The Federation did not even exist when the Ba'ku settled on the planet. They were there since the year 2066.

The Federation is the one wandering around trying to lay claim to a planet in this scenario.

but there was room to give Dougherty a bit more nuance if the (final) film could have been bothered to do so.

No argument there! Every remotely good idea they had for the film got the edges sanded off by too many contrasting voices. If Stewart and Spiner did not have so much sway by that point I believe we would have gotten a much better film. (That's not to say they didn't have anything but good intentions to make a great film, just that their own wants chipped away at the core idea.)

 

[CoveTom]

I have to wonder, suppose that tomorrow scientists discovered a mineral that held the key to curing all cancers and eliminating every single cancer death, but to extract that mineral required forcibly relocating a village of 600 people away from where they have lived for centuries, would we hesitate to do it?

 

[Tosk]

We do truly shitty things on Earth-now all the time. Some people would happily kill that village rather than go to the effort of moving them.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Not even Dina Meyer could stop Nemesis from bombing harder than any other Star Trek theatrical film. That's how deeply flawed it was. You have to try really hard to be that flawed.