movies section

star trek
nemesis


How thoughtful of the movie studios to give away the plot in the trailer

s menu - click a section what's new at www.eadon.com philosophy movie reviews cartoons - garden of eadon cartoons bible satire pics, images and poems about nun whipping bishops etc :) philosophy wars discussions and battles on religion and many other maddening topics Jim on diets, daft names and other musings Feng Shui Hippo's zodiac - a spoof of astrology and feng shui here is info about me, jim eadon and more read my novel madpole - the maddest but truest philosopher on this planet coincidences of readers etc read and sign my guestbook links s
body frame image body frame image
s

Star Trek: Nemesis
Directed by Stuart Baird
2003 PG 13/12A

I love and have always loved astronomy, astrology, astrophysics, cosmology, anything to do with space. As a kid I was Isaac Asimov mad. I love early Dr Who (Tom Baker) and I cannot resist Star Wars either. But Star Trek never won my heart. I confess! I was never a trekkie! As a kid I watched the first-gen Star Trek. I was entertained and still like Captain James T Kirk. But it never really set my pants on fire. The second generation Star Trek was squeaky clean drivel, a total turn-off. (Well, OK, one or two of the chicks were not a turn-off by any means). I gave up on the whole shebang.

I returned to the Star Trek franchise briefly to discover a bossy woman running the Enterprise: she was earnestly trying to persuade alien blobs in space not to mate with the Enterprise. Honestly, I'm not making this stuff up. It was dire. Goodbye forever. And I ain't never coming back! I suspect Star Trek is a turn off because it has much to do with the fact that the programs are chocker with do-gooders. It is pious. It is horribly PC.

The touchy-feely aspects of Star Trek tried to put me in touch with my feminine side, and I rebelled. It was not a conscious decision: it was in my blood. I did not want to be preached at and patronised. Give me philosophy, nothing wrong with that at all! But give me some shit-eating characters with some bollocks, give me excitement, give me action and violence and cool special effects.

So what about Star Trek: Nemesis then? The usual Star Trek interstellar garbage dump of a plot revolves around pointy-eared alien race politics: the aliens being the Romulans and Remans (Romulans and Remans!!! Geddit?). The holes in the plot can truly be described as black. Sagittarius A has nothing on Star Trek Nemesis.

Star Trek Nemesis is barely watcheable on the big screen, but I expect some trekkies might love STN as they are better able to ignore all the usual Trekkie-style scenes that neither pay off as drama nor entertainment. This movie was surreal, a dark and gloomy Star Trek, a far cry from the ultra-sucky Star Trek Insurrection.

Patrick Stewart played jean-Luc Picard of course. This is one of the reasons I decided to watch this movie: the guy can act. He has the ability to rise above the shoddy material, to carry a bad show and, on a level, actually make it work. He often manages to overcome the cheesy dialogue but this movie must have been grim work. Without Stewart, this Star Trek Nemesis would have been even more tragic. The rest of the cast were lacklustre, Data was the most human of the lot. Even the villain was rather harmless and goofy. I did not care what happened to him or to any of them.

Star Trek Nemesis is salvaged by some surprisingly good effects and set pieces. But the post-climactic ending dragged on for far too long, I was getting bored by the time the credits rolled, as I explain in the spoilers corner below.



s s s

spoilers corner


Spoilers!!!!
Warning: this box contains a movie post-mortem analysis that freely gives away important plot twists and details. If you have not yet seen this movie and intend seeing it, avoid this spoilers box until afterwards. Bookmark the page, see the movie, see if you agree with my review then write an arsy comment saying I am talking total b*ll*cks :-)


 

During the battle, the Enterprise was shaking pretty violently, judging by the fact that the camera seemed to be perched on a mad cow, but the crew seemed unperturbed, obviously having a magical ability to withstand shocks.

Data sported a fat double chin and wrinkles. Do androids age? And if so, why was his "prototype" middle-aged-looking too? The scene where Data flew through space towards the enemy craft, like Superman, was splendid.

But later on, when Data was atomised, I was not moved at all. At first I thought my lack of emotional response was because I couldn't pity an android. But that is not the case: in the underrated AI I really did irrationally feel sorry for the little bastard android as it prayed earnestly to the Blue Fairy. That Speilberg made me pity a character played by that talented yet annoying kid was amazing. And I was very moved by the scenes involving the magic The Iron Giant! My lack of compassion for Data must be down to my total lack of empathy for the character. So the ending shots where everyone was mourning the droid that bought the farm did not resonate. Real humans died, but that did not seem to matter. Perhaps that is the real moral of Star Trek.





 


There are no more spoilers below this point, except maybe in any user talkback comments.

End of spoilers corner


s




Jim's preferred ending: I get to crash the Enterprise into the production crew

Rating: 1.5/5
score


Do you think this movie is any good?

Click on one of the buttons below

12 3456789 10
Ghastly OK Fantastic
s View Results


Add your comment to this page

add a talkback

sssss
From: ryanSubject:2006-02-09 11:29:23
s
help: how to add your comment

Page hits: 2992



body frame image body frame image
s


www.eadon.com home sweet home contents: more stuff Next uninformed movie review


www.eadon.com