Boy, did we see different movies...
By dx31701

Quote:
It may be strange that the vacuum of space bathes the interior of the Enterprise-D in golden light, but it’s sure pretty to look at.

What was strange here is that the lighting was so drastically different than we saw for seven years. I don't know that I agree that the lighting was well done - much of the time it just looked like they simply had the lights off on the ship.

Quote:
McCarthy’s sweeping cues elevate the picture in many instances and never make the mistake of becoming mere wallpaper to the striking visuals.

Gotta disagree here, too. Yes, it had a nice theme with some rousing instances of the courage fanfare, but much of the score was the same old "wallpaper" that Berman seems to like for the TV shows. This was not a score that was really well thought through, where the music enhances the themes and becomes a storyteller and a character. This was background music that was ocassionally reasonably good, but mostly just there.

Quote:
The fact is that GENERATIONS goes into the hearts of both our captains and while the sentimental approach may not have been the best strategy for huge success at the box office, it’s a really enjoyable ride for STAR TREK fans. We see a whole new side of Kirk and the look at his life that could’ve been is entirely appropriate for what would become the character’s ultimate swan song, and a movie that tries desperately to deal with the issue of mortality. Having the swashbuckling heroes reexamine their choices as mortality creeps in is a poignant subtext to the “passing of the baton” credo permeating of the pic.

This "sentimental approach" was terrible for STAR TREK fans - i.e. for people who know these characters well. This approach to Kirk and the look at mortality was an unoriginal rehash - done and done again in previous movies. TMP - Kirk has been pulled away from the bridge and is desparate to get her back. TWOK - Kirk has been pulled away from the bridge and is desparate to get her back and faces mortality in a very real way. GEN - same ol' rehash. Doesn't this character grow? Doesn't he adjust and adapt as life changes? Yet again, Kirk can't adjust to life outside that chair.

Then, "establishing" that Kirk's greatest need in life is to be a starship Captain and to "make a difference" (I thought he wanted to explore the universe, not be a hero), we are shown that Kirk's greatest fantasy, in this Nexus that gives you what you want so badly that you never want to leave, is chores? cooking? Some woman that the audience has never seen, who Kirk is happy to drop for a horseride? Ridiculous.

In GEN Kirk becomes a throwaway character who doesn't grow - he doesn't overcome that debilitating need to be on the bridge. He doesn't learn to live life in it's next configuration. He just gets a chance to return to what the writers claim he needs - "making a difference." And then he falls off a bridge. This icon of a show and a genre and pop-culture ends up being nothing more than a catalyst for character development for Picard, and is subsequently thrown away.

There are at least two great mis-characterizations of Kirk in Star Trek that just completely get the character wrong. One is "Requeim for Methuselah" in which this Kirk, who is committed to Enterprise "with no beach to walk on" is ready to throw it all away to be with the android woman. The other is Star Trek Generations.

The characterization of Picard is less "wrong", but a definite miscalculation in terms of effective drama or storytelling. It feels forced, rather than flowing from what we know of the character, and the need to continue through offspring had been sufficiently explored on TNG.

As for Data - completely ineffective in terms of humor, completely out of place for the tone of the movie, the "shark jump" beginning the ruination of a great TNG character - the push in a downward slide which resulted in nobody even caring that Data bites it in Nemesis.

Generations is a failure as Star Trek, and barely adequate as a film.