Star Trek: Insurrection (1998) User Reviews (563)

Enjoyable TNG movie

[neil-476 · 7/10 · 25 March 2012]

The Federation (or, rather, a corrupt Federation high-up) joins with one humanoid group in order to try to remove another small humanoid group (600 people) from the planet which brings them long life, so as to provide this benefit to a larger group. While this appears to fit with Spock's Wrath Of Khan philosophy that "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few," it also breaches the Federation's Prime Directive of non-interference. Factor in some humorous shenanigans involving Data, and Picard finding romance with one of the colonists, some bright colourful exteriors, with a moderate amount of action, and you have an enjoyable, entertaining sci-fi romp.

There are two other things. One is that there is some food for thought - the balancing of needs and rights, the issue of prejudice etc. And the other is a terrific performance by F Murray Abraham as the chief antagonist.

Plus I like Donna Murphy in anything!

Strong if unspectacular Star Trek film

[TimBoHannon · 7/10 · 18 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.

Highly entertaining

[CharltonBoy · 7/10 · 2 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

Genuinely Entertaining. What a movie!

[Drew-36 · 7 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!

Hugely underrated

[riddion · 6/10 · 7 September 2004]

I am a big Star Trek fan and I have loved it from the first moment I saw it. I remember seeing Star Trek the first time with Star Trek 4 - The Voyage Home and The Next Generation series and I remember being at awe at the wonder of it all. It has been many years since then, and having watched the all the series and movies many times, especially the movies since they take such a sorter time to watch, it is clear to me that this movie depicts the very heart of Star Trek. Do we have the right to tell other people where to live and how to live? It is about tollerance and thinking of others before ourselves. The movies has so many magical moments and it very clearly dismisses the myth that the odd-numbered movies are worse than the others. It is not so much an action science fiction as First Contact, but Star Trek is NOT about action. I guess this is why I like the episodes with virtually no action and much character development and tests on the characters and how they cope with different situations the best. The movies does have some cliché dialog, like when Data saying 'Sattle up. Lock and load', but Star Trek is no famous for it's one-liners.

I may be in the minority when it comes to this movie, but I think it is important to defend this great Star Trek movie, especially since the really bad Nemisis came out. We have to judge this movies on it's own merits and on the idea of what Star Trek is all about.

I actually enjoyed this movie!

[azalard · 7/10 · 11 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.

better than I remembered it being, but still not great.... here's why

[funkyfry · 6/10 · 20 November 2007]

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.

A moment in time can be a universe in itself

[TBJCSKCNRRQTreviews · 7/10 · 10 November 2010]

Upon learning of the true intentions of a race known as the Son'a who are in alliance with the Federation, Picard and crew openly rebel against their former employers to protect a unique planet's current population. Part of the anger towards this one, being called "the worst of the ST films", is probably that it lacks the immediate gravity of the others... this isn't about Earth in danger(like many of the others), it's a small colony that we've never heard of before, and we don't, since. And the bad guys aren't The Borg, Romulans, Klingons or something else that has long been built up... no, it's these generic beings that behave in an "evil" manner. While this is genuinely funny, it also has gags and jokes that fall flat and embarrass. It gets to be too silly at times. One can wonder why the Enterprise is suddenly so weak. And the focus remains on the Captain and Data. Other than that, this is a solid entry. The plot is fairly engaging(even though disobeying orders has been explored before in this series) and the developments keep your interest. This has impeccable dialog. With very few exceptions, it is well-written and delivered spot-on. The acting is dependable. Frakes and Sirtis are cute together. This has great production and FX, and honestly inspires a sense of wonder in the audience. The action is pretty good, and this is very exciting. There is a bit of disturbing content and a little sensuality in this. The DVD comes with a decent 5 minute behind-the-scenes featurette, a trailer and a teaser. I recommend this to fans of Star Trek and The Next Generation. 7/10

Whoever said this was the worst Star Trek film is so wrong!

[boyinflares · 8/10 · 30 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".

An Underrated Effort

[zkonedog · 7/10 · 12 March 2017]

Though often reviewed as a typical "odd numbered" Star Trek movie (for some reason, the even numbered movies in the series have performed much better than the even numbers), Star Trek: Insurrection is actually a rather strong forte into the Trek universe.

The conflict of this film works on two levels: First, there is the conflict between two races of people (a plot point as old as time but one that, if done right, can be quite effective). Second, there is the conflict between Captain Jean-Luc Picard (and thus his crew) against upper-ranking Federation officials, who want to violate the sacred Prime Directive of the universe. Both of those areas of conflict, acting simultaneously throughout the movie, are surprisingly effective and compelling.

Besides the effectiveness of the main plot, however, this film also (much like the previous First Contact film) contains some interesting and humorous character development. While trying to rescue a persecuted race of people, the crew of the Enterprise investigates a planet on which the effects of aging are reversed. Thus, while the android Data is unaffected, other characters are taken on an interesting hormonal journey: Worf begins acting like a typical (violent!) Klingon youth, Crusher and Troi notice certain, um, body parts firming up, and Geordi LaForge regains the use of his natural eyes.

To conclude, Star Trek: Insurrection, while generally regarded as a sub-par effort, actually breaks the "odd-bad, even-good" chain of Star Trek movies. If you are new to the Star Trek universe and are interested in this movie, I would recommend watching the previous film, First Contact, in order to get a better handle on the Next Generation characters before watching this film. If you thoroughly enjoyed First Contact, this movie (with its action/adventure combined with great human drama and humor) will not disappoint you.

Hmm... pretty rubbish really...

[patrick3201 · 4/10 · 21 October 2002]

*****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?

Its not as bad as some say.

[DanPacino · 8/10 · 3 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.

Above average installment in with the heroes of the U.S.S. Enterprise NCC-1701-E help the survival of a race

[ma-cortes · 7/10 · 26 November 2021]

Good entry in the long-running series has the familiar characters battling some strange enemies and time-traveling back to Earth . It is the 24th century , it is the rebirth of a saga , the start of a new scenario when the U. S. S. Enterprise NCC-1701-E captained by Captain Picard (Patrick Stewart) and his crew (Brent Spiner as Data , LeVar Burton as Geordi , Michael Dorn as Worf , Gates McFadden as Beverly , Marina Sirtis as Troy) face off an alien race called the Son'a with domination their goal , while defending the immortal Ba'ku , whose planet offers regenerative radiation and their culture is secretly researched by the Federation associated . While on a trek to observe the peaceful Ba'ku race , Lieutenant Commander Data suddenly behaves as if having to fear for his existence . But the Son'a intend to kidnap the Ba'ku in order to take the planet for themselves and for the Starfleet officials (F. Murray Abraham , Gregg Henry) who all would love to regenerate their bodies . But they did not think of the loyalty of Captain Jean-Luc Picard and the crew to the execution of Prime Directive . Along the way , Enterprise to carry out the plans , chases the enemy aircraft and enters a time distortion . Meet the new face of evil. The battle for paradise has begun. Eternity awaits beyond the final frontier. The ultimate battle between good and evil begins. The future of the galaxy, and the survival of a race, depend on an act of rebellion.

This epic story is concentrated on characters as well as thrill-packed action and special effects although there're numerous of those too . This time including an ecologist message with an enjoyable and peaceful race that displays incredible lifespans , living in harmony with nature and rejecting advanced technology. The movie has action , tension , comedy , emotion , suspense and sensational spacial scenarios like is customary development of the franchise whose series buffs will have no complains . Spectacular, exciting , fast-paced , thrilling this is the description of this new outing of Star Trek , following two concurrent threads . Film that reinvents the saga through a perfect pulse narrative that does not give a second of rest to the spectator who is trapped for two hours approx. In a genuine visual spectacle . Idealism , humor , humanity , several agreeable characters and trademark effects abound and will please the enthusiasts such as the neophyte . The top-notch acting convinces , especially the nasty and extremely made-up F Murray Abraham , in a super-villain role , while other guest players also make a nice work as Donna Murphy , Anthony Zerbe , Gregg Henry , Stephanie Niznik and Daniel Hugh Kelly . The stirring final amazing the spectator , in which the moving and spectacular scenes create a perfect union that terminates with an ending that leaves you stuck in the armchair facing the formidable spectacle as a privileged witness .

Magnificent special effects by ILM (courtesy of George Lucas' Indutrial Light Magic) whose animators created several new classes of Federation ships for the huge CGI animation sequences . Exceptional soundtrack by Jerry Goldsmith , he composes an impressive musical accompaniment to the film . Furthermore a colorful and evocative cinematography by Matthew F Leonetti . Efficient direction by Jonathan Frakes, the notorious Star Trek's commandant Riker . At the end of filming , actor/director Jonathan Frakes got the nickname: "Two takes Frakes" because of the efficiency of his style .He's an expert filmmaker of Sci-Fi genre and TV episodes : ¨Star Trek¨, ¨Roswell¨ ,¨Masters of science fiction¨, ¨The Librarian¨ , ¨Twilight zone¨ , among them and occasionally for Cinema such as ¨Clockstoppers¨ , ¨ Thunderbirds¨ and ¨Star Trek Insurrection¨. Suitable for family viewing , it's an entertaining adventure which young and old men will enjoy . Fans of the series will find very entertaining and fun . It is amusing to watch , reliably entertaining for fans and Trekkies are sure to love it , resulting to be a good sequel . Rating : Better than average . Well worth watching , essential and indispensable seeing for Trekkies.

Like They Were Only Half Trying

[coleman601-504-844864 · 5/10 · 1 May 2015]

Star Trek tries to do three things - provide a sci-fi adventure; showcase memorable character moments; convey a moral theme. These are the staples that when done right make Star Trek the legendary franchise that it is.

With Insurrection it's like all three of these are only half done. What results is a muddled, clunky and not very memorable. Our story is engaging to start with but never quite lives up to what is needed to be interesting. Our characters are given some good moments to shine but some of it has been done a lot before in the series. You'll chuckle at funny lines but no one will pull on your heart strings.

This brings us to the most controversial aspect of the film for fans: the moral. On the surface it's a strong one, echoing many elements of human history to make us think. But it falls apart when examined closer. Put simply the - a noble idea but in the context of the actual movie it falls apart. This only partly puts us on the side of the main characters which bogs down the plot and makes it difficult to invest in.

In terms of positives there is some great action, FX and awesome musical score as always. The performances are strong, especially from Patrick Stewart who almost cleans up the uneven moral theme.

So while the story is weak there's still some entertaining moments. Honestly this edition to the franchise just falls quite flat.

If you like Star Trek TNG..See Insurrection

[Poochafalafell · 23 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.

As smooth as an android's bottom?

[Pjtaylor-96-138044 · 6/10 · 27 January 2022]

I quite enjoyed 'Star Trek: Insurrection (1998)', to be honest. Once it's properly underway, it's a fair bit of fun. Of course, it has its issues. It's often oddly goofy, seems preoccupied with being lighter than its predecessor and its characters - aside from Picard and, arguably, Data - are all pretty bland overall. The piece also struggles through several supposedly romantic sequences that end up coming across as anaemic and, even, quite cringe-worthy. It features plenty of really bizarre scenes. This includes a sequences in which Picard and Worf sing classical karaoke in order to calm a malfunctioning Data, a moment in which Picard storms into his chambers and demands "something Latin" before he does a little dance in front of his bathroom mirror, and a scene in which Troi sensually shaves Riker's signature goatee as they share a candle-lit bubble bath. These parts are all as weird as they sound and they aren't the only eyebrow-raising moments in the movie. Still, they're more funny than frustrating, which pretty much mitigates even the most head-scratching of them. The plot is peppered with more serious problems, but its pacing is mostly snappy and it centres around some interesting ideas. I don't think Picard's position on the central conflict is quite as misguided as most others seem to, as the displacement of one group of people for the benefit of another (even if that one is larger) is an inherently iffy idea. Neither of the two extremes are ideal but they're the only options posited, which does create a legitimate ethical crisis and is worth exploring. The flick doesn't quite have the gumption to do this in an incredibly effective way, but it uses its philosophical underpinning as an intriguing way to propel its plot forward while affording some insight into its central characters. Putting its heroes alongside the people they're trying to protect goes a long way in making you care about both, allowing the affair to avoid the 'faceless stakes' issue that plagued some of its predecessors. Still, the picture is fairly clunky overall. Something feels slightly off about it, too. It's enjoyable enough for what it is, but it's far from the best in its series. It's fairly fun fluff. 6/10.

I believe that Star Trek: Insurrection was the best of the TNG films

[Jon Athey · 7/10 · 12 December 1998]

There was much more comedy in this installment. Not since Voyage Home have I laughed so much at a Trek film. There was (lock and loads of) action, more than First Contact. And the chemistry between Picard and Anij was great! Donna Murphy is beautiful! F. Murray Abraham (who I thought was great in Amadeus) plays an excellent protagonist, and when that vein bursts on his forehead in Picard's ready room----really adds to the feeling of his desperate mission. What I didn't like: There was a question as to how Worf happened to be onboard the Enterprise E that was poorly explained. And anybody who has had a beard knows that you cannot easily shave it off with a straight razor without clipping it first. But that's nit-picking. This movie was great and I place it second on the list just after Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan and before Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country. Go see it!

All in all, not too bad

[x_leesha_x · 7/10 · 12 May 2003]

The first time I saw Insurrection in the theatres, I was appalled and horrified. My favorite science fiction franchise of all time had become a singing and laughing bad joke affair. I walked out of the theatre disgusted. I even refused to watch it on video when my mother rented it. Four years later though, I've had a change of heart. If you take away the singing and the jokes about butts and boobs, this movie is "Star Trek" the way Gene Roddenberry wanted it. The movie is generally good, but not "Wrath of Kahn", "First Contact" or "Nemesis" great. The film is a little hokey from time to time, and the jokes wouldn't be so bad if there weren't so many of them (I couldn't look at Data the same way again after the butt joke.) No offensive to Mr. Spiner, but leave the music on broadway. He's a great singer, but you can't win a tony if you're singing in a movie! The special effects were pretty good (I liked the little pet pocket thing, that was cute.) The orchestral score lacked a little, but it was still good. My final thought on this movie; not as bad some people make it out to be.

It's a Gorch !

[elektra33 · 7/10 · 31 December 2003]

I think Insurrection gets a hard time by some fans. Of course it's not as good as First Contact, but it's far from being a bad film. How could any film featuring Picard and Data singing the HMS Pinafore be bad ? - or a film featuring a kingfisher trapped in a perfect moment in time - or the scene where Bev examines Geordi's eyes in sickbay.

I would highly recommend this film to Trekkies and non-Trekkies, but make sure you give Star Trek V a whirl first, as it's probably the best damn film you're ever likely to see.

Score is captivating

[jmarcel · 8/10 · 6 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.

Really a great entry

[russem31 · 7/10 · 30 November 2005]

Star Trek IX: Insurrection - Stardate: Unknown

I hear many people say this is a weak installment in the Star Trek saga, but personally I like it better than most of the other Star Trek films. Yes, you can argue this isn't as epic as the great Star Trek films like II, VI, and First Contact, with a localized story which doesn't really put the main characters into any inherent danger, but regardless, this film has its perks. This has to do with the fact that there is a sense of family among The Next Generation crew (with many humorous moments between various cast members - Riker and Troi rekindling their romance as an example - with Riker sporting his Season 1 non-beard look!). This isn't the case in the other Next Generation films in my opinion. This sense of family always brings a smile to my face because it's obvious that this crew has become a close knit group after 9 years together (it also shows how the actors portraying the characters have come to know each other, considering each other as friends). This is a must see entry in the Star Trek saga.

A Weak Trek Entry

[DanB-4 · 5/10 · 23 December 2003]

Star Trek movies were growing tired by the time this 9th installment was released. The effects have become common place and the characters too familiar. So the key to making the movie work, to make it new, is a great villain. As much as I admire F. Murray Abraham, Ru'afo not cut it here as the wrinkly-faced bad guy. He is a cartoon character.

Insurrection follows the story of a small race of people living on a planet where the aging process as slowed so much that it has nearly completely stopped. As a result, Worf breaks in zits, Troi and #1's hormones run wild, Jordi's vision starts to come back and Picard, well, he is still bald.

The Federation is trying to supplant the small number of inhabitants of this planet so that others can make use of its special life restoring radiation. Hardly a plot worthy of a feature film. Data goes nuts, Picard does not follow orders (I do not feel that this is a spoiler since the title is Insurrection) and Worf sings HMS Pinafore. They bad guys try to hide their secret and nobody believes Picard as he uncovers the truth. Yawn.

There are worse entries in this franchise, but Insurrection signaled the beginning of the end that Nemesis seems to have completed. What this movie tells us the most is that they should have stopped at First Contact. ** out of ****.

Star surprise

[Chronus · 9/10 · 13 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.

Actually I Quite Liked this one

[The-Sarkologist · 7/10 · 7 December 2013]

Well, with the previous two Next Generation movies seriously disappointing me, I wasn't really all that keen on seeing this one. Even so, when a Star Trek movie comes to the screen, I do drag myself out simply to see what it is like. My brother also wanted to see it so I decided that I would, and I am glad that I did because it was far better than the other two.

Insurrection is a plot that twists and invites the viewer to work out what is going on. As well as being science fiction, it takes a far better approach that simply flashing Borg in front of us hoping to impress us. Instead it opens up with a problem and everything slowly unravels as the movie goes on.

The movie begins on a planet among a peaceful society and the Federation, using personal cloaking devices, are monitoring these people. Suddenly Data malfunctions and reveals these spies to the village. The Enterprise is asked for the schematics and instead of simply giving it to Star Fleet, they travel to the planet to see what the problem is. The planet happens to be located in the middle of a large nebula and as such no communication out is possible, thus what is going on on the planet is hidden from the Federation, even though one of the admirals is involved.

The thing about the planet is that the rings produce rejuvenating rays which restores body tissue. This is the secret of eternal youth which everybody is looking for. Such a benefit always comes with a disadvantage – and this seems to be a common plot in Star Trek – all other problems have been solved but people still die, so what can we do about it.

This mimics humanities fear of death. They take everything away but there is still death so they decide to create a way in which to eliminate that as well. What Star Trek really is is humanities desire to live in a better world without having to submit to a supreme authority – God. I have had arguments regarding the morality of Star Trek with numerous trekkie friends and will always remain firm that the reason that I hate Star Trek is that they are openly against religion and claim that humanity can solve all of the world's problems itself. This I just cannot believe because in 6000 years of recorded human history we may have advanced technologically and culturally, but the same problems that faced our ancient ancestors face us today, so what makes us think we can solve them in a few hundred years. Maybe we argue that we have been evolving, but all we have to do is look at the social decay within America as everybody becomes hyper-individualistic to realise that this is not the case.

I did like this movie and was suitably impressed, even with one that Jonathon Frakes directed. I was not suitably impressed with some of Frakes' directions as they generally seem nice and idealistic and generally sickening, but this was good. If they can keep up the quality of such films then I will be returning to see them.

Shoulda Got ILM

[view_and_review · 4/10 · 6 December 2020]

I read that Industrial Light & Magic wasn't available to do this movie because they were working on "The Phantom Menace" and one other project. It showed. "Stark Trek: Insurrection" should've waited for ILM because the third rate quality of the CGI was a huge downer. Whatever they spent on this movie was too much.

STI is the third installment of the Next Generation Star Treks. I'm not going to attempt to explain the plot in much detail because most of the jargon went over my head. It all boiled down to a race of beings on a remote planet which has some "metaphasic radiation" which keeps them young. Some other alien-like beings want to remove them from the planet for the planet's youth-making properties.

The movie was so generic it looked as if it were made for T.V. I don't mean HBO or Showtime, but NBC, CBS, or ABC type T.V. The whole movie had a sanitized non-dramatic look and feel. Even the most dire moments were short lived and cast little doubt about their outcome. It's hard to get behind a movie that is so sorely lacking real drama.