Star Trek: Insurrection

Alright everyone, that time of the month came that I was scared of from the first day. If you don’t know what I am referring to, I am of course referring to the absolute worst “Star Trek” movie, “Star Trek: Insurrection,” released in 1998.

Dustin Putman started his review out by saying, “I have never been a "Star Trek" fan, and, to tell the truth, out of the five films in the series that I have seen (1,2,3,8,9), I have disliked all of them. I do, however, always go into one of these with an open mind, and the ninth film in the series, "Star Trek: Insurrection," is no exception.”

Not having the hardcore sci-fi element of “Star Trek: First Contact,” this movie tells the story of a planet that has only 600 people, called the Ba’ku, including the Fountain of Youth. At the beginning of the movie, the Ba’ku are under attack by another extraterrestrial species, known as Son’a, who want to exterminate every Ba’ku so that their own race will not be extinct. Another person the Ba’ku is attacking is Data, everyone’s favorite android from “The Next Generation.” Cut to Picard and the crew on the Enterprise, no one knows why Data was unexpectedly taken over by something else. Some of the Enterprise team beam down to the planet, where Picard encounters and falls in love with one of the inhabitants, Anji, played by Donna Murphy, who is over 600-years-old, but looks like she is in her 30s.

“Star Trek: Insurrection” is a completely uninspired and cheap-looking movie in the franchise, and is a major step down from “First Contact,” which looked like they did something different and was inspired by the show. “Insurrection,” on the other hand, plays like a rejected episode from the show because of the small-scale, standard storyline, and relying heavily on one-liners rather than what Trekkies love. Putman is right when he said, “The film was filled with nearly non-stop comedy, and worse yet, most of it fell flatter than a cartoon character that drops off a cliff.” On top of that, when there are any action scenes, they’re not engaging or new, relying on the clichéd time suspension rule of the time bomb counting down sluggishly. This plot device, which was seen in about every action movie at the time and might still be today, gets old fast. Putman asked, “Are filmmakers so bankrupt of ingenuity and ideas that they must always have a timer ticking away during the climax?”

Another element of the “Star Trek” films is that Picard always has some sort of love interest, but she somehow disappears when the next film comes out a few years later. Even though Donna Murphy, whose character is the same thankless love interest in here, is one of the few characters that we get familiar with in this movie, Alfre Woodard was “so” much better in “First Contact.” Putman stated, “She should have returned for this one, but I don't blame her for not wanting to waste her time with this movie's disappointing and often lifeless screenplay, by Michael Piller.”

Putman is right when he says, “"Star Trek: Insurrection," is perhaps the weakest film in the "Star Trek," series, although I have not seen what is widely considered the worst, "Star Trek V: The Final Frontier."” (Consider yourself blessed Putman). This movie is the type of “safe” sequel that will confuse those who aren’t fans of the series, since it is such a downgrade compared to most of the blockbuster action films at the time (although most of them were not very good, either), and does disappoint loyal Trekkies, since it could have easily been better if the makers had realized that the screenplay needed to have a few more rewrites. Actually, they probably should have put the script through the shredder. That way, they could have come up with a story that at least look smart and fresh.

Like I stated at the beginning of the review, this movie feels like a rejected episode from “The Next Generation.” Because when you look at, minus all the ethical discussion of the Ba’ku looking like cheap rip-offs of the Amish, the film overall is a bore. The action and effects look so dull that it looks like no effort was put in this. I felt like nothing was accomplished in this movie. At least all the other odd-numbered Trek films left you with something good that made you glad that you saw it, but this didn't have anything backing it, which is the worst crime for a Trek movie. This one is just totally forgettable. In all honesty, if you want to skip this one, I say go right ahead, since this falls in the same trap as the first and fifth movie. Instead, watch some of the great two-part episodes from "The Next Generation" show. Even though Trekkies and regular moviegoers say the fifth movie is the worst, I sincerely think this movie is far worse and the worst in the series.

Phew, what a relief. Now that I have gotten that horrendous movie out of the way, check in Friday for the last movie for “The Next Generation” cast, which will be a defensive review in “Star Trek Month.”