posted
Some of what I post here was mentioned by me in an earlier thread, but those comments inspired me to start an entirely new topic. And that topic is "Star Trek: Nemesis." Is anyone (else, besides me,) getting bad vibes about this movie? Though I prefer to go into the cinema as "unspoiled" as possible, what I have heard about "Star Trek: Nemesis" (and the information is probably more than I wanted to know) does not sound promising, not to me, at least. Let us start with what I heard will be the big plot twist: the villain is really a clone of Captain Picard. The old evil twin plot. Fitting, perhaps, for second-rate soap operas, but for a Star Trek movie? Besides, how many evil twins can one senior staff possibly have (see Lore and Riker, Thomas)? Even if such a plot was well written, whence doth this clone cometh? Were not the Romulans in a state of no contact when Schinzon was supposedly cloned? And why did they clone Picard? How did they know he would eventually captain the flagship of the fleet? Or is Reman populated by clones of every Starfleet officer?
Though the plot could have problems, even many of the little tidbits of information on "Star Trek: Nemesis" have bothered me. I have heard a large Romulan Warbird will attack "Enterprise" in what Rick Berman will undoubtedly eventually describe as a "rip-roaring" battle scene. Translation: "Enterprise," flagship of Starfleet, will once again be pummeled. Now, I have not heard which characters are supposed to be where during such a scene, but if Picard is on Romulus, and Riker is in command of "Enterprise . . . . " Also, a number of the rumored lines of dialogue sound like they were written for fanboys, not intelligent viewers.
Finally, from a production standpoint, I find it odd that Paramount is cutting the budget (in comparison to "Star Trek: Insurrection"). Is this film not supposed to be the action packed, in-the-vein-of-"Star Trek II," blockbuster that will reinvigorate the franchise? I fail to see how cutting the budget will help.
Once again, does anyone share my fears, or does anyone have any information that contradicts what I said here? Hopefully I am just overreacting to rumors that will prove false.
*I cannot take credit for this brilliant multiplication that describes what the 10th Star Trek movie might actually be.
Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
capped
I WAS IN THE FUTURE, IT WAS TOO LATE TO RSVP
Member # 709
posted
Anyone with a good grasp of logic and science can tell that Nemesis wont be bad, because it is even-numbered. Only odd numbered movies are bad (or adequate in the case of 3 and 7).
By the way 'the old evil twin plot' is a Star Trek staple, and will probably be awesome.. remember 'Enemy Within'? .. the most ridiculous plot i think they could use for a movie is time travel, which they have done twice and impressed me once and made an adequate movie out of it the other time.
and cutting the budget is a great idea.. remember: Star Trek: TMP was the most expensive movie ever made in 1979, and Star Trek II had the barest fraction of its budget and really rocked because they paid attention to the story and movie instead of bullshit special effects and gimmicks (which seems extremely appropo in this case because 9 was a big pile of bullshit special effects and gimmicks with no appreciable substance, IMO)
[ February 01, 2002, 09:14: Message edited by: CaptainMike ]
-------------------- "Are you worried that your thoughts are not quite.. clear?"
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Shinzon is a clone, not an "evil twin". Considering that Picard is over seventy years old, and Shizon is supposed to be in his twenties or thirties (I forget which), I think it's safe to say we won't see anyone mistaking him for Picard.
"Wow, captain! While you were down on the planet and we lost contact w/ you, you seem to have gotten half-a-century younger!" "Thank you, Number One. And I really am Picard, not an evil Romulan clone, or anything like that." "Of course, sir."
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I do not think that Schinzon will be impersonating Picard (Patrick Stewart looks a bit older than Tom Hardy), but he is still an "evil twin" in that he is the "dark side" of our good captain. Such a plot element is a staple of soap operas and, as CaptainMike pointed out, is often featured in Star Trek. So, once again I sarcastically state, how original. Once again I ask how was Schinzon cloned? And does this mean the next Star Trek film will feature Geordi La Forge's long lost evil brother, on a quest to steal his sibling's superior eyesight?
Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Raw Cadet, you do realize that much of the stories in movies and television are all re-used ideas. Rarely would there be any new ideas. And if Shinzon is a twenty-odd year old clone of Picard, I see no problem with any continuity being messed up. After all, Starfleet has had contact with Romulans in between the Khitomer Assault and the end of TNG's first season.
-------------------- Is it Friday yet?
Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
About the "rip-roaring space battle": I have to say that these days, I take very little of what Rick Berman says seriously. Or anyone else related to Star Trek, for that matter (except Mike Okuda & Mojo, of course).
As for the movie, I do admit that I find myself feeling similar to Raw Cadet. When the only things that you are looking forward to are seeing the designs of the new warbird and Riker's new ship, then you should start getting worried.
So far, the plot doesn't fill me with a lot of interest, or confidence that this will be a memorable movie. It sounds like it will suffer from Phantom Menace syndrome (i.e. the overuse of special effects & action to the detriment of plot & characters). The Romulans must have cloned Picard for a reason, but damned if I can think of a good one. And it seems like Patrick Stewart is ga-ga over this whole 24th century jeep thing. Sure, I 've driven a jeep and experienced jeep-fever too, but someone want to explain why he needs to drive a jeep when he's got a perfectly good shuttlecraft to fly?
-------------------- "A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money. As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing." -StCoop
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Dat: Raw Cadet, you do realize that much of the stories in movies and television are all re-used ideas. Rarely would there be any new ideas..
Yes, I do realize that, but there are far more "original" stories that could be told than the one apparently presented in "Star Trek: Nemesis."
quote:Originally posted by Dat: And if Shinzon is a twenty-odd year old clone of Picard, I see no problem with any continuity being messed up. After all, Starfleet has had contact with Romulans in between the Khitomer Assault and the end of TNG's first season.
It did? When? Besides, I would be willing to grant the possibility that Picard could have been cloned 20-30 years "ago," but why? Why would the Romulans think the captain of "Stargazer," or a captain between ships, is a guy worth cloning? Or is it standard Romulan policy to clone all Starfleet captains?
Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
I know where our uncooked colleague is coming from, but I'm withholding judgement for now. As far as the clone issue goes, haven't we seen they can auto-age clones? (and, everything I've seen suggests to my mind Shinzon might have been cloned during the TNG years) Why they didn't auto-age him right up to Picard's true age though niggles a bit, however.
quote:Originally posted by CaptainMike: Star Trek: TMP was the most expensive movie ever made in 1979
I don't want to get too off topic here, but I wanted to address this thought.
While I agree that TMP is a flawed film and has a troubled history, the mythology that surrounds the budget and production remains exaggerated.
There were films that cost more (Cleopatra, anyone?), especially when adjusted for inflation. And, while TMP was a very expensive film on-the-books, it's been pointed out numerous times that a lot of what Paramount claimed as the the film's budget included not only its costs, but the money spent on every single attempt to bring back Star Trek between 1973 and 1978, including the aborted Planet of Titans feature and the aborted Phase II show. Then there was the Robert Abel and Associated debacle... oy.
And, as "Coming to America" famously proved, Paramount was not above cooking the books with blockbusters to make it seem the film never turned a profit (for tax reasons).
Honestly, I think Paramout used that 44 million figure as a marketing tactic, much like ye olde "cast of thousands" claim to get people interested. When you look at the film it's obvious what's on screen didn't cost 44 million dollars in 1978 money. Maybe 25-30. Robert Wise himself has said he figures half the official budget was spent before he even came on the picture.
One of the reasons the sequels were so relatively cheap to make was that so much was already built for TMP: sets, effects, miniatures. Then the resuse of effects footage from TMP as well. If they'd had to build it all from scratch TWOK, and make it look as good as they did, TWOK would have cost 15-20 million easy. Maybe more.
-------------------- "Well, I mean, it's generally understood that, of all of the people in the world, Mike Nelson is the best." -- ULTRA MAGNUS, steadfast in curmudgeon
Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Personally, I'm NOT SUPPOSED TO BE HERE. I know way too much already, but, i'll give my input anyway.
I am looking forward to Nemesis, as I look forward to all star trek movies. The plot sounds very good, and the amount of effort being put into this film seems to be on part with First Contact.
But we all cant really tell till we see it. Only then we can draw conclusions.
Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I'm getting tired of making Riker jokes, but the oppertunity seems to keep popping up.
Should we start an official Flare betting pool on how long it'd take the Enterprise to get its butt kicked, and how long it takes Riker to come up with some silly trick to defeat the Romulans at the last second?
-------------------- "God's in his heaven. All's right with the world."
Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Once again, a ship named Enterprise will be Berman & Braga's bitch for a movie. I am taking bets now as to if Troi will once again man, er, woman the helm and crash the ship again. Any takers?
-------------------- Fry- How will we get out of this? George Takei's head- Maybe we can use some kind of auto-destruct code like one-A, two-B, three-C... (Bender's head blows up) Bender- Now everybody knows! -Futurama's obligatory Star Trek episode
Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Since I started this thread let me now invoke my right to fully de-rail it by adding to Mr.Neutron's post. The same year "Star Trek: The Motion Picture" was released another expensive film (partially) set in space came out: "Moonraker," the 11th "official" James Bond movie. I believe its budget was about $30,000,000, so, if one takes into account the points Mr. Neutron made above, "Moonraker" was probably every bit as expenisve as Star Trek's first film.
Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
Printer-friendly view of this topic
