At first I thought this movie was pretty good, but upon rewatching it a few times, it just came off as really lame. But I wouldn't say this is the worst Star Trek movie like Linkara did. Final Frontier, for me, is the bottom of the barrel for Star Trek movies.
If there's anything related to Insurrection that's worth looking into, it'd be Fade In, an unpublished behind the scenes book written by Michael Pillar, the main writer for Insurrection. It's interesting to see his thought process and how the story changed from his earliest drafts.
You did a good job on Insurrection. Both of you. The weird thing is my original editor likes it quite a bit. Overall, I give it 1/5 for reasons you explained.
As for Nemesis...again, don't think I really need to say anything. You like it, Doug, so more power to you, but I'm afraid we'll just have to disagree. I give it a Not Even Considered/5.
Sadly, you won't get to cover the 09 film. I myself liked it a lot. They really captured the feel of Trek. I don't quite like the actionization of the movie, but it makes sense to draw in audiences. I like the visuals of the film a lot, as well as the scene with the Kelvin. Always makes me cry. 4/5
So, to sum it up: Motion Picture: Slow, but has good ideas. Directors Cut is better. 2/5 normally, 4/5 Director's Cut. Wrath of Khan: Awesome in every way. 5/5 Search for Spock: Don't like bringing Spock back. Otherwise, meh. 2/5 Voyage Home: Hilarious. 4/5 Final Frontier: Nothing that hasn't already been said. Not Even Considered/5 Undiscovered Country: Fitting sendoff to the TOS crew, but not quite Wrath of Khan. 3/5 Generations: Equal parts good and bad. 3/5 First Contact: A movie formed on the basis of a continuity error. 2/5 Insurrection: Backwards morality, little accomplishment. 1/5 Nemesis: Final Frontier for the Next Generation crew. Not Even Considered/5 Reboot: Lots of action, but very faithful. 4/5
You know, after watching the review for this, I take back every negative thing I thought about Star Trek Nemesis. (though the story was a tad weak there and it really didn't fit to end the TNG series...)
No wonder the odd numbered Trek movies are considered bad! (3 was the exception sort of)
1. Boring with little character development but had interesting ideas 3. A continuation without being it's own story but not bad. 5. Bad bad bad bad BAD! 7. Not much was explained (though seeing Picard and Kirk on screen together was cool) 9. The logic made no sense and it had the weakest villain.
Nothing against the Star Trek franchise (seeing as how I watched Deep Space Nine and Voyager with my dad when I was a kid), but I can't wait until Doug is finished reviewing what no man has reviewed before.
By the way; since he's already done Saves Christmas and Scared Stupid, am I the only one who wants him to do an "Ernest month?" Cause that would friggin' rock!
My favorite part was when Critic started complaining about the Gilbert and Sullivan scene, only to discover Linkara joined in. It's as if he forgot from Suburban Knights that Lewis is a fan of musicals.
I know, if this was Star Wars, we'd know all about who he was, what his theories were, what effect they'd have had if Picard hadn't blown him off, what he did after that, and what his favorite holodeck program is.
Oh, and did you know there's a new theory about Star Trek movies that should replace "Odd bad, even good", now that Nemesis and Star Trek Open Bracket 2009 Close Bracket broke that?
The one that broke the rules. Simon Pegg once pointed out how his character in Spaced made the comment about "Sure as every odd numbered Star Trek movie is crap" just to see the tenth movie break tradition. And then he went and exacerbated it by starring in the 11th which was pretty successful.