Star Trek: Insurrection (1998) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
527 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Whoever said this was the worst Star Trek film is so wrong!
boyinflares30 September 2006
In my personal opinion, and as an avid Next Generation fan, without a doubt "Insurrection" is one of the best Star Trek films, and the third outing for Picard, Riker, Deanna and the rest of the Next Generation crew stays most true to their esteemed television series. This time round, the crew are faced with a violation of the Prime Directive and whether or not the 600 people who live on a literal planet-of-youth are more important than the millions of other people that could benefit from the planet's regenerative powers. Action, drama, comedy and romance follow in true Star Trek spectacular.

As always Patrick Stewart is in top form as Captain Picard who leads the Star Trek resistance to save the innocents from one of his own corrupt superiors Vice Admiral Dougherty (played terrifically by Anthony Zerbe) who are involved with some aliens (including F. Murray Abraham's Ad'har). Along the way Picard finds a new friend in Anij (played by the lovely Donna Murphy), one of the Ba'ku, and a little romance follows.

Jonathan Frakes once again directs and does an outstanding job, though it does mean his character Commander Riker gets a bit less screen time, though he is always a pleasure to watch. Riker's relationship with Commander / Counsellor Deanna Troi heats up in this film (and it's about time too!) Marina Sirtis of course returns as the lovely Troi and gets a fairly good amount of screen time this time round, and certainly most of the comical moments. Frakes and Sirtis have great chemistry together.

Brent Spinter's Data gets (as usual) too much screen time, again his story consists of his quest to become more human and the like, though he does befriend a Ba'ku child which was done quite well. As usual Gates McFadden (Dr. Beverly Crusher), Michael Dorn (Lt. Commander Worf) and LeVar Burton (Lt. Commander LaForge) are given very little to do in the Star Trek films, and this one is no exception, though at least Worf and LaForge got their own small story lines - Worf had to go through puberty again and LaForge found himself with the ability to see. Beverly however only gets a "storyline" involving her boobs firming up. Terrific. Poor Gates must be the most under-appreciated actress in all of Star Trek, but also the most gracious for returning each time.

The special effects of "Star Trek: Insurrection" are above average, and the music score is really well done. Often its the small moments in the Next Generation films that are the best, and this one is no different, but at least the big moments are good too. I think the "Star Trek the Next Generation" films are probably the only action-type films in which the heroes are all (with the exception of Marina Sirtis) in their 50's and people still want to watch them. Quite interesting too that a main theme of the movie was the eternal youth. At least when the sad time comes that the Next Generation cast are no longer alive, they will be immortalised in history by their much loved characters and beautiful stories, just like "Insurrection".
80 out of 120 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
Its not as bad as some say.
DanPacino3 June 2001
Don't let some of the bad reviews for this film put you off watching it. I finally got around to watching it last week and I must say that It was no where near as bad as what some people have said about it. In-fact I thought it was pretty good. It's not the best Star Trek film but it's not the worst either. Some people have criticized it by saying that it looks like an extended television episode- All the films except 'the motion picture' have - what's the point of changing the television look and feel when it is so good? The one time they did try to change it from the episode feel (the motion picture) it was crap. Come on people, this is Star Trek - what were you expecting - this was not meant to be another Shawshank Redemption. I like this film so I'm going to give it 8 out of 10 because I don't care what other people say.
66 out of 103 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
Genuinely Entertaining. What a movie!
Drew-367 January 1999
I would say that this movie rivals the skill of the first "Next Generation" movie, First Contact. If anything, the dialogue is more refined and the humour, of which there is a great deal, is well timed and raised smiles at suitable points in the movie. Many have criticised the writers for either making the humour too silly or, for not daring to take the jokes to the belly-laugh level. Personally, I think the film is richer for the homour, which seems natural, not forced, and generally hit its targets. After all though, it's not a comedy.

Insurrection is a movie which displays far more humanity than the cold, but nevertheless enthralling, First Contact. To compare the movies is difficult, as they are very different, and opinions will inevitably clash. Both movies have a different agenda, I think.

I would dare to say that Insurrection would do a better job at converting people to the Star Trek "cause" than would any of the other films. Before watching, I knew little about Star Trek, and it really stoked my interest in the series. In evaluating Insurrection I realised that the film has several outstanding set-pieces, some of which are very memorable, such as the high-speed chase between Picard and Data through the cloud layers, with The Captain trying to coax Data into performing a scene from Gilbert and Sullivan's HMS Pinafore. The scene is outrageous, and very surreal, and extremely well done. Another example would be the attack of the flying miniature transporter robots, where Worf really gets to prove how brave, and violent, he really is.

Finally, the acting is universally good, and Stewart puts in a performance of depth, although not as impressive as in First Contact. The plot of Insurrection is slight, and alone doesn't manage to hold the attention. But the other elements that go into producing a good movie, such as the script, acting, directing, and, dare I say it, special effects, add up to an entertaining whole.

I think that free of the limitations imposed by the "classic trek" rules, and the campy acting that dogged the earlier Trek flicks, the Star Trek franchise will flourish, and this movie shows how much a cast enjoying what they are doing adds to the fun and feel-good factor of watching the film with a cinema full of enthralled viewers. Well done Jonathan Frakes!
65 out of 109 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
Star surprise
Chronus13 June 2000
Let me say this: I loved this movie. I'm not one of those unconditional trekkies, but I liked this movie a lot.

And this one, by actor/director Jonathan Frakes, is a good piece of entertainment. It's intelligent, sometimes surprising, has good action (albeit the tactics and manoeuvres of Star Trek ships are quite ridiculous - whatever the movie) and the actors chosen for this one are good performers.

The Star Trek Universe is complex, rich, but not my favourite. There seem to be holes in its consistency - technology seems to be less advanced in fields where it should have been far ahead, politics seems too much like politics on any country on Earth, and society a replica of USA's, Europe's or Japan's society, military tactics seem no different of manouvering battleships like Submarines, Frigates, Air Carriers, etc. At least, there is some effort to put some science into Star Trek - even if we do not know what metaphase is or why the explosion of metronium gas is so destructive in space.

The script is too simple, I grant that. But the way Insurrection was shot, the special moments achieved, a couple of twists in the plot, a reasonable dose of uncertainty and humour, leads me to say we are in the presence of a Star Trek masterpiece.

It's a pity that the main motor of events isn't some larger than life quest or fight (or is it?). Those of us who grew up familiar with the grand scale of events of the Star Wars saga, the details and realism of Blade Runner and Twelve Monkeys, the ingenuity of Batman, Dark City, The Matrix, expect of movies like Insurrection something that tops or equals these other masterpieces, and when that doesn't happen, something seems to fail.

But Insurrection ends up being a good work by someone that had only directed some episodes of Star Trek - The next Generation.

Well, the special effects are good, the acting is good (Patrick Stewart, Donna Murphy, Zerbe, Murray Abraham, Frakes, Levar Burton, Brent Spinner - they know exactly what to do and give this movie the extra-consistency), the soundtrack is ok.

If mr. Jonathan Frakes read this, I would advise him to continue his good work but to seek more complex and elaborated scripts for Star Trek. If he chooses to direct other types of movies, he does have the talent.

I hope you all enjoy this.
6 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
A Brilliant Piece of Work...
spaceboy_a27 January 2003
This is probably the best of the recent Trek films. Honestly, I don't know why many people don't like it when production wise, it couldn't have been any better. Each scene is nicely constructed and utilizes all the necessary ingredients of film making.

OK, the story was simple but for what the story was, screen writer Michael Piller, wrote a screenplay that is so polished, that every one-liner was perfectly timed and the dialogue was very sharp. The drama and story unfolded not too slowly and not too fast. The characterization was fantastic particularly the conflict between Piracy and Admiral Ross. It's a story about fighting for what you believe in, which every character in the film, even the bad guys, does until the bitter end.

There is no rules that says a science fiction film or Star Trek must have a complex storyline, but a storyline that tells a story and tells it well is what Insurrection does perfectly

I don't enjoy action films and I think 'Star Trek: First Contact' is one of the most overrated sci-fi actioneers in years. Insurrection had a very human story and is also very audience friendly for those who have never seen Star Trek.

I think people need to take another look at this film and ask what is wrong with it apart from the story being too simple? Production design looks great, the film is beautifully shot, Jerry Goldsmith's score was perfect, and the energy from performances from the entire cast comes off in the film like no other Star Trek movie.

'Star Trek: Insurrection' is a very underrated film, and a film that deserves way more credit.

SCORE: 9 out of 10
61 out of 107 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
Strong if unspectacular Star Trek film
TimBoHannon18 March 2007
"We are betraying the principles upon which the Federation was founded," states Captain Jean-Luc Picard 49 minutes into the ninth Star Trek film, "It's an attack upon its very soul." "Jean-Luc," answers his superior, Admiral Dougherty, "We're only moving six-hundred people." "How many people does it take, Admiral, before it becomes wrong," asks Picard in return, "A thousand. Fifty Thousand. A million?"

The above exchange occurs during Insurrection's key scene. The entire first half of the film meticulously builds to this conversation between Starfleet officers. Dougherty (Anthony Derbe) justified his actions because the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Picard (Patrick Stewart) sights the Prime Directive, which prohibits interference with other cultures or their natural development. The two officers had remained on a collision course until the moment when something had to give.

The conflict begins during a routine survey. Insurrection opens with a gorgeous panorama of an agrarian village. Children frolic about in the tall grass outside the perimeter. Farmers lift gates to aqueducts, women laugh pleasantly as they slam down their bread dough for kneading and the blacksmith works away. We are treated to long panoramic looks at the restful town and its benign inhabitants, the Ba'ku. Members of a culture survey walk about unnoticed in their isolation suits, invisible to the eye. Director Jonathan Frakes' willingness to take so much time introducing the audience to the setting demonstrates an unusual amount of focus for a movie like this.

The peace is shattered when Data (Brent Spiner) begins acting wildly. He exposes the survey and follows with many more bizarre and aggressive actions. The architects of survey, Admiral Dougherty and the So'na leader Ad'har Ru'afo (F. Murray Abraham) orbit above the planet. Data's behavior puzzles and scares them, and they ask Picard how to destroy him.

Delaying his orders, Picard (Patrick Stewart) arrives and successfully captures Data. Against the wishes of Dougherty, Picard stays to determine why his android became a loose cannon. Picard acquaints himself with Anij (Donna Murphy), a Ba'ku woman who informs him that Data told the Ba'ku that the survey team was their enemy. A short investigation uncovers a conspiracy to forcibly remove the Ba'ku from their planet.

The planet, buried deep in a gaseous cloud called the Briar Patch, has rings that act as a fountain of youth to its inhabitants. Dougherty and Ru'afo believe that the planet must be used for medical reasons, and Picard is forced to make the choice to abandon the Ba'ku or violate his orders.

It is at this point when the film accelerates. The conflict becomes a proverbial chess match between grand masters as the Enterprise crew tries to keep the planet inhabited. Both sides devise as many solutions as they can think of to accomplish their missions. The audience is almost invited to participate as the movie keeps them wondering what the next move will be.

The script shines with an abnormal level of polish. It deftly handles the question of whether an officer should obey orders or stand up for what is right. Almost every line flawlessly captures the writers' intent and communicates them to the viewers with beautiful yet easily understood diction. Every character sounds expressive and well educated. The dialogue is free-flowing and enjoyable. There is even a scene where Picard calms Data with a rousing rendition of "A British Tar." I imagine the production staff had a good laugh when they thought of that one.

The acting is of the highest Trek standards. Abraham, one of the true gentlemen in Hollywood, is exceptionally good as Ru'afo. He is so superior that he has every subtlety mastered. The way his face sneers when he says "Eliminate them," his vocal inflections, his different postures, his mannerisms, the passion and disdain in his voice all point to the work of a true master. Hatred seems to perspire from his every pore. A blood vessel bursts in his face and we can almost see hate flowing out of it. His friend Gellatin (Gregg Henry) is constantly talking him out of more extreme decisions. For Ru'afo, it is personal, but we do not find out why until the final act. He tops it all off with the best scream of anguish and frustration ever captured on film. Ru'afo may not quite be the most effective Star Trek villain, but Abraham's acting is the best in the series. He is not the most prolific actor, but he is arguably one of the best ever.

Sadly, some of the story devices fall flat. In First Contact, the Enterprise was the most advanced starship ever made. Its quantum torpedoes were so powerful that it seemed nigh invincible. Here, however, it is too weak. There is one exchange where it is fighting with two So'na ships and seems badly overmatched. The Enterprise-E was designed to take on small fleets and win. If the Federation could defeat "the Borg, the Cardassians, the Dominion," why can't the crown jewel of its fleet defeat two So'na cruisers? It is even controlled at one point by simple joystick. I never knew flying a 700-meter starcraft was so simple. Redemption does come with the ingenious denouement of the fight. There are also other moments that do not work, and some jokes fall flat.

In the end, Insurrection shoots itself in the foot. It also suffers from following First Contact and the Borg. It is an entirely different production with different goals. It may hurt itself, but in the end it is solid enough entertainment to rate a seven out of ten.
24 out of 43 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
Sebastian J.8 April 2006
This is one of the best Star Trek movies! It is exciting, funny and supported by Jerry Goldsmith's fourth Star Trek score. In contrast to Star Trek-First Contact very many scenes of the film do not play on the Enterprise, but on the paradise-like planet of the Ba'ku. This film is not only exciting, it also criticizes society. In many countries, for example in Ireland, people of the same races fight each other. This movie illustrates that these fights are senseless and that all people belong to one race. Jerry Goldsmith's score is also very extraordinary which makes the movie even more worth watching. Especially the Ba'ku theme is so good that you have after having seen this movie a good impression of it.
31 out of 58 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
Highly entertaining
CharltonBoy2 January 2000
If you are a Star Trek fan( of which i am) you will not be disappointed by Insurrection. The story is good and the acting is up to it's high standards the only let downs are the lack of any real great special affects and the lame enemies. I would not say this is as good as first contact but never the less well worth watching. 7 out of 10
30 out of 57 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
The worst TNG movie ever!!!
jimconnell-217 January 2007
Warning: Spoilers
So let's get this straight: The Federation has partnered with an alien race to harness the power of a planet's rings, adding years of lifespan to literally trillions of beings throughout the galaxy...the only thing they need do is re-locate 600 squatters (who have no more legal right to the planet as anyone else).

This seems like a good deal, right? Isn't this what Spock taught? "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few"? Apparently not, because Picard mounts an "insurrection" to stop the deal, after calculating that a forced relocation was more of a moral outrage than the squatter's hording of life-extending powers, denying trillions of federation members additional years of life.

So what does he do? He leads the squatters (a bunch of pacifist hippie beatniks who've rejected technology to embrace blissed ignorance) into a series of collapsing mountain caves to thwart efforts by the "bad guys" to beam the squatters to safety. Picard figures that the bad guys won't tap this fountain of youth until the squatters are off the surface (which will be scorched during the process).

I don't know what's worse...(a) the fact that Picard is naive enough to use the squatters as human shields in hopes that the bad guys aren't really bad enough to kill them, or (b) the fact that we have bad guys who aren't really bad enough to kill the squatters. Either way, this is easily the worst Star Trek plot ever conceived.

I haven't even discussed the nonsense with the chick that can inexplicably slow down time when she feels like it, or the plot demands. Or, when Whorf gets acne, or the Picard-Data duet, or the girlish scream the bad guy releases when he's tricked, or the countless other insults and indignities this film inflicts upon the viewer. Utter rubbish. Rent II, III, IV and VI
21 out of 38 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
If you like Star Trek TNG..See Insurrection
Poochafalafell23 September 2004
It's safe to assume a lot of people think that " Star Trek : Insurrection " is more like a 2 hour episode of TNG then a film. But if you like the Star Trek TNG series then you should see Insurrection.

Personally i loved "First Contact" so when i saw "Insurrection" i wasn't expecting it to be better then First Contact. I wasn't expecting anything. Whenever i see a Star Trek movie it IS like seeing another Star Trek episode... I don't compare it to last weeks. I just want to see what the crew has to face this time and if/how they make it out OK. This Film is also filled with comedy which always works for me.
20 out of 36 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
Score is captivating
jmarcel6 June 2000
Insurrection features a wonderful score during the opening sequence and throughout. This added to my enjoyment of the film. I have to admit, the battle sequence between the Enterprise and the S'ona ships is too fast, poorly edited and unimpressive. Overall, however, I enjoyed the performances from Stewart and Donna Murphy and the light-hearted tone of the film. While not in the same league as First Contact, Insurrection is a satisfying Sci-Fi film which feels more like a good tv episode (with great cinematography). Don't expect FC and you'll do fine with this movie.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
better than I remembered it being, but still not great.... here's why
funkyfry20 November 2007
Warning: Spoilers
It was interesting to rewatch and reevaluate "Insurrection" because at the time when I saw it in the theater I was extremely disappointed. I even felt a little ripped off, because the whole affair felt to me like a pretty standard Star Trek episode stretched like the skin of the alien villains in the film well past the point of integrity. I also felt disappointed that Berman and the other Paramount decision makers had further abandoned any attempt at character development or continuity between films in the series.

There just seems to be a lack of ambition and imagination surrounding the entire project. Although I definitely enjoyed it much more this time around – maybe it's just that an extended ST:TNG episode is more appealing now in 2007 than it was in 1998… the show has been off the air for a few years now and is barely syndicated at this point. But I also noticed some positive qualities – Geordi LaForge was always my favorite supporting character in the show and he gets his best scene in the series here watching a sunset with Picard after gaining his vision. F. Murray Abraham is as good as the script will let him be and the makeup effect is pretty striking (I love how he starts bleeding from pores in his face when he gets angry). There are some excellent set pieces like the bit with Picard and Worf chasing down a renegade Data and singing Gilbert and Sullivan to pacify him. The first time I saw it I was confused by the characters departing so much from their established personalities, but this time I realized it was due to the sci-fi element, the effects of the planet's healing properties on the crew. From that perspective it's very nice to see characters reverting back to earlier behavior and I like seeing the clean-shaven Riker again though I never bought his relationship to Troi.

But the essential reality hasn't changed. The sets and locations look and feel exactly like a dozen episodes of the Next Generation show, and the costumes for the aliens are downright mundane. It's impossible not to be reminded of little Wesley Crusher (thank the gods of ST that he and Alexander did not make film appearances) getting in trouble for throwing a ball in the bushes, when you see these perfect and mellow people in their "paradise." The direction by Frakes is standard TV direction just like in "First Contact." Too much of the story revolves around the 2 central plot twists, and you can almost feel the commercial break coming on. Abraham's villain is fun to look at and the concept is good, but he never really confronts Picard or the Enterprise in such a way that the conflict feels personal. Donna Murphy is a fine actress and it's great to see Picard "hook up", but their love affair is too gentle to be believable, totally lacking in drama, and then it's dispensed with at the conclusion far too easily…. Again, just like a TV episode in which the consequences of the episode cannot intrude into the flow of the series.

One thing I did like, however, was the central concept – the search for immortality is universal and compelling, and tying it into the history of "forced relocations" adds the kind of real-world resonance that "First Contact" and the first 3 films in the original series were lacking. The fact that members of the Federation are in a conspiracy and that their motives remain ambiguous even after the conspiracy is uncovered is also very much in the spirit of the best qualities of the Next Generation show with its increased emphasis on political intrigue, another element missing from previous Star Trek films (with the notable exception of "The Undiscovered Country." Another interesting story element of note – on the commentary for "1st Contact" regular series writers Brannon Braga and Ronald Moore discuss an original draft in which Picard remains on the planet and is involved in a love affair while Riker fights the aliens in space as a "B plot" (btw, it's telling how even now the screenwriters discuss plot mechanics exactly like a TV episode). Here we have a different credited writer, but the resulting plot is very similar to what was originally conceived for "First Contact" but changed apparently on Patrick Stewart's request.

In the final analysis, I feel the film is actually more pleasing to me as a fan because it's more true to the tradition of Star Trek than "First Contact." At least this one actually utilizes science-fiction ideas, as opposed to simply doing an action movie in space. But the film isn't as ambitious as it should be, and I feel the central problem is that the alien culture was made too simple and earth-bound, the melodrama between Picard and his love interest was non-existent, and overall there's just not enough meat on this story's bones. But what we do get is pretty well done and pleases me as a fan of the show.
11 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
Worst Star Trek movie EVER. Plot points included here.
Adrian Cribb11 January 2000
Warning: Spoilers
I won't speculate on how so many weak and irritating ideas ever made it into this movie. However, Paramount are in really bad shape if no-one there has the power to say STOP even when presented with this load of rubbish.

By far the biggest irritant is that the alleged "good guys" are actually some of the most hateful people ever filmed. While these people, known as Baku, have been leading drippy and unproductive lives for centuries their own children have been banished to grow old and infirm on another planet. When these now technologically advanced "Sona" return, close to death, in an attempt to benefit from their home planet's natural regenerative radiation, the Baku hoodwink Picard and his crew into thinking that they are infact the victims. This is mainly because the Baku, basking in regenerative radiation all day long, have remained relatively pretty while the Sona are now very ugly as the film takes pains to point out.

It's been thankfully a long time since I have seen a totally white cast in a film, but black people are conspicuous by there absence from the Baku.

Additionally Picard takes up with a Baku who has spent her last 300 odd years learning how to look like a pouting airhead even when tons of rubble are falling on her head, yet cannot row a boat or swim when she needs to. This even though she lived next to a lake all that time!

Goodness knows what sort of point Jonathan Frakes is trying to make with this film.

I would recommend that anyone considering watching this film does so on DVD/video with the remote control never far away from their grasp. After you've spinned through:

1. Riker and Troi behaving like the first couple in school who find out how to kiss

2. Picard and a woman with a charisma by-pass talking about nothing for minute after nauseating minute

3. Blond kids rolling around in haystacks

, there really is only about 45 mins left of F. Murray Abraham (the baddie) and spaceships.

1 out of 10 and such an utter disappointment after First Contact which was a fantastic film.
23 out of 46 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
Attracted to Older Women,or Picard's Idyll
Cristi_Ciopron13 July 2006
Prior to being SF,Western,sexy,or otherwise,a movie,any movie,ought to be,first,an excellent cinematographic achievement,good cinematography. In fact,there is no such thing as "great SF",or "great Western",but only great cinematography.

"Star Trek IX" is a masterpiece of naturalness,humor,casualness,wit and art.This way,SF adventure who does not choose the dystopia avoids also the insipid utopianism.

Frakes directed the "Star Trek" movies that I like most.This is what I want from a SF movie."Star Trek:Insurrection" is charming and fluent.

Stewart,Spiner,Mrs. McFadden do great job in this film.

Fortunately,Mrs. Sirtis has a greater role.

There is a wonderful flavor of intelligence and good taste in this movie.

"Star Trek" VIII and IX,Frakes' works,are mature movies,with a wealth of ideas,resourcefulness,creativity,etc.,an exquisite visual quality, what I've always wished and asked for.
15 out of 28 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
Hmm... pretty rubbish really...
patrick320121 October 2002
Warning: Spoilers
*****Warning: Spoilers below, don't read if you don't want to know what happens*****

Okay, well, I think the main problem (and there are many many others) with Insurrection is the basic plot. Here it is, in a nutshell:

  • A tiny number of space colonists (called the Baku) land on a planet and find a fountain of youth there. None of them age or die or even get ill. They stay on the planet for a couple of centuries and there's now a population of 600 there (gosh, either they're VERY inbred or they don't have kids very often!).

  • The Federation (within whose territory the planet lies) would like everyone in the galaxy to have access to this fountain, and not just the 600 space colonists. To do this they want to move the colonists to another similar planet while they set up equipment to make the fountain available to everyone (including the 600 space colonists).

  • Picard & co think the space colonists should be entitled to stay on the planet as long as they like, with the planet to themselves, and no one else is allowed to touch the planet.

Now, in case you can't spot the flaw in this already, allow me to assist:

Why are the 600 Baku colonists entitled to the ENTIRE PLANET FOREVER while the rest of the Galaxy shouldn't set foot there? I could at least understand the moral argument if the Baku were native to the planet, but they're not, they're interstellar colonists (many of them first generation settlers) just like the people trying to evict them. What is the moral argument for Picard taking sides in what's clearly a straightforward turf war?

Worse than that, why are the 600 Baku entitled to ETERNAL LIFE (having already enjoyed several illness-free centuries of bonus time) while countless millions suffering elsewhere (including the supposed villains of the whole film!) aren't given access to the fountain?

Now, I know the Federation is meant to be an idealistic vision, but it's not meant to be an absurd parody. Even if the Baku had been native to the planet (which they're not), the 600 figure is just way way way too small to sound plausible as a reason for Picard's rebellion (goodness me, there are more people on board the Enterprise!).

Yes, I know Picard gives a speech where he says "how many before it becomes immoral?", but by that logic he would have rebelled against the federation even if there was just 1 colonist. Can you imagine how plausible the film would have seemed then? ("Don't worry, Mr Baku, we and our entire crew of hundreds will die to protect your illness-free immortal lifestyle on your own private planet!")

To sum up, this film supposedly tries to make a point about ethnic cleansing in Bosnia and elsewhere, but by removing all traces of the horror (the murders, the death camps, the torture, the rapes, the mass graves, the genocide, the bloodfeuds, the poisonous nationalists on *all* sides) and by making the Baku first-generation colonists rather than natives, what you have left is a comparatively minor, questionable and extremely boring treatise on international property rights.

It's like watching a film discussing Norway's claim to Antarctica. Who cares?
7 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
If only the Star Trek movies could have ended here!
stumpmee7710 January 2005
Warning: Spoilers
And at the end they could have rode off into the nebula; Data would be alive and I wouldn't have this bad taste in my mouth for Next Generation Star Trek (Thank you STX).

There are some parts that are sickeningly derivative, the cheesy villain having his face fixed up ala Brazil, the main example. And the captain defying orders taken too many examples--Indeed one could say Picard acts more like Kirk in this one but one can contribute that to the atmosphere around him (at least they explained it in someway) but there's also plenty of good moments.

5)Beverly toting a phaser!

4)Worf with his Klingon Zit.

3)I love the little love story between Picard and Anjj did not seem fakey (Lucas should have watched this when he scripted Episode II)

2)The big, funny surprise!--Data playing in the hay with the boy.

1)THE SCENE WHERE GEORDI'S ON THE MOUNTAIN LOOKING AT THE SUN--That is the most moving Geordi scene in all three Next Generation movies!

There's a wide range of humorous angles here that the next movie sorely lacks which covers a lot of this movie's predictability; indeed that's what makes this filming charming--you don't know who's going to start it. It's not a the top Star Trek file for me it'still STII and VIII but it's not at the bottom (10 & 5). It's worth a look see again and again.
13 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
Best Next Gen Movie Ever
cal-brady27 March 2010
This movie is, in my opinion, the best Next Gen movie that they've ever made. I know it's often criticized as having a moral basis that is incorrect; as it's based on the rights of the individual as opposed to the rights of the majority--but preference for the individual over the majority in moral issues like the one presented here is what makes Star Trek, Star Trek.

Michael Piller wrote an awesome script for this movie, based on the story that he and Rick Berman developed for it. It still has the action and adventure of a Star Trek movie, but it's at a much slower pace and it has the morality that I love about Star Trek.

What I found truly interesting about this movie is the fact that there is more character development then in most Star Trek films--Captain Picard falls in love and Data furthers his understanding of what it means to be human through a friendship with a young boy on the Baku planet.

All in all, what's not to like? It has the action and adventure of a Star Trek movie, and the morality of an episode.
11 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
Great but little different Star Trek...
Enchorde23 March 2011
Warning: Spoilers
In my opinion this is quite a unique Star Trek movie, different from most of the others. Sure, there are all the typical elements that there should be in a Star Trek movie, the sense of wonder and exploration and the big space battles. But none of the common enemies like the Borg, Dominion or others appear. Instead the crew of Enterprise is thrown into a secret research mission aiming to steal an entire planet from a small population because of the miraculous healing properties it has.

The tempo is a little different, actually more harmonic than many others. And the story is just as good as any other Star Trek movie. Not surprisingly, the cast is as good as always. That is one of the best part of the Star Trek movies, they have managed to keep the crew of the different Enterprises together and you feel like you get to know them. And you know them even before the movie has started.

For the Star Trek fans this is a must see, even though it is a little different from the others. For non fans this might be a little trickier as it always depends upon knowing the crew and characters from beforehand. The introduction is on the light side, which works very well for the fans though.

6 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
I actually enjoyed this movie!
azalard11 February 2003
Granted, it didn't have everything I wanted in it, but I actually enjoyed Star Trek: Insurrection. The humor was great, although I wish there was a little more between the Enterprise and the Son'a ships. I enjoyed this movie and I own it on DVD.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
Probably the best Next Generation movie so far
ixijimixi19 March 2002
The writers used this movie to resolve a few of the internal and interpersonal conflicts that have been left hanging from both the series and the previous next generation movies. It's great to see the characters grow in such a manner.

Plenty of action, and a fairly good plot.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
Space Above and Beyond
whiteroses10027 March 2000
This was a good enough film it was different than the previous, it didn't have enough action. It was limited. This movie had more humor than the other previous movies and in that case it made the movie more appealing in a different view.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
The best "Next Generation" film I've seen.
Roger-651 November 1999
This is one of those rare Sci-Fi films that don't require a second viewing to give it a chance at pleasing. In fact, I liked it so much the first time around, that I sat through it again. I rated it an 8 out of 10, which is a little unusual for me because of my affection for the original Star Trek series and films.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
Good movie, great cast!
shadow-5429 September 1999
Star Trek: Insurrection was a particulary good movie. Certainly better than Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan and Star Trek V: The Final Frontier.

This film has had some strong aspects, exceptionally its continuously brilliant cast! Patrick Stewart, Jonathan Frakes, Brent Spiner, LeVar Burton, Michael Dorn, Gates McFadden and Marina Sirtis once again give an awesome performance and bring more life to these characters we've grown to love over these past 12 years.

This movie cost 50 million to produce and still lacked the intensity we've seen on Star Trek: First Contact and Star Trek: Generations. I guess it was time to produce a light hearted movie for a change.

This movie and its story can be displayed as a light hearted story in the midst of a galaxy enveloped in chaos, war and tragedy. With the events of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine and Star Trek: Voyager making the timeline of the Star Trek universe, Star Trek has been changing dramatically ever since The Next Generation's 3rd or 4th Season.

This movie was even funnier than Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home. Picard, Riker and Data were more funny than ever! The story and action scenes mix perfectly as well as the comedy and the story. I loved the scene where Picard and Worf chase Data in the planet's atmosphere and begin singing that hilarious song.

Jonathan Frakes takes the director's chair for the second time in a row. Already a veteran directing Next Generation episodes he truly knows how to make a movie come to life. I only hated seeing Michael Piller writing the movie. He took off Data's emotion chip! I don't want to see another Star Trek movie written by him. Bring Brannon Braga and Ronald D. Moore back to the writing!

This movie also marks the first direct violation of the Prime Directive by Picard himself! I never believed he would actually break the chain of command. Sadly however, the movie's ending was just not worth it. Picard should still have been arrested on the charges of treason and insurrection. That happened to Sheridan on the end of the 4th Season on Babylon 5 after he took back Earth.

But it's still a movie worth watching! I only hope the next Star Trek movie comes packed with lots of action and intensity like we've seen on First Contact!

Great job Paramount!
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
The WORST Star Trek Movie!!!
D Vass26 July 2014
All my life I have been a Star Wars fan. Star Wars started my lifelong love for the sci-fi and fantasy genres. However, until a couple of years ago I never bothered with Star Trek because it didn't look that interesting to me. However, J.J. Abrams' two Trek movies encouraged me to check out the other 10 and I am very glad that I did. Star Trek is a brilliant franchise, even with its weaker installments - it's a vehicle for creative and interesting ideas and great characters. Even at its worst (namely The Motion Picture and The Final Frontier), it has something good to offer. Or so I thought until I saw Star Trek: Insurrection. This is not only the worst Star Trek movie, but one of the worst movies ever made, period. A lot of people are criticizing Star Trek: Into Darkness, but at least that movie had a plot. The Final Frontier rightfully deserves all the flak it's getting too, but at least the villain had clear motivations. Insurrection has no plot, no intriguing ideas, no heart and no interesting characters. The story (if you can even call it that) is all over the place - it feels like it's being made up as it goes along. From the opening scene I was completely lost and had no idea what was going on, what the people in this movie were fighting for or why I should care at all. The inhabitants of the planet whose name I can't even remember are underdeveloped, have (apparently) magical powers that are never explained, and therefore it is impossible for me to feel a connection to them. The same goes for the crew of the Enterprise - the previous two Trek movies gave them character development, which was non-existent here and half the time they feel like over-the-top caricatures of themselves - even more so than the characters in Final Frontier. In fact, I'll go a step further - the opening titles of the film are lazy and bland. Every single Trek movie before that had grand opening titles accompanied by amazing music. The title of this movie just flashes by and that's it. The villains of the movie are one-dimensional, their motivations are impossible to understand and are impossible to take seriously. If you've seen the movie, you know what I'm talking about. And that's another thing that makes this movie fail: all the villains in the previous movies - VGER, Khan, Kruge, Sybok, Chang, Soran, the Borg Queen - had clear motivations and were a legitimate threat - something the villains in this movie are not. I am astounded that Jonathan Frakes, who directed the brilliant First Contact, looked at the script for this movie and thought it was good. In conclusion, unless you are curious or are a completionist like myself, avoid this movie like the Plague. It is not worth your time. Final rating: 1/10 (But in reality it deserves a 0).
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews