Did I say that even at their worst, Star Trek films are still worth watching and they have a lot of good things going for them. I probably overstated that.Question From Scott: “You ranked Star Trek: Insurrection as your least favorite Trek film. Give me five good things about it.”
Andrew’s Answer: Arg. Everything was wrong with this movie from stunning plot holes to just senseless action sequences to the inexplicable conduct. Finding five good things may be impossible. But I’m up for the challenge.
1. I like the casting with a caveat. F. Murray Abraham is always a great villain. Anthony Zerbe should have made a good Admiral. And Donna Murphy could have made an excellent romantic counterpart for Capt. Picard. But there’s a caveat -- they were all wasted by horrible, horrible writing.
2. I like that they filmed part of this outside. The Next Gen always felt too stage-bound to me in that they rarely went to planets and, when they did, they rarely ended up outside in natural light and with cool scenery. This film has some great scenery.
3. I like the huskier design of the Enterprise itself, though I don’t care for the inside and I really dislike the bridge which looks setup for a rock band with competing synthesizer players.
4. I do like the scene where Picard feels younger, as evidenced by his dancing briefly. It’s about time one of the Star Trek films was about the joy of life rather than the agony of feeling old and winding down their lives.
5. I like F. Murray Abraham’s couch instead of a captain’s chair. It’s hard to imagine that in a vast universe everyone is going to buy their chairs and desks from the same Federation Generic Plastic Works. I felt this made the culture seem more real. . . provided you ignore everything else about them.
Ow my brain.
Scott’s Response: I completely agree with you on #1. The supporting cast is way too good to be starring in a second rate Star Trek film like this one.
On your second point, while it is nice to see the crew outside, the Ba'ku village simply looks like a slightly larger version of every stage-bound alien village set we saw in the series: a central building, a few support structures, and a garden. Big freaking deal. Sadly, all the location shooting caused the budget to skyrocket which meant they couldn't outfit the Ba'ku actors with alien prosthetics - it would've been fiscally and logistically impossible, which is why they all look like us. Mr. Plinkett talks about this in his Avatar review - the tendency of an audience to side with the more attractive people in a conflict.
Yeah, the Enterprise looks very good. I have no problem with the bridge, however I do have a problem with the fact that, despite being a big movie with a budget, they still had to redress most of the sets: the crew quarters, sickbay, and the library were all recycled Voyager sets. This film also introduced new dress uniforms... white tunics which make the crew look like waiters!
Oddly, I've never had a problem with Picard dancing to the mambo music. So many fans hate that scene but it's only ten seconds long! Sadly, for all of the other instances of the crew getting younger, they resorted to cheap zit and boob jokes. Yikes. On the other hand, the scene where Geordi sees the sunrise for the first time with his real eyes is nice, if a bit implausible. (Would his eyes really grow back? What happens to his occular implants?)
Ah, the couch. I can tell you're grasping at straws with this one but I'll buy it! Interestingly, one of the original designs for the Enterprise-D bridge on TNG had no captain's chair - it featured a conference table instead.
Andrew’s Reply: Yeah, the waiter outfits are horrible. You would think somebody would have realized that and scrapped them. The village is rather generic and doesn't look particularly lived-in, but then, their culture is phony as well. Plinkett does a great job taking this film apart (NSFW LINK). A conference table instead of a captain's chair? Good grief.
Hmm, I'm kinda sad that they scrapped the conference table now that I know about it. Talk about underlining TNG's liberal utopian tenancies!
ReplyDeleteOn the waiters' uniforms, I suspect the costumer was striving for "nautical." They should've put Picard in a spacey bicorne and Riker in a boater. The rest can wear dixie cups.
If I'm honest and somebody asked me to outline the plot of this film, I could not do it. It was during my post original Trek blackout period. I can't say I saw it, but can't prove I didn't either. I don't believe I saw many of the Picard films. I guess that is why they called it "The Next Generation." That said, given your comments, perhaps I didn't miss much.
ReplyDeletetryanmax, I think you're right, I think they kept going for nautical throughout the later films. That why they even did the Worf promotion thing on a ship with genuine sails. But whatever the reason, they totally looked like waiters! LOL!
ReplyDeleteYa know... a conference table right there might have exposes the series a lot earlier for many people? Arg.
Can you tell I was really struggling with this one by the way?
Jed, This is the one I never watch, even when I'm watching all the others -- it's that bad. It's the one about the people who live in paradise but the big evil oil compa... oops, federation wants to chase them off their lands so they can build a health spa there and prolong people's lives. It's got "American Indian" written all over it and it's so full of holes it's incredible.
ReplyDeleteThese people take up about 1000 square foot of the planet. Why can't the feds build their luxury hotel someone else on the planet? Why "forcibly relocate" them? And it just gets stupider from there.
I got the feeling that the writers were striving for politically correct and forgot that the Federation is politically correct.
ReplyDeletetryanmax -
ReplyDeleteYou may have been tongue in cheek but no, I don't think there was anything political about having a conference table on the bridge. :-) Roddenberry's thinking was probably along the lines of, "Well, the characters spend most of the time on the bridge anyway, so why have a separate room for discussions?"
On that note, the original plans also called for a transporter room to be adjacent to the bridge but the creators realized that there's drama to be had from characters engaged in conversation on their way to the transporter room.
Jed -
ReplyDeletePersonally, I think any Trek is worth watching once. Unfortunately, this film wears on people. A friend of mine who's a huge Trekkie hates this film with the fiery intensity of a thousand suns. It's not even a political thing - he just thinks it's a bad movie.
Joel, I've had that same thought and it makes me laugh. The federation is already the most PC thing in the universe and here they are trying to attack the federation for not being PC enough? Seriously?
ReplyDeletePlinkett also does a great job of showing his this film completely contradicts the moralizing Picard did in one of the episodes where they tried to relocate some people.
Andrew -
ReplyDeleteI actually liked that Worf's promotion was on a recreation of an old Enterprise frigate. For the most, part I enjoyed the nautical references over the years but sometimes they went too far, especially Nicholas Meyer when he did Star Trek VI and Kirk orders "Right standard rudder." Really?!?! :-)
As for the PC stuff, I can't disagree. We've discussed it before but the story development on this film was a long arduous process that involved so many different ideas and approaches. The film was originally to have a darker Heart of Darkness vibe to it with the crew "sailing up river" to this planet and experiencing changes along the way. Most of this never made it into the final product, nor did the idea of killing off Data which they saved for the next film.
Joel -
ReplyDeleteAs far as PC is concerned, I'll only say this: Insurrection is the only Trek movie or episode where I actually agree with the villains!
Scott, On the one hand, that makes sense -- why should they rush from the bridge to talk about a crisis? It's kind of silly. But the point is that the conference table would have totally made this show laughable. Can you imagine any spaceship captain having to have committee meetings before deciding what to do? At least with the conference room, it had the feel of Picard the CEO calling them in for opinions. Putting the conference room on the bridge would have been too PC.
ReplyDeleteA vision realized: LINK
ReplyDeleteScott, I don't hate this film, I just don't like it. It's nonsense and it's dull. And when it comes to deciding if I would rather watch this or anything else, anything else tends to win.
ReplyDeleteAndrew -
ReplyDeleteI know; I was only speaking for my friend. Between this and Nemesis, it's a shame the TNG crew wasn't allowed to go out with a bang like the original crew. Instead, they just ran out of gas.
Scott, I don't mind the promotion ceremony at all and I think the nautical stuff works fine. But the waiters uniforms here were just atrocious. They were instantly laughable and you would have thought someone on set would have realized that and done something to make them better or just scrapped them.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you about siding with the villains. This whole episode is nonsense. If all it takes is for people to move here for a couple weeks, then open a big spa just over the mountains... or build a space station -- being space seemed to be enough. There's no reason to move 100 people so you can take a whole planet. This was purely a fantasy ethics scenario which just made no sense.
tryanmax, Awesome! I love the com-badge on Picard's hat! LOL!
ReplyDeleteScott, tongue planted firmly in cheek. Yet, just knowing Roddenberry considered it is revealing. As humans, we arrange our environment to enforce our social structures. We may do so intentionally, but the same structures arise intuitively, almost instinctively across cultures. Even if it was just his instincts that fostered the idea, that certainly says something about Roddenberry's instincts.
ReplyDeletePlus, can you just imagine Picard scooting around a table to take his feet in front of the view screen? Now, if the ship were captained by Don Corleone, he'd never have to get up.
Scott, Yeah, they really didn't do a good job ending the films did they? They should have used the series finale as a movie, that would have been an awesome ending.
ReplyDeletetryanmax -
ReplyDelete(Nice artwork!)
Yeah, the conference table is one of those ideas that sounds good on paper but the execution would never work (where have we heard that before?!).
Now if they gave Picard a white cat... :-)
Andrew -
ReplyDeleteOn the Generations commentary, Ron Moore says that they did a better job on the finale than on the film and he wishes the finale had been the first TNG movie. So you're definitely not alone in that regard. Q always seemed to be waiting for his big-screen debut but actor John de Lancie, while talented, isn't exactly a big star. Then again, these films never depended on A-list supporting talent so maybe it wouldn't have mattered.
As for the uniforms, it's a shame considering First Contact had great costume design; Insurrection not so much. Then again, all the Starfleet uniforms were designed by the same guy anyway. It'd be interesting to see the rejected dress uniform concepts that didn't make it into the film.
tryanmax, Very true, our choices are revealing. And I think what Roddenberry's instinct revealed was a desire to turn what should be a command-structure into a cooperative. I think you see that throughout the show. Why else would they have a shrink sitting next to the captain? And why else would they rely on different members of the crew each week to solve the crisis? It's because Roddenberry didn't like the idea of having a leader and he wanted "leadership by consensus" (a management school oxymoron if there ever was one).
ReplyDeleteScott, A white cat would have been awesome... and a monocle!
ReplyDeleteOn the uniforms, I think they wasted their budget always changing the uniforms. They could well have stuck with the same dang uniforms throughout and I doubt anyone would have whined. The original cast did that once they got the red jackets.
On the script problems, I could go on and on about why I think they failed, but I won't. I'll just say that (1) I don't think they understand how films work (as compared to television) and (2) I don't think they genuinely understood the Star Trek TNG property. Otherwise, they could easily have come up with something much stronger for each film. The mistakes they make are both amateurish and show a serious lack of grasp for what made the series click.
Wanna see something really scary? I can't believe I found this but I remember the TV spots for this film tried to portray it as an action extravaganza.
ReplyDeleteAnd the tagline was... "Get warped"
Seriously!
tryanmax, That's great! LOL!
ReplyDeleteI watched this movie twice. The first time because I wanted to see it and the second time because I wanted to see if it was as bad as I remember. There just isn't anything I really like about this film. It's not that the film is a total mess (except for the constant plot holes), it's just pointless somehow.
Scott, That could well have been the trailer I saw. I recall seeing the TV ads and thinking, "wow, that looks really exciting." What a load. Totally false advertising.
ReplyDeleteDUQ, To me, the first big problem is the plot holes. As I watched it, I kept thinking, "why don't they just ___" over and over again. That's a really bad sign for a film. And yeah, beyond that the movie just sort of meandered.
ReplyDeleteAndrew -
ReplyDeleteIf you needed a sixth thing, you could've mentioned Jerry Goldsmith's score. You may not have even noticed it but it's a good one. He managed to turn crap into gold on more than one occasion. :-)
I'm trying to find the new interview they did for the DVD where Jonathan Frakes admits the film wasn't all that it could've been but it seems to be the one thing YouTube doesn't have.
Scott, When has Jerry Goldsmith ever turned in a bad score? I will say, however, that I don't see anything special about this one.
ReplyDeleteAndrew, You were clearly struggling! LOL!
ReplyDeleteDoc -
ReplyDeleteI like this score. There's some great "pastoral" material in it, and I say that as someone who loves loud, bombastic stuff. I especially enjoy the cue New Sight.
I wouldn't say Goldsmith has done any downright terrible scores (though some film music fans may point to oddities like Link)... however, he may have been on auto-pilot for a while in the 90s.
Doc, I was struggling big time. It was surprisingly hard to find good things in this movie once I started thinking about it.
ReplyDeleteScott, There was indeed a point where all of his stuff began to sound very generic -- especially the Jerry Bruckheimer stuff. I personally don't remember the score from this one either.
ReplyDeleteGoldsmith never did any Bruckheimer stuff (unless I'm misreading your post and you're referring to a "style" of music and not the producer himself).
ReplyDeleteHowever, I agree every composer can come off as generic after a while. Even Goldsmith's action music for this film isn't anything special.
But since I'm weird, I pay attention to this stuff. :-D
Huh, you're right. All these years I've been wrongly blaming Goldsmith for Hans Zimmer's crimes. Who knew?
ReplyDeleteHans Zimmer has en entire cadre of composers under the banner of Remote Control Productions. Many of these guys like Harry Gregson-Williams and John Powell have done great work on their own (Zimmer, too) but whenever they're called to work for Bruckheimer or any Bruckheimer wannabe, it all sounds the same.
ReplyDeleteI'd love to see a return to grandiose film scores, except: a.) studio execs are convinced people think such scores are "corny," b.) film schools really don't focus on film scoring and many directors don't know how to deal with composers, and c.) it's expensive!
There are exceptions. I just downloaded Michael Giacchino's John Carter score. I haven't seen the film (like most of America, sadly), but the score is very good.
Scott, It does. Bruckheimer's soundtracks literally sound interchangeable. It's a musical cliche at this point in my opinion and it detracts from films.
ReplyDelete@Scott... Q should've been on the big screen. I think John De Lancie could have won folks over. I also wish they'd pursued the Vash/Picard romance. I know the actress is a TV actress -- but she was beautiful -- maybe she could've made a move to big screen. She was an archaeologist for Pete's sake... they could've still worked in a PC storyline AND let Picard lighten up a bit.
ReplyDeleteFloyd -
ReplyDeleteI haven't seen the Vash episodes in years but I was always hoping they'd rekindle the Picard/Beverly romance and I think Nemesis was the best time to do it - Riker and Troi got married so there was, to borrow a phrase, "love in the air."
Andrew -
ReplyDeleteI'm working my way through screenwriter Michael Piller's unpublished book on the writing of this film, looking for some interesting revelations:
For this ninth installment of the series, Rick thought it would be interesting to find a classic story in public domain and adapt it to Star Trek. His first idea was “The Prisoner of Zenda.” Rick suggested that perhaps the Captain of the Starship Enterprise, Jean-Luc Picard, is kidnapped and another man, cosmetically altered to look like him, takes his place as Captain. I felt the audience was coming to see Picard, a popular hero who’d been away from the screen for two years. How would they feel when he’s kidnapped in the opening scenes and the movie is turned over to another character who happens to be played by the same actor? When Rick heard my concerns, he agreed.
I almost wish they had gone with this idea instead!
We started considering possible villains. The Romulans, an imperialistic, fascist race of aliens, had been long-standing enemies of the United Federation of Planets (the good guys) and had never been used in a movie before. Perhaps the story could be set against the threat of a new outbreak of war with the Romulans. We also talked about the idea that someone in the Federation itself might be involved with the Romulans in a conspiracy to steal the fountain of youth. This was no small matter. As I’ve said, a fundamental part of Gene Roddenberry’s vision is that humanity has evolved as a species by the Twenty-Fourth Century. There might be a bad apple now and then but as a rule, the humans of the Federation were pure and good. Rick and I were very protective of Roddenberry’s vision. But we liked the idea of someone in Starfleet Command sending Picard on a mission without telling him the entire truth.
So that was there from the beginning but the Romulans would've been an interesting villain.
Floyd, I agree. I think both Q and or Vash would have been excellent choices. Both were very charismatic and had well-written personalities which would have brought a lot of life to the films.
ReplyDeleteScott, I hate to say this, but those two passages show me the problem: they don't know how to plot a story.
ReplyDeleteWhen you are trying to come up with a story, it's a HUGE mistake to start by taking isolated ideas and then trying to craft a plot around them. In other words, you can't create a worthwhile plot when you say, "I want a story which includes the following three or four subplots." When you do that, you end up with a disjointed plot that really only holds the subplots together. Instead, you need to come up with the plot first and then massage it to see if you can fit in your elements. And if you can't, then you drop the subplots. It sounds like these guys sat around thinking up cool ideas and then tried to tie the jumble together into a film. That would actually explain the incredible plot holes in this turkey.
The movie should have been an episode(45 min.)of STNG. But I would say that about all of the STNG movies.
ReplyDeleteAs far as this one goes, the setting combined with the soundtrack, made the planet where the Baku(sp?)lived look like a nice place. But sadly for me that's where it ended, other than a good laugh at Riker steering the E with a joystick.
It looked like the cast was having midlife issues with the desire to be young again. So lets make a movie about it.
Its very common for studios to reuse sets. They have been reusing sets(and props) that were from TMP.
Andrew -
ReplyDeleteI agree, though I did skip over one part in the book where Piller comes up with the initial concept: finding the Fountain of Youth.
April 1997, the pitch -
I came back to Rick with a premise I called “Heart of Lightness.” I told him we’d be using a structure based on Heart of Darkness, but that the trip “up the river” would lead Picard and his crew on a very different kind of adventure.
“We open at Starfleet Academy in Picard’s youth,” I told him, “Establishing Picard as a curly-haired, high-spirited cadet. We give him a best friend, another cadet who is as close to Picard as any man has ever been and ever
will be.
“Flash forward to the present day and find adult Picard being given a mission by Starfleet Command. His old friend is now a wanted man -- he’s been attacking ships in an unexplored region of space and no one knows why. Picard
has to track him down and if necessary, kill him.
The Enterprise sets off through this mysterious region and the crew begins to act in unusual ways. We don’t know why yet. After several curious incidents, they finally find the hiding place of Picard’s old friend. Picard
transports down to the planet and discovers that he looks exactly the same as he did at the Academy! We ultimately learn that this is a fountain of youth and somebody is trying to steal it from the people who live there. Picard’s friend has been defending the natives on the planet.”
It's interesting how close it is to the actual film, though the Academy friend more or less turned into Data and the mystery aspect isn't emphasized as much.
Commander -
ReplyDeleteYeah, I know they'd been reusing sets and props forever. It seems to be a Star Trek tradition. Sometimes it's more blatant than others. The films in the 80s, I could understand since those were never big budget films but once we got to the late 90s/early 2000s, you'd think they'd have a few bucks to spare.
Who am I kidding? All that money went to Patrick Stewart and Brent Spiner. :-)
You won't have to worry about sets being reused. After the Christie's auction most are gone. It is interesting to see just how much stuff gets reused in shows. To use STNG as an example the Oscillation Overthruster from Buckaroo Banzai was all over that show. It even made it into First Contact. Scott I don't know how much you know of this stuff. But Hollywood props have a long and interesting history, not just the props themselves. But the events around those props are the sort of thing that Andrew could put into a book.
ReplyDeleteFunny I thought the STNG films were the low budget films. But that might be my perception that the STNG films never really went beyond the little screen.
Max, I have to agree. This was a much harder question than it appeared once I started trying to find good things to say about the film.
ReplyDeleteI agree about sets, they get reused all the time. I think the key is to not make them appear reused. I think the biggest flaw with the village in this case was that it never felt lived in. It looked and felt plastic, like it had just been built and was only touched for filming. There was no sense of the wear and tear you always see in real life.
Scott, That would have made a much better movie. In terms of how close it is to the current film, however, I honestly don't see much of that PLOT in this film. That plot was about Picard going up river to hunt his friend. That's resolved in the first two minutes of Insurrection. All that's left after that is the element of the fountain of youth, which Picard doesn't even need to find -- he's told where it is.
ReplyDeleteAt that point, the actual plot of the movie kicks in, and it's basically whether or not Picard will help these American Indians against the evil United States who want to relocate them for inexplicable reasons. So I honestly don't see any Heart of Darkness or Lightness in this.
Max, I understand that props do have quite a history and I'm always amazed when you hear about some item being used in multiple films throughout the years until it's sold at private action. Interesting stuff.
ReplyDeleteI have no problem with props or sets being re-used if it makes sense. For example, I see no reason to keep redesigning the Enterprise bridge for each movie, or the uniforms. I think that's a waste of time and money that should have been better spent on story development.
Max and Andrew -
ReplyDeleteI'm not too familiar with Hollywood props in general but as far as Trek is concerned, oh yeah! I even knew about the oscillation overthruster - they even gave it to Peter Weller's character when he guest starred on Enterprise.
The TNG films were never given A-list summer blockbuster budgets but between the four films, the budgets slowly crept up, but Stewart and Spiner's salaries did as well.
As for reused props, check out this website and scroll down to the Graphics, Props & Costumes section - it's a time suck but very informative!
Scott, that is uber-nerdish. It is simply a fact that it is impossible to make the Star Trek history consistent because the show's producers never cared. And trying to explain the inconsistencies is like trying to find a theory is an exercise in insanity.
ReplyDeleteSadly, many Trek fans love to explain the inconsistencies: why the bridge looked a certain way in one film but not in another. I don't go that far but I enjoy reading it. Sometimes.
ReplyDeleteI won't say the producers never cared but there were times when they could've cared a little more. TV production can be a bitch.
And I'm using "uber-nerdish" for the title of my autobiography. :-)
I stand by the "never cared." There are too many blatantly obvious inconsistencies for me to think they ever thought about it. They just took the big pieces (warp, Klingons, Romulans, Vulcans, prime directive, etc.) and just used them however they saw fit in whatever episode or film they were making. I can understand minor inconsistencies, but not the big blatant ones they create.
ReplyDeleteI've been around the prop world for some time.
ReplyDeleteIt's been an experience.
Even though there is a lot of info online about the stuff used in these shows. It takes a bit a time and work to get to the neat stuff. Since it's not on the net.
Take a glance around this board, www.thereplicapropforum.com
Andrew will like this one,
http://www.startrekhistory.com/index2.html
Andrew is right, the producers really didn't care. Berman has stated as much publicly.
The producers are there to control such things, so it wouldn't hard to keep ST in line. But if a producer isn't into it. Then it becomes a money thing. IMO the latter ST would have been a much better and far more exciting show. If they were strict on ST history. But since we got what we got, it's clearly a money thing.
To add, they were hoping the ST franchise would end after each movie came out. But the popularity continued until it peaked in the mid nineteen nineties. By the time Enterprise came out the franchise was in essence dead. It was still just as dead when the JJ STINO came out. They were hoping to revitalize the franchise, since it was a huge cash cow in the past. But like so many other reboots it failed, so they are going to keep trying. Just what they have done with so many other franchises in past years.
ReplyDeleteST really needs to be put to rest. Or at least given a very very long rest.
Max, Thanks for the links. Here's the first: Forum and the second: History.
ReplyDeleteJJ STINO... excellent name for it! :)
I think you're right about the intent of the various parties. I've never seen anyone since Roddenberry who "loved it." Instead, the actors seem to tolerate (I recall Stewart denigrating it on more than one occasion) and the producers seemed to see it as a chore or job. I think Abrams saw it as a potential cash cow. But I've never seen anyone connected to the show who loved it.
Max, Interesting site.
ReplyDeleteThe most obvious thing is the disdain of the fans. Not like in some cases it isn't deserved. But regardless the various parties should conduct themselves more professionally. Not unlike the entertainers who show a public disdain of those of us conservatives, Republicans, etc. Do they realize what they are doing, or do they care. That we cannot say, regardless their image is tarnished. At least labeled a jerk(I prefer more a colorful metaphor;)). Thank goodness not all of the people who worked on Trek are jerks. I once met Michael Dorn(I was in a Klingon costume). I said to him I have some appreciation of what it's like to get into and wear the makeup and costume everyday. He stated, "Not everyday". He said it with a smile, then he signed my batlith(sp?). That was my highlight of the day.
ReplyDeleteAndrew I knew you would find it interesting. That's one of best sites on STTOS out there. I wish they would update it more often. There is more info out there.
Max, I've just spent the past hour going over the site. It's truly excellent! I've been reading about the effects and the big Enterprise model. Very, very cool!
ReplyDeleteDorn has always struck me as a really cool guy. His interviews are always fun to watch and he seems to love the fans. From what I've seen, Frakes and Wil Wheaton appear just as nice.
I never have understood the disdain for the fans that the producers showed? I mean, in some ways they were great. I knew several people who loved the idea that fans could submit scripts. That's a really great touch. But then I would see interviews where they acted like the fans were pests, and then the next film or whatever would come out and they would spend their time denigrating everything about Star Trek. I particularly recall a lot of condescension and venom poured out at the original show in interview after interview, and often times they would denigrate the prior seasons of the new show. I never understood why they seemed to hold the whole property in such low regard?
I have seen Frakes make some negative comments but that was well over 20 years ago. That was on the Arsenio Hall show(if you remember that far back), it's hard to say whether or not it was an act. After all actors are prone to do that:).
ReplyDeleteOne would assume that it would be very unwise to knock what earns you an income. But...
But when it comes to ST the fans seem to enjoy the beating.
Max, I do indeed remember Arsenio Hall. That was many moons ago!
ReplyDeleteI never saw the particular comments from Frakes, but you are correct that isn't very wise. I think the thing is that some of these actors come in with the idea that they're bigger than science fiction and they look down upon it like it was "just a paycheck." That's always been the attitude shown by Stewart every time I've seen him discuss the role. He always spoke of it as just a lessor role and gave the impression that he wanted to say, "I'm a real actor, forget this Picard thing... I was slumming."
Yeah, the ST fans seems enjoy the beating. Sad.
Your comment on Stewart makes me think of the Sir Alexander Dane character from Galaxy Quest.
ReplyDeleteWho did say, "I was an actor once".
You were not the only one to have that observation.
Max, LOL! Yeah, Dane has come to mind a couple times. I love how upset he gets about being typecast and how all anyone wants is for him to repeat that one line.
ReplyDeleteGlad to hear I'm not alone in observing that.