Wednesday, February 8, 2012

Star Trek: Insurrection



The Nostalgia Critic and Linkara must team up to face one of the worst Star Trek films ever! ‎

96 comments:

DuelMark said...

Looks like Nostalgia Critic is finally getting punished for not including you in any of the previous reviews.

Ostsol said...

I could swear that I saw this one in theatres, but I recall none of it. It's familiar, but that may be because it's a plot that's been done before in Star Trek.

Anonymous said...

I only really have one problem with this movie, it's relatively minor I admit, but it still bugs me. The holoship. Why? It's a treaty violation. It's got a cloak, if the Romulans ever found out about that they'd have a field day.

Fiery Little One.

Lewis Lovhaug said...

"I only really have one problem with this movie, it's relatively minor I admit, but it still bugs me. The holoship. Why? It's a treaty violation. It's got a cloak, if the Romulans ever found out about that they'd have a field day."

If I had to guess, the cloak was a Sona one, but if we wanted a better explanation, the Federation wasn't exactly happy with the Romulans when they signed a non-aggression pact with the Dominion and didn't really give a damn anymore about the Treaty of Algeron, as evidenced by the cloaked minefield they put in front of the wormhole to keep Dominion reinforcements from coming through.

Anonymous said...

Huh... I suppose that makes sense.

Fiery Little One

Ozaline said...

Love the DS9 era costume, I honestly don't know if I like this movie or Nemesis less... I'd have to watch them again.

This does have the worst excuse for including Worf outside of the Star Trek/X-men novel where he's brought in because he's the only person in star fleet who knows Klingon culture (despite Riker and Picard also having of lots of experience).

Loved the Wizard of Oz joke (though Dorothy didn't look like that in the books).

There have been several groups who reject high technology in Star Trek before, The Way to Eden from TOS for example... I suppose this movie should have made a distinction from tools and basic infrastructure to electronics and high technology... I see your point there.

Hah the video game sequence was so much fun.

Okay after watching this review, I think I have to say this one is probably worse then Nemesis...

I'll have to watch both of them again.

You and Doug really bounce off each other in your collaboration videos, hope you two can work together in the future on a comic book movie again.

Ozaline said...

Also was that one ship just modified model of the Solar Sail ship that Sisko piloted in one DS9 episode? It looks almost exactly the same.

(and why do I always think of something after hitting submit?)

Peter Dawson said...

Man did I hate this movie. I don't even care about how horrible the Baku are written (white humans living in harmony with nature, whatever, stupid, but whatever), just how incredibly black and white they treated one of the biggest gray issues Trek has ever brought up.

Anonymous said...

I liked the idea that a Star Trek novel came up with, which was that Section 31 built the Holoship and was behind the Baku plot. It makes sense for them, as they were committed to saving the Federation no matter what the cost was, or the ethics involved. If you remember it was discovered that they were behind creating the virus that was designed to completely eradicate all of the Changelings, and nearly succeeded.

CMWaters said...

Yeah, this movie left a LOT to be desired. With a better writer and less filler, it could have made a decent episode of the show.

It was NOT, however, movie worthy.

Or maybe I'm just bitter that Q never made it to a Star Trek movie, I dunno.

By the way Lewis, we got Doug's view on Nemesis...I genuinely am interested in your views on it.

...even if I do have a hatred for it without having seen it for killing off my favorite non-puberty related Star Trek: The Next Generation character in it.

BlUsKrEEm said...

Does this movie happen on the smallest planet in the galaxy? How much space do 600 people need?

PS: the reboot was worse...

jstr4life said...

"Have you noticed how your boobs
have firmed up?"
One of the worst jokes in Trek history. Thanks for skipping it.

BooRat said...

WOW!!! I'm so glad I've never seen this movie! God that was terrible! That kind of lame lazy message is the kind of thing that would piss me off!
I'd love to hear somewhere in the reboot universe that some one just invades that planet of hypocritical Hippies and killed them all and strip mined the planet for all it's magical properties like in AVATAR! that or the Borg attacks them! IRONY!!!
I do admit I don't watch Star Trek but I do gotta wonder why in this space series there aren't very many aliens! I can only think of 3-4 species; Klingons, Volcans, Romulains(even though from what I've read they're the same as Volvans), and maybe those green people Kirk is always screwin'!
Nemesis I was always curious of because the effects from the trailers looked cewl, but I've heard very baaaaaaad things!

DJ1107 said...

Good review bugs me that The Nostalgia critic seems to not respect you even though your a 3 time world saver (I'm thinking by your storyline I know you & Doug are good friends). I saw Nemesis I thought it was okay even though people called it a rip-off of Wraith of Khan. My favorite scene was when the Enterprise rammed into the bad guy ship that was awesome. Whats your take on Nemesis Linkara? Do you hate it or do you kinda like it like the way Doug likes it?

The Exiled One said...

For me, Sci-Fi Guy made this review.

He refused to "play along" with the review and with Doug's antics and was more confused than anything else.

That puts him above most other collaborators who annoyingly keep acting menacing/scared in these crossover (the Wonder Woman pilot comes to mind).

And that's quite an achievement, considering he's an Other, and Others have a greater tendency to "play along" in crossovers. Hell, this is the same Sci-Fi Guy who ruined Marzgurl's review of "Titan AE" by refusing to act normally, thus forcing Marzgurl to "act out" (and Marzgurl's charm, her unique gift, is that she DOESN'T "act out", she's the only reviewer who doesn't have a gimmick or a character, she's just herself in her reviews, no scripts or jokes or storylines or anything).

Anonymous said...

The biggest plot hole in the movie is how the Baku were able to force the Son'a off the planet.

Think about it, the Baku are pacifists who reject technology while the Son'a can build massive starships and all sorts of advanced weapons. So how exactly did the Baku get the Son'a to leave? And how did they force the Son'a off the planet? The Son'a could have just moved to another continent. Heck, they could have just moved to the other side of the mountain and the Baku would never know they were there.

Also, it would have been funny if the Son'a joined the Dominion because of what happened in Insurrection and they came back with a fleet of Jem'Hadar ships to take the planet by force.

In fact, Weyoun even mentions in one of the episodes in season 7 that a secret Son'a controlled Ketracel White facility had been discovered by the Federation.

It would have made a lot of sense for the Dominion to invade the planet since the Founders were dying and the radiation could be used to treat or even cure them.

The Exiled One said...

"Loved the Wizard of Oz joke (though Dorothy didn't look like that in the books)."

At least Dorothy's braids are a recognizable image taken from a movie that at least TRIED to respect the source material.

Alice NEVER looked like the abomination that American McGee depicted, and that videogame rapes the original book by Lewis Carroll in a million different ways, yet it's sadly her more recognized image when it comes to the internet.

"Man did I hate this movie. I don't even care about how horrible the Baku are written (white humans living in harmony with nature, whatever, stupid, but whatever), just how incredibly black and white they treated one of the biggest gray issues Trek has ever brought up."

On that subject, is it me, or is this movie just "Avatar: Star Trek edition"?

I mean, replace "Na'Vi" with "Baku", "Coronel Quaritch and the evil Corporation" with "stretchy skin guys" and "Jake Sully" with "Picard and his crew", and you have basically the same movie.

"PS: the reboot was worse..."

Why? What was wrong with it? It was a decent, fun, understandable movie that introduced new versions of familiar character while keeping the original versions intact in the same multiverse. What was so bad about it?

"that or the Borg attacks them! IRONY!!!"

Wouldn't that be a sight to behold...

Baku Leader: No! We will not let you into this planet! We hate all forms of technology, and you are technology incarnate, so we won't let you here!

Borg Drone: Your philosophy is irrelevant. Your primitive weapons pose no threat to us. You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile.

Baku Leader: Wait, what?

*all of the Baku get assimilated in record time*

"I do admit I don't watch Star Trek but I do gotta wonder why in this space series there aren't very many aliens! I can only think of 3-4 species; Klingons, Volcans, Romulains(even though from what I've read they're the same as Volvans), and maybe those green people Kirk is always screwin'!"

The Bajorans, the Cardassians, the Xindi, the Borg, the Ferengi, the Felines, the Talaxians, the Denobulans, the Trill and the Tribbles.

"Good review bugs me that The Nostalgia critic seems to not respect you even though your a 3 time world saver (I'm thinking by your storyline I know you & Doug are good friends)."

Then you'd be wrong. Linkara's storylines don't affect the Nostalgia Critic show.

If they did, that would just raise a lot of questions:

-why didn't Lord Vyce or the Entity took over the Wishverse? If Linkara became the head of DC and Marvel, then he never became "the Champion" and never created the Arsenal of Freedom, meaning the Wishverse Earth is completely unprotected.

-why didn't Linkara use Doug's gun to kill the Entity? If it can kill an angel, then it can kill an eldritch abomination.

-if everyone in the world dissapeared during the Entity storyline, how did Doug manage to continue with his show?

-if Doug is immortal and his gun can kill angels, why didn't Lord Vyce go after him, seeing as he would be a bigger threat to his plans?

-why didn't Linkara use the magic gun or the Dragonzord Power Coin against Malachite?

-how can Doug not be aware of the existance of magic when Linkara has used magic several times before?

-why couldn't Linkara clone Ma-Ti back to life like he did with Spoony?

-why is 90s Kid depicted as living in his own apartment in the "Bio Dome" review if he's depicted as living with Linkara in "Atop the Fourth Wall"?

-how did 90s Kid come back to life after he was shot in the "Alone in the Dark" review?

Lewis Lovhaug said...

"The biggest plot hole in the movie is how the Baku were able to force the Son'a off the planet.

Think about it, the Baku are pacifists who reject technology while the Son'a can build massive starships and all sorts of advanced weapons. So how exactly did the Baku get the Son'a to leave? And how did they force the Son'a off the planet? The Son'a could have just moved to another continent. Heck, they could have just moved to the other side of the mountain and the Baku would never know they were there."

I put that in my notes, too. And if they had ships, why didn't the Sona come back earlier and lay waste to them all or something?

As for the moving to a different continent, I didn't mind that as much since the reason for the exile in the movie was that the Sona tried to take over the village, so they would've wanted them as far away as they could. Again, though, how did they exile them without spaceships?

August M. said...

While I'm not an avid Star Trek fan(I only follow the shows and movies), this movie doesn't really bother me. Granted, it's bad but I'll take this over the Slow Motion Picture. Anyways, I hope you have a dark and sinister plan for the Critic for cutting you off on your thoughts of Nemesis.

David page said...

No mention of chell from elite force when the blue alien appeared?

fantastic episode though

CaptainCalvinCat said...

„The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few“ is Spocks worldview, not necessarily the of the entire federation. It got lampshaded by Kirk, who justified Spocks rescue in Star Trek III with “The needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many”.

The “we do not wish to use technology”-part can be understanded, if you stretch it, and dismiss the “we believe bla bla bla… you take something away from the man” and say: “Okay, we do not wish to use more advanced technology than” say “the basic things, that help us to cope with live”…

All in all – I thought the movie was not that bad… I have seen worse, and I tell you, what these movies are, in my point of view. Take Star Trek I, for example. *yawn*…
Even Star Trek II, which is consideres as one of the best, if not THE best movies, had its moments, where I thought “Oh come on, cut the crap!”

I have seen better: Star Trek IV and Eight, for example, but the question, that lingers in the Insurrection story, is quite a fascinating one. It is “The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few” vs. “The needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many” in a much grander scale.

Brought to the real life:
I can totally understand, that a percentage of the greece poplulation is demonstrating, and say “We don’t want to loose our way of life!”.
If one had told me, “Cal, you work, until you are 50, and then you can retire” and then suddenly some person came and say: “Nope, that does not work anymore, because of sociopolitical and economical reasons” – I mostly would say: “Fuck you.”

And those people – they have lived 300 years on the planet… no one lived there before, so they have, as reviewers would say “dibs” on it. Finders keepers, right? So, they found the world, made it arable… and now, 300 years later, do our brothers, who did not like our way of living show up and not even ASK, if they could live with us, no – they say “We need the radiation of the planet, so, go, pack your stuff and get lost or die.”

THAT is the side of the bad guys.
You have “utilization of the magic-thingie-radiation of the rings” vs. “Screw you, this is our planet”. “Screw you, this is our planet” would mean… erm… what again? What does “the federation is losing the dominion war” have to do with the fact, that the Baku have to be forcibly relocated? “Screw you, this is our planet” means in the greater scale of things… erm… nothing.

The side of the bad guys, “utilization of the metaphasic radiation of the rings” – you could allways go to the planet and settle down there, right? Oh, I forgot, we learn, that the unhealthy way of live, the Son’A led, is deadly to them.
No shit, Sherlock?
Unhealthy way of life is at least not healthy?
Well, maybe you should not have run away, if you want to live there?
I mean, that would be, as if the romulans would come to the vulcans, years later and say “by the way, we hate you, because you do not agree with our way of life and forced us to go away, and now we vow our revenge.”
Okay, the romulans are that mad, but – it is their fault. They knew, what they did, when they left the planet.
Same with the Son’A.
When they come from a planet, where they all lived in a highly-advanced civilisation, polluted the planet, had to flee and came in the briar-patch, and so they knew, what could happen – the Son’A said “I don’t like your new style of living, I am out of here.”
So they continued living their life, and now, they come back and say “boohoohooo… life is so bad.”

Harvesting the metaphasic radiation of the rings? That means, that the entire system is going to die, so the Baku have to loose all they have worked for the last three hundred years.
It is not, as if they would have settled a few years ago on the planet, they are settling there for three hundred years.

The already pointed out forced relocations, which Picard helped, might have brought him to think about THIS relocation, at least, that is my oppinion.

So – not the worst film of all times.

Greets

Cal

Kevin Holsinger said...

Good morning, all.

Ostol, February 8, 2012 1:29 AM

"I could swear that I saw this one in theatres, but I recall none of it. It's familiar, but that may be because it's a plot that's been done before in Star Trek."

When you boil the Trek films down, they're shockingly similar at times. Like so...

1. Enterprise crew deals with paradise in some fashion:

A. Search for Spock (Genesis planet, arguably)
B. Final Frontier (Shaka-Ri, aka Eden)
C. Generations (Nexus)
D. Insurrection (Baku homeworld)

2. Someone wants revenge for something:

A. Wrath of Khan (Khan)
B. Undiscovered Country (Kirk towards the Klingons, arguably..."Let them die.")
C. First Contact (Picard)
D. Nemesis (Shinzon)
E. JJ Abrams Star Trek movie (Nero)

How the heck the writers could put out great TV shows, while having OVER FIFTY PERCENT of their movies fall into one of these two categories is beyond me. These are the same people who made All Good Things, one of the two best series finales I've ever seen (the finale of Lost being the other). Did they just not notice they were recycling the same two ideas for TWENTY YEARS?

Changing subjects, a question for Linkara...

Have you and Nella (Team Nostalgia Chick) ever thought of teaming up for something appropriately geeky? I was expecting her to show up at some point during this Star Trek retrospective given her affinity for the series. But no such luck.

Steve said...

My personal favorite part of the hypocrisy here is...well, LOOK AT ALL THAT METAL! To blatantly steal from Chuck Sonnenburg (too late), that must be some pretty impressive natural forge system to build copper instruments and mills! Hell, look at all the bridges and stonemason work! This isn't getting back to the land, it's camping out in an RV and SAYING you're pro nature!

Now, if they'd actually included the Dominion in this movie, instead of as "HEY LOOK THIS TAKES PLACE IN THE SAME UNIVERSE AS DS9 SO WE'RE NOT TOTAL INCOMPETENTS", that would've been interesting, a clear reminder of WHY they need this life-saving medical equipment against such a nasty opponent. (Plus, c'mon, who else wanted to see Dukat waste some space Luddites? XD)

Although that DOES raise a question I've been mulling over: what IS it about Nemesis that irks you so much in terms of quality? The only real issue I ever had was how badly they handled Data's sacrifice in Rick Berman's usual bid for "stealing from quality Star Trek movies."

Theta Sigma said...

Did anyone get a copy of Piller's non-published book on the writing of the film? It's quite an interesting read on how the film turned out way different to the original storyline. Actually changed my opinion of the film as well...

Anonymous said...

Talking about an overarching problem with Star Trek, Whats your opinion about the Prime Directive Linkara? In my opinion it honestly does more harm then good. Any order that basically says letting Extinction happen is by no measurable term of the word "Good".

"Homeward" from TNG has to be the Prime Example as I honestly found myself disgusted with Picard and the other's choice to just let the people on the planet die. Worf's brother was totally in the right!

Galactic Overlord-In-Chief said...

You know, this movie is also bad because it basically halted the momentum of the TNG movie franchise. The other movies usually had two year intervals between them. But Insurrection did so poorly it wasn't until 4 years later that Nemesis came out, right in the same season that the second Harry Potter and LOTR movies came out. Way to go.

Speaking of Nemesis, I'm not sure I have as fond a reaction as Doug did to it. The movie just felt like a rip-off of Wrath of Khan. I wasn't interested in the whole B-4 plot, and the Shinzon/Picard storyline was half-baked at best. Geordi just looked bored throughout the picture. And for the last TNG pic, it's a real letdown.

Also, in case nobody knows about it, there's an unpublished book floating around the internet by the late Michael Piller that talks about the making of this picture. Apparently, Piller had a much different plan for the movie's story, but it got altered along the way.

Professor Harmless said...

At the risk of bending over backwards to support a horrible plot, there is a plausible explanation for the departure of the sona.
You have to remember that the Baku migrated to this planet originally in their own ships, and it would have been at least somewhat difficult to destroy them in a way that wouldn't damage the planet's environment.
If you stretch their philosophy a bit, it's possible they never quite got around to completely destroying their original vessels by the time their children revolted against them.
A point to remember is that these are their own children, and as much as they might disagree with and even hate their parents ideals, it's still their parents.
The idea of leaving the planet entirely is immature, overly dramatic, completely unnecessary and something that would happen in a family squabble.
That said the entire contrivance stinks of convenience.

Anonymous said...

"Again, though, how did they exile them without spaceships?"

Well, what do you think the Ba'ku did with the spaceships they arrived on?

Jack said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Lewis Lovhaug said...

"Talking about an overarching problem with Star Trek, Whats your opinion about the Prime Directive Linkara? In my opinion it honestly does more harm then good. Any order that basically says letting Extinction happen is by no measurable term of the word "Good".

"Homeward" from TNG has to be the Prime Example as I honestly found myself disgusted with Picard and the other's choice to just let the people on the planet die. Worf's brother was totally in the right!"

No, I'm totally with you there. Actually, if you look at TOS, the Prime Directive was disregarded for completely legitimate reasons all the damn time.

Lewis Lovhaug said...

"Well, what do you think the Ba'ku did with the spaceships they arrived on?"

That's the best possible explanation, but it just feels a bit hollow if they don't explain that in the movie.

Anonymous said...

"As for the moving to a different continent, I didn't mind that as much since the reason for the exile in the movie was that the Sona tried to take over the village, so they would've wanted them as far away as they could. Again, though, how did they exile them without spaceships?"

That's the thing, the Son'a could have told the Baku that they were leaving the planet and just moved to another continent. Unless the Baku are also telepathic, they would have no way of knowing that the Son'a are still on the planet.

Plus why did the Son'a try to take over the village in the first place? They clearly had the numbers and the technology to build a small interstellar empire, so why didn't they just start their empire somewhere else on the planet? They would have 300 years to study the radiation, replicate its effects, and sell it to other races, becoming the richest, most powerful force in the Alpha Quadrant.

DJ1107 said...

@The exiled one
Those plot holes are easy to fill.
Doug show continued because of Hypertime
The "Wishverse" thing happen differently So for all we know Vice &
The Entity fought Apollo Z. Hack in that universe.

Linkara DID use His Magic gun on Malicite and it failed because he caught the bullets As for the Power coin he probably forgot to pack it.

The critic may have all ready been swallowed by the Entity To why Linkara couldn't use his gun.

90's kid got his own place but was kicked out by the end of the Bio dome review

Lord Vyce wanted to go after earths CHAMPION which the critic is not.

The whole cloning Ma-Ti was because they cremated him. Spoony had enough genetic material to make 3 Spoony's. Either that or Linkara lost his cloning set at his old place. Beside Linkara isn't Fantomex its not like he'll take a sample of someone and grow them in a few months to help him in a fight.

Doug not believing in magic is always a stupid plot cliché. The guy believes in Santa Christ for pete sake

CaptainCalvinCat said...

@ Steve

You Wrote: "My personal favorite part of the hypocrisy here is...well, LOOK AT ALL THAT METAL! To blatantly steal from Chuck Sonnenburg (too late), that must be some pretty impressive natural forge system to build copper instruments and mills! Hell, look at all the bridges and stonemason work! This isn't getting back to the land, it's camping out in an RV and SAYING you're pro nature!"



Like I already said, I for myself excersise myself in the obviously forgotten art of “selective perception”.
“Some technology is good, but not the excessive use of it.”, would be the lesson, I would draw from the film. And – we do not know, at which point in time the Bak’u decided, that further technology is to be forbidden. Like I said, they are not native to the planet, they come from another place. They came there, settled down – apparently they made some steps in the “using technology”-Direction, when they noticed: “Just a second, that could make the whole circle starting all over again”.

Which would be an understandable thinking.
Plus – it is not that the Bak’u are allways right. I mean – that is, what Star Trek is about. The general direction of things, not the worldview done to all extremes. Take the borg, for example.

At first: the usage of technological advanced body-parts would be okay, if the original body parts would be ill or at the verge of dying, were smashed in an accident or something like that. (Just remember the bionic man.)
The Borg take that concept and take it to the extreme, and that is the wrongness (is that a word?) of it.

Same with the Bak’u. The usage of technology to protect people, to make sure, they are in a safe environment is a current method, even now. We have light, we have electricity, we have working toilets, thermally isulated homes (which you need in sub-zero environments for example)

But taken to the extreme, technology is harmful.

Or take the Ferengi.
Take the capitalism.
Only a few words, and you know, that overall greed does not work.
Leman Brothers, the Euro-Crisis, greece … you see, where greed can take us – that is the mirror, the Ferengi are.
But only, because I say, that “that form of capitalism is bad” (which is the capitalism in its rawest form), I don’t say, that we all should never obtain anything, and that possession is evil.
I have the DVD- and Bookshelfs to prove that.

Like I said, the worldview of the Bak’u is not wrong per se, if one crosses out some parts.
“When you let a machine do something a man can do, you take something away from the man.”.
In principle, a nice idea, if one stretches the “a man can do”…
After all, there are things, you need machines for.
Beaking bread, for example. How else could you make the dough to getting all crispy and edible.

You just should not go to extremes, with that worldview, in which you say, “Everyone, who does not believe the way we do, is an idiot.”.
Or, as the nostalgia critic put it: “Thank you, you saved me with technology, I hate you.”
They did not said that, nor do I think, that they would think that, if they would be real.
After all – people, who can stay 300 years on a planet, live a nice, decent, not-too-fancy life – (like the amazons of the Wonder Woman Cartoon Movie) possess either the dynamism of a sloth or the brains to live in a way, which can be called “sustainability”.

And that, in the era of scarce resources, is something, one should learn to do, isn’t it?

Greets

Cal

Trekker4747 said...

My comments cannot be posted here due to length restrictions of the board, I'd have to break it up into multiple posts and, well, I won't do that out of courtesy but mostly out of laziness. Instead I will direct Lewis, more than anyone else, to the post over at TNC's forum for this episode.

Link

Gareth said...

We didn't get to hear your thoughts on Nemesis Linkara, would you mind saying your thoughts on it or posting a link to where you may have done so in the past?

When it comes to the question of Star Trek 1 V 9 I prefer 9, or at least I remember preferring nine (itss been around 6 years since I last saw it) because I watched 9 through to the end where as Star Trek the original motion picture was just too dull for me to do the same with.

Jarkes said...

"I could swear that I saw this one in theatres, but I recall none of it. It's familiar, but that may be because it's a plot that's been done before in Star Trek."

I actually DID see this movie when it came out in theaters... and, because it was so forgettable (and because I was seven at the time), I literally did not remember a single detail about the film until I watched this review.

Enigma_2099 said...

... this is Payback for the Superman 4 review, isn't it?

Anonymous said...

@CaptainCalvinCat

Except the movie still hinges on the idiocy of the Federation. After they found out that the Baku were not primitives, why didn't they try to negotiate with them? Why didn't the Federation consider other alternatives before agreeing to help the Son'a? Why did the Federation even trust the Son'a, who are slavers and allies of the Dominion, in the first place?

Why doesn't the Federation have their own ships in the area studying the radiation? If the Enterprise, the flagship of the Federation, was planning to go on an archeological mission, then surely Starfleet could have spared a couple of science ships to study this radiation that could potentially win them the war and give eternal life to everyone in the Federation.

The whole premise of the movie is contingent on the idiocy of everyone involved.

As for how the Dominion War have to do with it, being able to reduce casualties and put people back on the front does kind of help the war effort. On the Dominion's side, gaining access to the radiation could mean a cure for the Founders.

There is also the fact that Baku society simply isn't sustainable in the long term. If no one dies then they'll have overpopulation and resource shortages in the future. Unless they completely ban reproduction, their society is doomed.

The Exiled One said...

"How the heck the writers could put out great TV shows, while having OVER FIFTY PERCENT of their movies fall into one of these two categories is beyond me. These are the same people who made All Good Things, one of the two best series finales I've ever seen (the finale of Lost being the other). Did they just not notice they were recycling the same two ideas for TWENTY YEARS?"

That's because the movies don't make full use of the promise. The exploration aspect of the series, the whole "toi boldly go where no one has gone before" and meeting weird new alien civilizations, almost never comes up in the movies.

They could land in a planet of hot giant women and befriend them. They could land in a planet of aliens who hunt people from sport and try to stop them. They could land in a medieval/epic fantasy-style planet and fight wizards while riding dragons. They could land in a planet of cat people and help them fight an army of demons.

Instead, they recycle the two plots over and over, never "seeking out new life and new civilizations" like they are SUPPOSED to do.

Also, J.J. Abrams is only responsable for the 2009 movie, so he can't be blamed for the stuff other people before him did.

"Have you and Nella (Team Nostalgia Chick) ever thought of teaming up for something appropriately geeky? I was expecting her to show up at some point during this Star Trek retrospective given her affinity for the series. But no such luck."

I think they should review the movie "Vampirella".

Oh yes, there is a "Vampirella" movie.

It's too obscure for Doug, yet not obscure enough for Brad, so that Linkara/Nella team-up would be a perfect opportunity to see it reviewed.

"But Insurrection did so poorly it wasn't until 4 years later that Nemesis came out, right in the same season that the second Harry Potter and LOTR movies came out. Way to go."

By the way, this was also the year "Spider-Man" came out. And despite Doug's protests, "Spider-Man" brought the comic-book-movie genre back from the dead after it was killed in the 90s, paving the way for several popular and not-so-popular comics to be made into movies, a process that in turn led to "Kick-Ass", "The Dark Knight" and the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

So yeah..."Nemesis" never stood a chance. Hell it went direct-to-video in Argentina!

"Also, in case nobody knows about it, there's an unpublished book floating around the internet by the late Michael Piller that talks about the making of this picture. Apparently, Piller had a much different plan for the movie's story, but it got altered along the way."

So...which was the original plan for this movie? After two different users mentioning it, my curiosity is peaked? Can anyone give me a full summary of the plot originally intended for this movie?

"Plus why did the Son'a try to take over the village in the first place? They clearly had the numbers and the technology to build a small interstellar empire, so why didn't they just start their empire somewhere else on the planet? They would have 300 years to study the radiation, replicate its effects, and sell it to other races, becoming the richest, most powerful force in the Alpha Quadrant."

And HERE is where the timeframe of the movie comes into play.

It would be very difficult for the Son'a (or anyone else) to build an empire in the middle of the Dominion War. Whatever empire the Son'a could build would be destroyed by the Dominion in a very short time.

Planet Baku/Planet Eden/Planet Space Amish/whatever doesn't seem to be in Federation charts, so the Dominion probably don't know about it, making it the perfect place to hide until the War ends.

Anonymous said...

Any idea what the event the Critic screaming in the opening is from and where I can view it? I love the guy in the front row who played the role of "Raidou" and witnessed that spectral, er, the Raidou Kuzunoha cosplayer.

Lewis Lovhaug said...

"Any idea what the event the Critic screaming in the opening is from and where I can view it? I love the guy in the front row who played the role of "Raidou" and witnessed that spectral, er, the Raidou Kuzunoha cosplayer."

He was at Kami-Con Season 4 in Alabama. ^_^ I don't know if any footage from his panels is up yet, but you can start looking for it on youtube.

Gonzo said...

Excellent. I've been eagerly awaiting this moment since day one of Star Trek Month (well, Month-and-a-Bit by now). I do love a good crossover, even when I haven't seen the film (and now, thanks to you guys, I don't have to!).

Ha, the constant referencing to TV shows and random trivia that no one cares about reminds me of me. I wonder if any of the people I talk to ever feel like smothering themselves with a pillow. And I see what you mean about the aliens-who-look-exactly-like-humans not working with a modern, big budget movie. I honestly kept forgetting the Baku weren't supposed to be human until somebody explicitly brought it up. Would it really have been so difficult to paint their faces purple or something? Or maybe they used up their make-up/prosthetics budget on Mysterious Blue Guy.

CaptainCalvinCat said...

@ Anonymus

You are right, and I did not say, the movie was without flaws, but to be on the side of the bad guys is a bit far fetched, because, like I said, the Baku have led a harmless, uninteresting and peaceful life, until that other guys showed up.

And of course, you are right, when you say, that the Federation are idiots, to that point, where I say: “It is probably really because of the war, that they have the mind on other things, than on ‘exploring strange new worlds’.”

Although I highly doubt, that the radiation would do anything, afar from the planet, because I can imagine, it is a thing of the concentration. Just a thought. And the movie backs me up – think about it. Anij (that is Picards never to be mentioned again love interest) asks, where the Warp Drive would bring them, but away from the planet. Between the lines, it makes sense, because: It would just bring the Baku back to our normal life span.

And the usage of the metaphasic radiation – well: at first, you might test this stuff. Maybe it would reduce casualties and put people back on the front – was it apparent in the movie, that there were tests about it? No – it could just be Ruafo, wanting revenge for being an outcast…

The point with the overpopulation is of course a point, where I have nothing to say to, besides: You are right.


@ Gonzo
I think, unless you really come up with visually extreme overwhelming looking aliens, it just comes down to: “Ah – so those are the aliens, because they are painted in green.” Or “Ah, those are the aliens, you can see it, because they have bumpy foreheads. They really made an effort at the effects-department.”
*shrugs*

Greets

Cal

Mr. Evil said...

It's not the worst Trek film (Star Trek V - seriously, that one's just not good), but I do agree with most of your points about it. I'd recommend Redletter Media's review of it as well.

Except...

1) In ST:TNG, forced relocation episodes were about either saving a colony from certain death and/or stopping a potential conflict with another empire. It should be mentioned that the Native Americans were Fed citizens, not an indigious culture. So it's not technically a Prime Directive issue.

Here, the whole point of the issue is that the Federation is treading dangerously close to throwing away its Prime Directive and other ethics BECAUSE of the war. Wars have been used to justify lots of bad things. People like wars because it's such a lovely excuse to get medieval on people's asses... as long as you're not the one getting slaughtered.

And you can't win wars with medical technology (which is what the radiation would have amounted to). It just makes wars less deadly for your side.

2) What's with the "they didn't live here originally" argument? WE AMERICANS aren't native to this continent. By your logic, that means that somebody can relocate us because we weren't originally from this piece of land.

I admit that the issue was handled clumsily, but you're arguing that the bad guys are on the right side. No, they aren't.

Lastly, Spock's famous STII: WofK remark was about the logic of his self-sacrifice. He CHOSE to do it. Making others who don't choose to do so sacrifice their homes isn't self-sacrifice. It's called conquest.

13th Doctor said...

"2) What's with the "they didn't live here originally" argument? WE AMERICANS aren't native to this continent. By your logic, that means that somebody can relocate us because we weren't originally from this piece of land.

I admit that the issue was handled clumsily, but you're arguing that the bad guys are on the right side. No, they aren't.

Lastly, Spock's famous STII: WofK remark was about the logic of his self-sacrifice. He CHOSE to do it. Making others who don't choose to do so sacrifice their homes isn't self-sacrifice. It's called conquest."

America is not sitting a radiation that can prolong life. The Ba'Ku just lucked out and found this planet. What makes them more or less entitled to it than everyone else?

Now I could see the dilemma if the Ba'Ku were willing to help but they aren't. The Ba'Ku come off as holier-than-thou jerks who are perfectly ok letting technologically advanced allies fight their battles for them. WTF?

"Here, the whole point of the issue is that the Federation is treading dangerously close to throwing away its Prime Directive and other ethics BECAUSE of the war. Wars have been used to justify lots of bad things. People like wars because it's such a lovely excuse to get medieval on people's asses... as long as you're not the one getting slaughtered."




Also, the Prime Directive is crap to begin with. Earth evolved because cultures interacted with one another. What exactly constitutes as interference? If they meant conquest and forcing them to do what they say, THEN JUST SAY THAT. Don't use vague language.


"And you can't win wars with medical technology (which is what the radiation would have amounted to). It just makes wars less deadly for your side."

So what is wrong with making war less deadly? Isn't the point of some wars to NOT DIE? If the Ba' Ku's culture was less new agey and more wise, I could get behind your point more. I think the radiation should have been studied while the people are on the planet since I think taking them off would have caused them to die almost instantly. (Unless I am wrong; haven't watched it in a while)

You are right; the issues were handled clumsily; REALLY CLUMSILY. If they didn't try to simplify a gray issue such as this, then the film would have more value. But as it stands, it is a mess, mess, MESS. At least, Nemesis had some thought behind it.

All the same, thanks for your opinion. Lewis, great show. I can see this movie rubs you the wrong way and it is hard not to see why.

CaptainCalvinCat said...

@ The 13th Doctor: “Now I could see the dilemma if the Ba'Ku were willing to help but they aren't. The Ba'Ku come off as holier-than-thou jerks who are perfectly ok letting technologically advanced allies fight their battles for them. WTF?“

Why weren’t they willing to help – well, if no one actually ASKS, no one can be helped.
At the end, where Gallatin was reunited with his mother, it seemed pretty much, like they would be helping.

“Also, the Prime Directive is crap to begin with. Earth evolved because cultures interacted with one another. What exactly constitutes as interference? If they meant conquest and forcing them to do what they say, THEN JUST SAY THAT. Don't use vague language.“

Same thing with SOPA and all other bills – the more vague you get, the more loopholes can be found.



Greets

Cal

Mr. Evil said...

@ 13th Doctor

To your points:

1)"America is not sitting a radiation that can prolong life. The Ba'Ku just lucked out and found this planet. What makes them more or less entitled to it than everyone else?"

Is your home sitting on a gold deposit? Well, share it, you selfish person you. Oh, don't want to sell? I hope you're well armed...

It doesn't matter if they lucked upon it. IT'S THEIR HOME! To most people, that's a big deal, and would fight for it. Yes, the Baku didn't actually fight for it, letting the Enterprise crew do it instead. That's a glaring flaw. But that doesn't make it right to move them.

2) "Also, the Prime Directive is crap to begin with. Earth evolved because cultures interacted with one another. What exactly constitutes as interference? If they meant conquest and forcing them to do what they say, THEN JUST SAY THAT. Don't use vague language."

Cultures on our planet evolved on the BONES of other cultures... the bones we buried ourselves. Look at what happened to the indiginous cultures of North and South America, Africa, and Australia. None of them did well after our "interaction." The Prime Directive tries to address that. It doesn't always work.

3) "So what is wrong with making war less deadly? Isn't the point of some wars to NOT DIE?"

Some wars?

The point is that wars aren't won that way. Manpower, tactics, technology, but not medical care. There might have been a more compelling argument to be made if the Baku had access to a super weapon or a rare resource that might have shifted the war in the Federation's favor. But that wasn't the case. Still doesn't justify a clear violation of the Prime Directive for something that wouldn't even win the Dominion War.

I agree that the film bungles the issue by making it all action, and I agree with most of Linkara's points. Just not all of them.

Ming said...

Good crossover with Mr. Critic. It was only inevitable that you, having played Star Trek Voyager Elite Force (and teaming up with LT. MUNRO), would provide commentary on this lousy Next Generation movie.

I actually agree with a number of points you and the Critic made. However, the only film that can possibly be worse than Insurrection is Star Trek 5.

Kevin Holsinger said...

The Exiled One-February 8, 2012 6:05 PM

"That's because the movies don't make full use of the promise. The exploration aspect of the series, the whole "toi boldly go where no one has gone before" and meeting weird new alien civilizations, almost never comes up in the movies."

Hmm. Never thought of that before. Good point.

13th Doctor said...

"Cultures on our planet evolved on the BONES of other cultures... the bones we buried ourselves. Look at what happened to the indiginous cultures of North and South America, Africa, and Australia. None of them did well after our "interaction." The Prime Directive tries to address that. It doesn't always work."

Sadly, that's true. But that doesn't invalidate my point. Human history is not just about war. Freud was Austrian. John Lennon was British. Gandhi was Indian. Now imagine how less enlightened we would be if we didn't interact. Yes, humans have an incredibly spotty track record when it comes to diplomacy but since Star Trek is supposed to portray a more evolved humanity, I would hope that a proper balance has been struck. Plus, one point I forgot to mention is that the Prime Directive GOES AGAINST THE VERY PREMISE OF STAR TREK. Are we supposed to leave cultures alone? That doesn't sound like exploration.

"The point is that wars aren't won that way. Manpower, tactics, technology, but not medical care. There might have been a more compelling argument to be made if the Baku had access to a super weapon or a rare resource that might have shifted the war in the Federation's favor. But that wasn't the case. Still doesn't justify a clear violation of the Prime Directive for something that wouldn't even win the Dominion War."

I guess that's true. Good point.

"Some wars?"

I am bad at writing sarcasm lol.

Is your home sitting on a gold deposit? Well, share it, you selfish person you. Oh, don't want to sell? I hope you're well armed...

It doesn't matter if they lucked upon it. IT'S THEIR HOME! To most people, that's a big deal, and would fight for it. Yes, the Baku didn't actually fight for it, letting the Enterprise crew do it instead. That's a glaring flaw. But that doesn't make it right to move them."

I guess so but it seems the Ba'Ku are being blissfully ignorant of what their planet can do for other cultures. As far as they are concerned, that makes the apotheosis of evolution. This is one of the many points that drains sympathy for their plight. Plus, I already stated that moving them wasn't right. But the way this movie portrays them you kinda feel like they were asking for it. Bear in mind, this is fiction so you are freer to feel more vindictive towards people you should feel sorry for.


"Why weren’t they willing to help – well, if no one actually ASKS, no one can be helped.
At the end, where Gallatin was reunited with his mother, it seemed pretty much, like they would be helping."

The Ba'Ku should have GUESSED damn well why people were taking a sudden interest. This goes back to their Machiavellian thinking. The movie could have made this aspect a lot clearer.

"Same thing with SOPA and all other bills – the more vague you get, the more loopholes can be found."

Absolutely.

James Faraci said...

Only Gripe I have with the review is you didn't teleport the Nostalgia Critic onto Comicron-1 & have him fitted with a Star Trek Uniform & I know time, travel & monetary issues, blah, blah, blah.

CaptainCalvinCat said...

@ The 13th Doc:

The Ba'Ku should have GUESSED damn well why people were taking a sudden interest. This goes back to their Machiavellian thinking. The movie could have made this aspect a lot clearer.


Yeah, but the Ba'ku were not asked, if they could help. And if I learned something in school, then it was "if you do not want that someone takes advantage of your situation, wait, and let them come to you.". So when nobody asks them, why would they say "Hey, we have a planet, that can stop the aging process?" and with that action actually INVITE people to do the exact same thing, the Son'a are trying to do in the movie?

Just a thought.

Greets

Cal

13th Doctor said...

I meant to write in my previous post "As far as they are concerned, they are the apotheosis of evolution." Was typing in a hurry this morning. xD

NAS said...

There was an explanation for why they were using tags. Picard and the crew were using devices to prevent beaming. If someone else already said this, sorry, didnt see it when I checked.

Lewis Lovhaug said...

"There was an explanation for why they were using tags. Picard and the crew were using devices to prevent beaming. If someone else already said this, sorry, didnt see it when I checked."

They have and I knew that, but Doug apparently didn't notice and I should have pointed it out to him. Just didn't notice it in the script.

CaptainCalvinCat said...

@ James: Although I had found it funny, when Doug had tried everything to not meet Linkara and he had "zapp" beamed him up.
^^

@ Linkara:
Erm... Sorry for bothering you via EMail about that... thing.
Another point, you are right, when you say "If you can't say what you mean..."... like I said, I try to be a bit selective, because I really like the idea , the concept of that planet being paradise.

But - on the other hand - who wants to live like that. It sounds good - "We do not want to use technology" - the sentence would be more correct, if one had said: "We do not want to use technology, unless it is absolutely necessary"... would that be a better interpretation? Because - I honestly think, that people at least could learn to be more sustainable with the scarce resources of our very own planet.

And as long as people come to about a work, discuss about the content, the movie is not bad.

Okay, let me rephrase that: It is bad story wise, but even a crappy movie can make people think about their life and their reality.

Greets

Cal

SynjoDeonecros said...

Y'know, not to piss off Star Trek fans, but looking back at the "previously on" segments the Critic gave for the "good" movies makes me wonder why exactly people like Trek, in the first place. Even the greatest of the series, it seems, ends up breaking down into stupidity when you think about it, too hard. I didn't realize how out of character Picard was in First Contact until the "previous on" segment pointed that out, for example. And, as someone on here has already pointed out, most of the movies have to deal with either a perfect planet or someone gaining revenge over someone. I dunno, but it just seems... lazy, in my opinion.

Also, not going to get into the argument over the Ba'ku/So'na incident, but I will say this: it reminds me of the Dark Legion/Mitre debate over technology in the Sonic the Hedgehog comics. Can't really call one a rip-off of the other, even given Sonic's habit of copying stuff from other franchises, since the Legion was created before Insurrection was, but it does show an interesting parallel.

FormulaFox said...

I do have some bones I'd like to pick over your nitpicking in this review, Linkara...

First I'll note that I'm not really a fan of Insurrection, but I still slot it ahead of Star Trek I and V. With a little fleshing out and some filler removal it could've been a decent TV series episode, but that's about it.

However, I have a bad habit: The worse a movie is, the more I start digging into every detail and trying to find some sort of reasonable explanation for something to dull the pain. It's rather effective(and a core reason why I smack people upside the head for insisting you need to stop thinking to enjoy Tron: Legacy when in fact you need to think MORE to enjoy it).

Anyway, to my point:

1) How the Ba'ku could "keep up" with technology and, as others have questioned, how they got the So'na off the planet with no ships.

The simple answer is that they have all their old technology, they simply choose not to use it. Their tech level could very well have been on par with the Federation's current tech since the day they settled on the planet - which is expressly stated to be well before the Federation was as up-to-date tech-wise as they were at the time. They never say they don't have any of this, only that they choose not to implement it. This does leave open the question of why they couldn't fix Data's damage, but there are about a bajillion decent reasons that could be the case if you think of it as outlined above.

2) Your complaints about the implementation of technology. I'll actually direct you to one of the best comic series ever created: Gold Digger. Spoilers to anyone who hasn't read this comic's awesomeness.

In Gold Digger, there is a world called Jade where all the magic users and most magic creatures went to as the age of technology began. They have a very clearly defined sense of what makes technology: Power. Seriously, it's that simple: If a machine is powered by magic, no problem. If it's human powered, no problem. If it's powered by a battery or other form of technology, you're in serious trouble(as one main char found out the hard way). It's very possible that the Ba'ku subscribe to a very similar philosophy - if it's human-powered or uses the movement of a river, gravity, or other natural pre-existing source to make it go, there's noting wrong with it. And while they do specify that the Ba'ku don't use "machines," a lot of people will debate you for hours on whether or not a system that is NOT artificially powered truly counts as a "machine."

Mr. Evil said...

Last post, I promise:

"I am bad at writing sarcasm lol."

No worries. Just wasn't sure if there was a war out there where dying was the objective. Might as well be in some cases.

"Human history is not just about war. Freud was Austrian. John Lennon was British. Gandhi was Indian. Now imagine how less enlightened we would be if we didn't interact. Yes, humans have an incredibly spotty track record when it comes to diplomacy but since Star Trek is supposed to portray a more evolved humanity, I would hope that a proper balance has been struck. Plus, one point I forgot to mention is that the Prime Directive GOES AGAINST THE VERY PREMISE OF STAR TREK. Are we supposed to leave cultures alone? That doesn't sound like exploration."

Going from ST:TNG episodes, the canon suggests that it's only cultures that don't have warp technology that can't be interacted with (not advanced enough). However, Star Fleet is also not supposed to interfere in the internal affairs of any non-Federation civilization. That one's always a bit harder to work with, it's a bit subjective.

In the Baku's case, they do have warp technology... I guess. Maybe in their back pockets. They were non-Federation on a Federation-owned world, but they'd been there longer than the Federation, which should have given them carte blanche land rights. As the Prime Directive went, it was pretty cut and dry.

"I guess so but it seems the Ba'Ku are being blissfully ignorant of what their planet can do for other cultures. As far as they are concerned, that makes the apotheosis of evolution. This is one of the many points that drains sympathy for their plight. Plus, I already stated that moving them wasn't right. But the way this movie portrays them you kinda feel like they were asking for it. Bear in mind, this is fiction so you are freer to feel more vindictive towards people you should feel sorry for."

The Baku were the stereotypical peace-loving pacifist types you see in science fiction when you need an ethical issue involving fight-or-don't-fight. Usually their pacifism is shown as naive or foolish when faced with enemies more than happy to wipe them out. Here... I'm not sure what they were trying to do.

Cheers.

Anonymous said...

Have you seen this video yet?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0PlwDbSYicM&feature=player_embedded

It has Elijah Wood and Simon Pegg in it.

Anonymous said...

Have you played Arkham City yet Linkara.

If so, what did you think of the ending and the villain's potrayals in the game

Adam said...

"And despite Doug's protests, "Spider-Man" brought the comic-book-movie genre back from the dead after it was killed in the 90s,"

Nah, Blade and X-Men did that.

John C. Kirk said...

I agree with most of the comments you made, although I suspect they're defining "machine" as "anything which has its own power source". E.g. a bicycle would be fine, but not a motorbike.

When Picard is heading down to the planet, his command crew all volunteer to go with him, but he tells half of them to stay behind on the ship. It's a remarkable coincidence that the people he allowed to come were already in local clothing, while the people who stayed behind had kept their uniform on...

Anonymous said...

There is also the problem that even though the Baku don't use technology, they still need the protection of people who do use technology. After all, they are protected from hostile races by virtue of the fact that their planet happens to be in Federation space.

Without the Federation there, the Baku would be conquered or exploited by just about any other race that comes along. The Breen, Cardassians, Dominion, Orions, Romulans, or even the Ferengi and the Klingons would enslave or exterminate them without a second thought.

Plus wouldn't the Klingons and Romulans be really pissed off if they learned about what happened in Insurrection? Here they are dying by the thousands fighting against the Dominion and the Federation has access to a resource that could potentially be used to save billions of lives but won't utilize it because of a few hundred idiots.

Plus you'd think they would have set up some hospitals in the Briar Patch to treat wounded soldiers. After all, if the radiation could restore Geordi's sight in one or two days, imagine what it could do to wounded or dying soldiers.

Anonymous said...

You should check out this song about the Joker.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/miracle-of-sound/5286-Jokers-Song-Batman-Arkham-City

It has a "The Killing Joke" reference for crying out loud

Arianne said...

I'll pass on seeing this one. From this review, I don't think I could root for the pacifist B'aku. They come off as being arrogant pricks to me and hypocrites. Also, the what could have been mentioned on this movie Tv Tropes page sounded way more interesting than this movie. Just sayin'.

The Exiled One said...

"Nah, Blade and X-Men did that."

The "X-Men" movies, in my opinion, are highly overrated, and while good, they weren't as sucessful or massive as the first "Spider-Man" movie.

And "Blade" was good, but again: it wasn't as massive as "Spider-Man".

People forget it nowadays, but "Spider-Man" was ENORMOUS. It was one of THE big hits of 2002, and it was the POPULARITY of that movie that kick-started the comic-book-movie craze that goes on to this day. "Blade" and "X-Men" can't compare because they weren't as popular, or as huge.

"Harry Potter and the Philospher's Stone", "The Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring" or "The Matrix" are better comparisons in term of sheer popularity and sucess.

Anonymous said...

"Is your home sitting on a gold deposit? Well, share it, you selfish person you. Oh, don't want to sell? I hope you're well armed..."

1. Are you really comparing gold with something like this?
2. I would share it with others. Especialy if there was a freaking war going on. These selfish idiots get no symphaty for me.

Kevin Holsinger said...

Anonymous February 9, 2012 11:49 PM

Not that I would ever want to see a Batman musical, but that was pretty good.

Thanks.

Bellarius said...

I'm with The Exiled One, we can add this to the number of films James Cameron plagerised to make avatar. It flips the bird at the audiences, declares all technology evil, thinks that a simpler life would be easier; the only thing it didn't do was go the extra mile like Cameron's film and declare humanity to deserve extermination and that all our cultural advances and history is worthless tripe.

Thanks for pointing out the thing with the Dominion War by the way, i'd not realised it was set during that era of DS9. It just makes Picard and co look like even bigger arseholes as a result.

By the way Linkara, do you mind if I ask how long ago you and Doug Walker planned this crossover? Was it before his whole run on the Trek films? it's just there was a great deal of build up towards it.

Isolder74 said...

I think the part where any arguments about the Baku and their not technology hippie nonsense dies is the moment we see that Dam. Some of it we could justify in some way but not the dam. Without heavy machines and forges nothing that makes up that dam can exist.

Lewis Lovhaug said...

"By the way Linkara, do you mind if I ask how long ago you and Doug Walker planned this crossover? Was it before his whole run on the Trek films? it's just there was a great deal of build up towards it."

The original plan was just a cameo, but about two weeks in he realized that with the build-up he'd need a bigger payoff than just a cameo, so we decided on a crossover for this one, especially for this one since I told him how much I despise Insurrection.

Anonymous said...

"The original plan was just a cameo, but about two weeks in he realized that with the build-up he'd need a bigger payoff than just a cameo, so we decided on a crossover for this one, especially for this one since I told him how much I despise Insurrection."

Yes, give in to your hatred. It will make you stronger than you can ever imagine.

CaptainCalvinCat said...

Great Star Wars Reference, Annonymus. ^^

By the way, maybe someone can help me: Why is there that much hate between Star Wars and Star Trek Fans? I am a fan of Both, Plus Stargate, they tell interesting stories and have all their flaws and their good things.

Greets

Cal

Sailor_Sega said...

Nice review. Could have done without the Nostalgia Critic running around like an idiot at the start but I suppose it might be funny to people that are actually fans of the Nostalgia Critic. Not being a fan myself maybe I just don't get it.

The Blue And The Gold said...

I remember in the comments to The Wrath Of Kahn #3, you replied to me about how many argue that TNG's last episode served as a better wrap-up and story than the films, Generations in particular.

Having now seen this review, I wonder: was that your subtle way of saying you were one of those many? =P

MattComix said...

I think Picard has a line somewhere in either this movie or Nemesis where he says "Remember when we were explorers?"

Yes, Captain we do. ..and we miss it very much.

Lewis Lovhaug said...

"I think Picard has a line somewhere in either this movie or Nemesis where he says "Remember when we were explorers?"

Yes, Captain we do. ..and we miss it very much."

He does, which is another line you have to scratch your head at, since he did negotiations and peace accords and whatnot all the time in TNG.

CaptainCalvinCat said...

@ The debate about the Prime Directive


Hey, what just came to my mind - the prime directive is a bit like the Pirates Codex in Pirates of the carribean.

At first, Hector Barbossa said, they were just "guidelines", but in part three, they completely stuck to it - complete with the vote of a Pirate King which ended in Elizabeth Swan being crowned queen of the pirates...

And the prime directive should be nothing more and nothing less than guidelines - saying, that there are events and intents and purposes, which makes it okay, to - say - help a pre-warp-society.

SFDebris made a great video about prime directive, its origins and what happens, if they say, they have to stick by that rule no matter what.

And to the Picard-Thingie:
I most certainly would have loved to see them doing more exploration - but on the other hand, would that not even more look like it would be a TV-Episode?

Good night.

Greets

Cal

Mr. Evil said...

To that one Anonyomous person... no, the other one... no, the other one:

"1. Are you really comparing gold with something like this?"

It's a resource. It's your land. The value of the find doesn't change the principle of the matter.

"2. I would share it with others. Especialy if there was a freaking war going on. These selfish idiots get no symphaty for me."

Let's see here:

1) If you want to share it, great. If not, AGAIN, that doesn't mean someone else has the right to take it.
2) I didn't like the Baku much either. Guess what? That's not an justifible reason to remove them.

CaptainCalvinCat said...

And here comes the funny thing, Mr. Evil - the relocation was kinda included in the starfleets plan. The Son'A had fired the collector at the ring and would have let the Bak'u died from... whatever had killed it. Ru'afo made his point quit clear.

Greets

Cal

Anonymous said...

Linkara, you should incorporate that blue guy's theories into your next storyline.

The Exiled One said...

Captain James T. Kirk defintively had the "it's more of a guideline than a rule" attitude to the Prime Directive.

Which is why he's so awesome.

dash bannon said...

You claim that Star Trek Insurrection is the worst Next Gen movie, but I have to disagree. Nemesis was much worse.

While Insurrection feels like a run of the mill Next Gen episode, it at least feels like a Next Gen episode.

Nemesis felt like it was phoned in. The actors seemed to sort of look at each other like, "what do you want us to do?" The direction was poor, the story was weak, and it showed that the director had never watched an episode of Star Trek. He even bragged that he had never seen an episode.

It showed. That movie was so bad, when I walked out of the theater I said to myself, "Well, that's the last Star Trek film that will ever get made." It was a dog; a bad dog.

Star Trek (2009) felt like a Star Trek film. It was fun, it had action, it had science fiction elements. The characters felt like they belonged together.

In Nemesis, it felt like the characters really had no point to being in the movie. Even the villain felt contrived.

If they wanted to plumb old stories for ideas, how about looking at the original series. Where the heck did the planet killer come from in the original series episode, "The Doomsday Machine?"

There's something to explore.

Anyway, here's hoping that the new Star Trek film will be fun and great.

Cheers!

dash bannon said...

An observation...

I think Star Trek the original series (TOS) translated to the big screen the best because the original series as an action oriented show.

Next Gen, to me, never seemed to translate well to the big screen. Next Gen was more cerebral and science fiction oriented than TOS.

Picard was cerebral, contemplative, and principled. In the Next Gen movies they wanted him to be an action hero. Picard wasnt' Kirk. Thinking about this, I think that's why Star Trek (2009) worked. Kirk's a man of action. Picard will take action if needed, but he's more likely to think his way out of a problem.

RPGaholic said...

@dashbannon

You might want to hunt down the novel Vendetta by Peter David, where he delved into the potential of the planet killer.

@Linkara

To me, this felt like a weak crossover. I understand you went from a cameo (and would've hit one or two highlights) to a crossover, but there was so much more I felt that you and the Critic could've ripped into.

Le Messor said...

I've never minded this movie, though I agree with the people who say it shouldn't be more than an episode.
Then again, the only Trek movie I've disliked is 5, and even that one's grown on me.
Worse than Nemesis? No. Way.
Much as I love vampire movies, Nemesis just plays too fast and loose with continuity, and tries too hard to remake WoK. 'Pieces of a Data-like android on a deserted planet? Let's put them together and see what we get! Lore? What does that mean? I'm sure the viewers have forgotten. We sure have.'

"didn't really give a damn anymore about the Treaty of Algeron,"

Wait, that's what prevents cloaks? I thought it was the Khitomer Accord.
I deduct 5 Trek points from myself.

"The biggest plot hole in the movie is how the Baku were able to force the Son'a off the planet."

I've always felt the Son'a were played as rebellious teenagers who left because they were bored.
They changed their minds when they figured out they were no longer immortal.

Anonymous said...

"To that one Anonyomous person... no, the other one... no, the other one:

"1. Are you really comparing gold with something like this?"

It's a resource. It's your land. The value of the find doesn't change the principle of the matter.

"2. I would share it with others. Especialy if there was a freaking war going on. These selfish idiots get no symphaty for me."

Let's see here:

1) If you want to share it, great. If not, AGAIN, that doesn't mean someone else has the right to take it.
2) I didn't like the Baku much either. Guess what? That's not an justifible reason to remove them"

1) Its not their home.

2)Yes. its not. But this movie tries to make them look like best people ever and that doing something against them is like torturing unicorns.

3)They did no effort to find some compromise with Federation.

Tantum Ergo 2 said...

I'm something of an amateur ethicist, and to be honest, I find myself laughing at every last person who claims there are grey areas in morality.

Every. Last. One.

People just don't understand ethics because they don't take the time to study the subject in any great detail, and get angry when it's brought up, and nothing kills an honest discussion of any issue like some hothead who's emotionally-invested in the outcome.

That said, this movie doesn't even try to present a morally-serious issue.

The first rule of ethics that you need to remember in situations like this is; consequentialism is a load of garbage. You may -never- do evil, so that good may come of it. Stealing is evil.

Here's the problem. The federation basically owns the planet already, so when they force the Baku to relocate, that's not stealing. It's just making them feel uncomfortable, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with hurting somebody's feelings or disrupting their way of life if that way of life is embroiled in ethical injustice.

And really, it could be argued that that's exactly what the Baku are. I mean, they're basically freeloaders who don't even want to hear the ethical objections to the life they've chosen, and -that- is where most ethical "dilemmas" come from; some unethical person choses to live in an unethical way, and surrounds himself with a lot of other people who share his beliefs. Then, when the subject is brought to their attention, they moan and groan, and act all hurt, even though their own stupid actions are responsible for their problems.

That's all I have to say. I'm fed up with this movie. Even when I saw it as a teen, I knew it was blah.

CaptainCalvinCat said...

@ Anonymus

3)They did no effort to find some compromise with Federation.

Actually - yes they did. At the very end. They were not asked, they were observed by the federation and the Son'a in hiding.

I guess, if they had asked "Hey, what is the matter, might we set up a colony on your planet"... I don`t think, they would have said "Get to your ship and the hell out of here" but they had said "Why, sure, why not?"

Greets

Cal

Anonymous said...

A bit of trivia. The throne was in the room, not because of Doug, but because earlier that day they were celebrating Martin "LittleKuriboh" Billany's birthday. Every panel in that room got to take advantage of that throne!

Toby'c said...

Gotta disagree with your comparison to The Ensigns of Command and Journey's End. Both those episodes involved colonies of Federation citizens (at first) on planets that were legally the property of a hostile power, and in the latter case, the colonists knew the territory was in dispute before they even landed.

I think this is part of what keeps me on side with Picard in this movie - what kind of precedent is the Federation setting here? Is this going to give them the right to evict every other non-Federation colony within Federation space if the planet becomes strategically important or something?

SynjoDeonecros said...

I have to agree with FormulaFox on the whole "Ba'ku are hypocrites for only using primitive tools when they say they're 'eschewing technology'" bit; yes, while technically any artificial means of getting a task done - from the simple hammer to an iPad - is technology by strict definition, most people who are told a "simpler lifestyler" is "not using technology" knows EXACTLY what they mean without splitting hairs; they're not using tech that is powered by another bit of tech, like a battery or engine. It's rather pedantic to nitpick on that case, since there's no way, even now, that anyone can truly go back to the hunter-gatherer lifestyle WITHOUT using SOME sort of tools to gather up the resources needed to live. And really, comparing a piece of paper and a pencil to a computer, and saying one is being hypocritical for choosing the former for their work instead of the latter by saying they're "eschewing technology"? Yes, they fulfill the same basic role - to record things - but the complexity and versatility and sheer amount of other uses the bleeding edge tech has over the stone-age tech makes it impossible to properly compare the two.

I actually heard a similar argument being made in the furry art fandom, or even general animation, over the use of photoshop or 3D renderings instead of traditional mediums. Being a sort of jack of all trades/master of none who has experimented with a variety of art styles - from traditional pen-and-paper sketches to pixel art and 3D rendering, and even "tangible" mediums like metalwork and clay sculpting - I can tell you that, like the comparison between something like an old and new tech form of transportation, the general gist of the art and its creation are the same, but the techniques and details that make each different vastly outweigh those basic similarities. No, CGI is NOT as lazy as everyone thinks it is; you need to actually build, bone, skin, and animate the renderings much in the same way you would a puppet or action figure, and it gives a visually distinct look to the piece from a traditional animation.

There's a lot of good reasons why someone may want to go with a more primitive medium or piece of technology to get something done; maybe they don't feel they could use all of the features the high tech version grants them, maybe they have a sentimental attachment to doing it old-school, maybe they can't get a grasp of handling the new tech, etc. "It takes something away from the man" IS a valid excuse, if they're saying that it makes the task more impersonal and less satisfying to do - just look at all of the complaints made about automated telephone operators. There are also stupid reasons for it, wrong reasons that can be used to justify subjugation or willful ignorance of the masses through it. As SFDebris himself said, technology does cause a lot of problems, but it's only when people don't educate themselves on the pros and cons of the new technology, how it works, and what not to do with it, or are willfully indifferent to the damage it causes that makes the problems it causes greater than it can solve.

Anonymous said...

On top of the hypocrisy, poorly written dialogue, and complete reversal of the pro-technology stance of Star Trek, the biggest problem is a plot hole most people skip over.

Remember when Dr. Crusher scanned a Sona and discovered he gave off the same biosigns as a Baku?

NOW YOU FIND THAT OUT?!

I'm sorry, when did the Federation find out about the Son'a? I'm pretty sure they would have done some scans of their species after contacting them. So when the Federation ran into the Baku, I'm pretty sure the Federation also studied their biosignatures then, even if it was under their invisible suits.

Shouldn't they have noticed something when the biosignatures of the Baku and Sona were identical?!

Hell, near the end they say that they can pick up a hundred Baku on a Sona ship. I'm sorry, but they could tell the difference between the Sona and the Baku with a dinky medical tricorder. Are you seriously telling me the sensors on the FEDERATION FLAGSHIP can't tell the difference?

le-messor said...

What makes you think the Federation guys who teamed up with the Ba'ku *care* that they're the same as the So'na?

~ Mik