[samwiseb]

I suspect most A-list directors wouldn't come near ST even now. After over 30 years, it's not like they haven't had their chance.

[Captain Tom Coughlin]

I think that themes get lost when you mess up the execution. I don't think it's enough to say that a film has a nice theme to it, if the movie itself fails in too many other ways.

[Quark]

Originally Posted by kevin

Ah, the dangers of picking holes in Star Trek movie plots.................never wise!

That's what these boards are for. To discuss. That's why I joined it.

[Captain Tom Coughlin]

Yep, it would be boring if we all had the same outlook on everything.

[kevin]

And we can at least say we don't do that here!

[samwiseb]

I can't say I find Generations' themes particularly rich either. Especially considering that the whole mortality theme was already played with greater subtlety and subtextual coherency in II. More importantly, I don't think these themes forgive the haphazard nature of the story itself when the entire plot literally unravels with a single nitpick. The nexus is probably one of the worst examples of magic or deus ex machina ever conceived for a film (how did Kirk and Picard figure out how to leave it, exactly?). Generations always felt to me like the kind of project in which you design your movie poster first and then ask your writers to come up with a story ("What's that the ship is fleeing... an exploding sun? Write it, write it!").

I've never really had a problem with the film's acting or dialogue, outside of the obnoxious one-liners they give to Brent Spiner (what does 'emotion' have to do with understanding humor, anyway? Appreciating it, I can kind of understand. But suddenly being able to 'grasp' the punchline of a joke after processing it for seven years? That's just silly). The dialogue doesn't really stand out for me at all, which I suppose is a good thing. Generally, it's that way with all the STs. It can hardly be 'bad' if it doesn't stand out for the most part. STV and Nemesis both had what I would consider to be 'bad' (as in *embarrassingly* trite or over-expressed) dialogue. So did parts of TMP and Insurrection.

Cinematography, I actually thought was pretty good. Probably the single strongest component of this film. Dare I say this was probably the most cinematic-looking ST film since number IV, although V looked pretty good whenever it wasn't rushed. (BTW, have any of you been to the Valley of Fire? I went out for a Sunday drive some four years ago. And while you could easily get turned around exploring the park, the actual canyon where they filmed is so narrow and small you wouldn't even recognize most of what (you think) you're seeing in the film. That they could helicopter their equipment in there, let alone get the kind of shots you see in the film, is absolutely staggering. Most of the rocks they were climbing on are eclipsed by even higher hills all around. And you get sand in your shoes as soon as you enter the canyon from your car).

Music was definitely uninspired. Easily the weakest of all of ST's film scores, and the only one I haven't collected to date. With no disrespect to McCartly, he is clearly not a film composer. That they actually thought he could work out for them, and then were forced to reconsider for the sequels, I think says more about the Berman aesthetic than any other one thing in his eighteen-year history.

[horatio]

Originally Posted by Captain Tom Coughlin

I think that themes get lost when you mess up the execution. I don't think it's enough to say that a film has a nice theme to it, if the movie itself fails in too many other ways.

That's as if I said that STXI totally sucks because it is a spiritual and thematic zombie. It doesn't, it merely fails in this one respect which has no impact upon the many things that worked in that movie.
So yeah, your claim that achieving something is overshadowed by failing at something else is obviously influenced by your preferences for particular movie "ingredients" and not actually good analysis.

[Captain Tom Coughlin]

It's not a claim, exploring a theme is a function of writing. If the writing is flawed, so is the exploration of that theme.

The new Star Trek movie has themes as well, very old ones about being lost and finding your place in the world. About finding purpose and family. You dismiss them based on your own preferences of "ingredients" as well, don't pretend you don't.

[Roysten]

Originally Posted by samwiseb

The nexus is probably one of the worst examples of magic or deus ex machina ever conceived for a film (how did Kirk and Picard figure out how to leave it, exactly?). Generations always felt to me like the kind of project in which you design your movie poster first and then ask your writers to come up with a story

Yeah can't really argue with that. Shame there was such a rush to get Gen out after the end of the TNG season 7. I mean compare it to All Good Things and you start to wonder what went wrong.

Cinematography, I actually thought was pretty good. Probably the single strongest component of this film.

I thought it was ok, the lighting was an interesting idea, but taken way too far in my opinion. Like the lens flare that Abrams used, the darkness and shadows on the Enterprise were just too much. Used a little more subtly and it could have been really effective, instead you just think that the Enterprise is trying to lower its electricity bill.

Music was definitely uninspired. Easily the weakest of all of ST's film scores, and the only one I haven't collected to date. With no disrespect to McCartly, he is clearly not a film composer. That they actually thought he could work out for them, and then were forced to reconsider for the sequels, I think says more about the Berman aesthetic than any other one thing in his eighteen-year history.

Some of the music I liked, but it is weak compared to the other films. Why didn't Jerry Goldsmith do this one? Anyone know?

[martok2112]

Jerry may have had several other gigs to do at the time, and might not have been available for Generations. His last Trek movie before First Contact was Final Frontier. He was rather intermittent with the first few Trek films. (TMP, TFF, and then returning for all the TNG films after Generations).

On another note, methinks that the producers were out to simply show how well TNG could measure up to the big screen with largely television generated effects....and the music.

Well...they got what they wanted....and what they got was a two hour episode that just happened to transpire on the big screen. A big screen movie with broadcast level effects.

There was really nothing big screen about Generations (or next two follow ups). Even the saucer crash filled up the screen better on a TV than it did in the theater.