(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?
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.
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.