(Not including the reboot trilogy as that’s a different altogether topic)

I was recently in a mood to binge the first ten Star Trek films as I hadn’t seen any of them in several years, and I notice that the TOS films are better than the TNG films. Which is weird because when it comes to the tv series, I far prefer TNG and its spin-offs over TOS but when it came to the films, it’s the opposite. I love First Contact, and like Generations but Insurrection and Nemesis are pretty bad IMO, whereas the only TOS film I truly dislike is V. (My favorites are IV and VI) Was wondering what others here thought, I think this may be the standard opinion in fact.

As for why they’re better, I think for whatever reason the TOS movies feel more cinematic, whereas the TNG films were mostly trying to capture the TNG feeling and not as much be cinematic?

  • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    But part of the problem with Insurrection was that it wasn’t ambitious enough compared to the “bad” TOS movies.

    TMP is spacious and filled with great visuals; it isn’t a plot that would work as an episode.

    The Search for Spock is the middle of a great trilogy and sets up a personal grudge for Kirk that pays off in Undiscovered Country. The movie pushed characters along; the closest in Insurrection is the eventual marriage of Riker and Troi but it doesn’t play out in the movies.

    The Final Frontier has Kirk yell “What does God need with a starship”.

    Insurrection feels lacking in ambition.

    • startrekexplained@startrek.websiteOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Insurrection feels lacking in ambition.

      I just realized it was written by Michael Piller, the guy who saved TNG and created DS9. So kinda weird the one Trek movie he wrote was so bland and forgettable. And it was directed by Jonathon Frakes, who is a great director IMO so even more bizarre.

      • transwarp@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        He wrote a book about making it. The section on studio interference implies that it was all egregious, but it lists Paramount trying to fix most of the problems that were still in the final film.

    • Kahlenar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t know I think the motion picture is exactly what an episode of Voyager feels like. A strange anomaly shows up they can’t do anything about it and all over it and figure it out the end.

      I think that saying insurrection is not ambitious enough sort of is exactly my point about appreciating it more now that I’ve gotten older. It wasn’t a phasers first story it wasn’t a horror story it was a story of personal reflection and juxtaposition of one’s own values. And you cannot discount the ‘how many people’ exchange. Peak Picard just like line drawn here. And I think the biggest thing for me is that until the Trek resurgence I always assumed that Picard would retire and go live with the Baku.

      • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Plot wise, maybe. However, TMP looks and feels like a movie.

        In contrast, there really isn’t that much jumping out of Insurrection that feels cinematic.