linkara is going to teach nostalgia critic a lesson he won't wanna learn

Was waiting for this one!

Thank you!

Seeing Critic run into the screening room like a high-pitched howler monkey had to have scared the crap out of some of those people.


Like "OMFG THERE IS A SERIAL KILLER ON THE LOOSE!" kinda scary.

Although when you get StarTrekfanboy!Psychokara in there that is almost as scary as a serial killer. lol

Speaking of which, Picard certainly sounded creepy when he said "Come out, come out, whereever you are." *shudders* o.o

I'm gonna miss Star Trek month.

& NC molesting SFG on a bed looks in no way hilariously homoerotic.

I was thinking the same...

he's a man but he wears a pretty hat!

These "Commercial in the Middle of the Episode" jokes don't really work if you have Ad-Block enabled. And I've never been happier about not getting a joke in my life!

Been watchin' ya a long time Doug, first review, gotta say love all your work. Including this review like all your others.

Most of it felt like a repeat of Mr. Plinkett's review and in response to the "Who are you, blue man?" question, he has a name and it's Lieutenant Commander Hars Adislo. Don't they ever read Memory Alpha? Haha. Also, one of Linkara’s clips of Troi kissing Riker doesn’t count, because it was Thomas and not William.

At the time of the kiss, he was still named Will Riker, and considering physically they're the exact same guy, it's still TECHNICALLY kissing him with a beard. XD

TECHNICLY they were already seperatet persons.

But also, TECHNICLY, the experience of kissing Tom Riker with beard is the same as kissing Will Riker with beard, so the clip still serves to make the point that Troys suprised reaktion is makes no sense at all.

That's like saying Kirk really did rape Yeoman Rand, but like Dr. Crusher said, "He's not Will. He is Will, but... you know what I mean."

Also, did you forget that sometimes the needs of the ONE outweigh the needs of the many?

Why do you think the Amish would hate Linkara?

"Why do you think the Amish would hate Linkara?"

It turns out, they're all big fans of Youngblood.

I can't think of anything really witty to say to this. I just want you to know that you made me laugh Flaregun. Thank you.

Definitely. As for the other one, I can't remember if Troi remembers what happened when she was being used as a dump site for the emotions and urges that guy (*doesn't want to bother with looking up his name*) didn't want to deal with. Perhaps you know, Linkara? If she does, valid clip. If not, invalid.

Do you think that Nemesis was more hated because of the death of Data?

Nothing can beat the "Mr. Plinkett" reviews done by Red Letter Media; they have snark, are informative, and rip bad movie to shreds from the perspective of someone who himself creates indie movies, so he doesn't merely critisize a movie for inane plot holes or bad dialogue, he also points out things like bad pacing and how bad camera direction creates boring scenes in the Star Wars prequels.

The only drawback is that Red Letter Media sometimes takes the Mr. Plinkett persona framing story to far, IMO, it distracts from the reviews and becomes disturbing, and some people are put off by the Plinkett voice.

Um, you can evaluate "pacing" without making movies yourself, and the "A camera - B camera" stuff was pretty easy to see, once you paid attention to it (but who did?).

''The only drawback is that Red Letter Media sometimes takes the Mr. Plinkett persona framing story to far, IMO, it distracts from the reviews and becomes disturbing, and some people are put off by the Plinkett voice.''

I agree.

Um he was clearly deliberately avoiding harping on the same points as plinkett. He didnt bring up even 1 point plinkett did.

Yes, they did and it was certainly more than once. The whole point about the Ba'ku and technology, along with the comparison to the episode Journey's End are all straight out of the Plinkett review.

I thought I was first

I cracked up when Linkara said that Amish People hate him, I wanna know the story behind that LOL

lol me too that would be interesting.

This whole movie played like one big multi-part lackluster episode of TNG than any epic threatical release IMO.

Huzzah This is going to be great!!!

But still, good job with Star Trek month. Can't wait for next year. I'll get you next time Critic NEXT TIME!!!

Also extra nerd points for guessing what the song was in the background before the Critic started running.

Uwe Boll month? Dude, that's cruel and unusual.

If the critic really is a man he wouldn't be afraid of four little movies made by one little German director. Now wouldn't he? :3

One little German director? You jest! Uwe Boll is the dark spirit that turns all it touches to fecal matter.

I mean the critic already survived one of his movies, what's four more to the all mighty Nostalgia Critic?

I never thought of that, that the difference between right and wrong is so crystal clear in the future that you can just program it into a robot. They should have used that in the TNG episode The Measure Of A Man, Picard just shows them some calculations proving that reverse engineering Data is wrong. Or maybe they could modify their scanners to detect unethical behavior.

Seeing as it was just one guy and his opinion that created Data's moral code, it's actually pretty easy to program ethics and morality in an adroid. Just put in a line of code that says "It's wrong to participate in the forced relocation of a group of people, so don't take part in it and do what you can to stop it" in whatever programming language Dr. Soong used.

That being said, I completely agree with Linkara in that I sympathized much more with the "bad guys" in this film than I did with the supposed "good guys". The Federation was justified in relocating them if they refused to share their planet. They were sitting on a "technology" that could make people virtually immortal and could cure all sorts of diseases that had been plagueing thousands of planets for who knows how long. And yes it was a technology not magic. I refuse to believe that there's any magic in Star Trek.

The "good guys" in this movie had the ability to save 800 billion lives but they refused because they were selfish a-holes. They even refused to save the poor suffering skin graft guys, their own people I might add. They're pricks, plain and simple. Yes, the skin graft guys went too far when they resorted to killing, but I still sympathize with them. They were desperate, and were just doing what they thought was necessary to save themselves. Become desperate enough, and a society's moral code very quickly changes. Even though it can be programmed into a robot, a universal moral code does not exist.

.......I would have loved it if Linkara brought SFdebris in as the REAL expert on Star trek........



Also. Looking through alot of the phealous and Nchick reviews on blip, I REALLY like that Doug is giving a proper space for a commercial break. This is still better than television.

wait I think I figured out the origin of the blue guy, the watchmen ended with mr manhatten leaving earth right? and this takes place in the future AND in space right? and they both are blue RIIIIGHT? he is totally mr manhatten!

Actually, they're a species called Bolians and have shown up in Trek before, but I'm a nerd and all. XD

Well, they're definitely not Doc Manhattan himself, what with the bifurcating ridge and such. However, Manhattan did say that he was thinking about creating some life....

Good review. At first I had this feeling, like there was something lacking...but from what I remember of the movie, you really didn't miss many events at all. (I do have an odd memory of the scene where the Baku recognize one of the Sona as being kinda off and...oh man, they have son in the name and their whole thing is that they're secretly the offspring? Nice).
I suppose its just the film itself lacking the appropriate big moments.

yes but this is the ONE guy who has no origins, he just appears and disappears, think about it

Perhaps Mr. Manhattan founded a new race. am I on to something? ;)

No, not Dr. Manhattan, A Bollian. They've been on the show before.....in fact the barber on the Enterprise D, Mr. Mott was a Bollian. Peace.

HA! I thought I remembered seeing a guy who looked like that on the tv series!

Couldn't be Dr. Manhattan since this blue guy never walked around naked. Not a complaint, mind you, just Doc had a penchant for presenting his penis.

I dunno Linkara, you didn't know what the room Spock died in was for or what the pedestal housed...just how many technical manuals do you actually own and/or read anyway?

Yay! Yay, yay, yay!
Good god, I love the intro. "He can smell geek!" XD

I haven't seen this one, and I have no plans to, but I agree, Nemesis isn't awful. I like the latest Star Trek movie better though (yes, I know it's not relevant at all to Nemesis).

Another awesome review I especially love the opening and the interactions with Linkara. :) Keep up the great work and I look forward to the next review!

Plinkett and NC should get together and review something.

This. I can see it now.

NC: Now let's dive into-
PLINKETT: Hey asshole! I already reviewed/was going to review this movie you jerk.
NC: Plinkett? You're not even from my website.
PLINKETT: Did that stop the Mad electronic game geek?
NC: You mean the Angry video game nerd?
PLINKETT: No, there's so many of you unfunny talentless hacks, I assume anything could be a name.

A Plinkett Linkara team up wouldn't be bad either. They would argue about how to put a story in your review.

I think that's a terrible idea. NC and Plinkett are opposite sides of the spectrum - Plinkett deals largely with dry humor, black humor, and sometimes anti-humor. In other words, Plinkett is a very non-energetic style of reviewer. NC is a very energetic style of reviewer. Their personalities would clash. NC's quirkiness sucks into every reviewer he collaborates with - Cinema Snob is a non-energetic reviewer like Plinkett, but during his crossover with NC, the whole thing was a lot more energetic.

Plinkett bases his observations more on objective flaws that almost went entirely unnoticed. NC bases his observations on problems he has with the film more than problems the film has in general.

And the list goes on. Plinkett needs to be on his own turf in order to remain as good as he is. NC can pull off crossovers, Plinkett's best on his own.

By the way, I never really thought the whole even versus odd number was consistent. Granted, most of the even numbered Treks are good. NEMESIS was ass. And granted, most of the odd numbered Treks are shit. On the other hand, I thought I and III weren't THAT bad. But I haven't seen them in a while. I wouldn't say the reboot is that terrible either, though it is flawed.

Star Trek III Search for Spock only suffers from the typical middle child syndrome of being a 2nd movie in a trilogy's story arc.

On the other hand, Star Trek X: Nemesis was, to me, just as bad and annoying as Star Trek XI: Insurrection.

That would be Star Trek IX, not Star Trek XI.

Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay better then the last couple in Trek month. This crossover episode worked. You two (three counting sci fi guy) balanced material between eachother nicely. It had great flow (unlike the film itself) and instead of relying on previous episode references you came up with a lot of cutting comments at what even I think is the worst trek movie. In addition you managed to hit at problems with the flick that RLM didn't making it stand on its own two feet. A good review and one I would recommend to Trekkies. Kudos.

Linkara is so awesome.

Linkara you techno rant is on the level of people who thourght the luddites were againts the development of industrial machines. Yes they have a water irrigation system one that looks like is was dug by hand and which has to be opperated manually rather an being compleatly automated thus taking something away from someone. After all an automated irrigation system would ensure the crops have the exact amount of water they need. The system the baku use requires the skill of the operator to judge how much water is enough and if he gets it wrong there's nothing to harvest.

Many cultures in history have built and operated complex water reservoir, water districbution and irrigation systems long before any industrial revolution, and had codes of law governing how much water everyone got so that the crops wouldn't fail. The Mayans, the people of Angkor Wat in Cambodia (which according to latest excavations was a megacity of 1 million inhabitants during the time Europe was in the Middle Ages), the 4000 year old bronze-age Indus culture in India/Pakistan as well as later cultures in India too, the Persians (who used pumps and ox-powered wheels to move water against gravity), the Chinese (who used pre-made pipes), the Romans...

Yes, it was work-intensive and had to be maintained, but so does every infrastructure unless you want it to break down (something many people today seem to have forgotten, when privatizing infrastructure for a quick cash grab means it won't be maintained and left to rot for 20-30 years because the corporation had no intention to "waste" money on maintaining it in good condition, and afterwards the sad remains will be handed back to the community). The need to maintain a water irrigation infrastructure and distribute water fairly forced people to work together because the good of the individual and of society was interlocked. All the basic principles of engineering we use today were already in existance thousands of years ago.

The point is, you don't need "machines" for a pre-industrial infrastructure. Well, depends on how you define machine. Are machines able to do preprogrammed thing by themselves? Able to bring more power to bear than normal humans or oxen could? Anything with levers or gears is a machine? Then a hand-operated irrigation system is not a machine, but a 19th century mechanic weaving loom or a medieval Chinese water-powered astrolabium-and-clock was. There is a continuum between "stone age" and "ultrahigh-tech", not just an on/off-button.

The original Luddites in Great Britain didn't protest against machines per se, they protested against the mechanical weaving looms replacing many weavers and driving whole families of laborers into poverty... well, into even deeper levels of poverty... or into forced work cycles. Not to mention many children (orphans especially) being killed or maimed by the mechanical weaving looms, until new laws and regulations forced employers to enact better safety measures and child labor was reduced or banned.

Reading your comment is giving me flash backs to western civ during my first year of college. I LOVE IT! XD

Irrigation by default is technology.

Yes anything with levers and gears IS a machine.

it still takes manual labor to use, the point is that higher technology creates complacency and to nitpick irrigation is one of the douche-y-est things you can do. people still have to grow crops to live jackass.

No, nitpicking a nitpick about irrigation and calling it "one of the douche-y-est things you can do" is one of the douche-y-est things you can do.

I'm a douche? eh. sure, you can think whatever you want. it doesn't make my point any less valid. in the review they had to misrepresent the facts in order for their nitpick (and it's greater gripe that it is a part of) to work. the baku do not, in fact, hate technology; they live by the philosophy that "when you create a machine to do the work of a man, you take something away from the man." it is infeasible to bring water to your crops by hand so you would NEED to create either an arable of some kind, like to the kind used to grow rice, or you would need some kind of irrigation system. if you had neither your town would more than likely starve to death. so yes call me a douche, but whilst your up there on your high horse why don't you use the view to look at the facts yourself and not be such a god damned sheep to blindly accept what two guys on the internet tell you.

i like linkara and the nc well enough, but this was just off base. they try to argue ethics whilst misrepresenting the situation, which is the worst way they could have gone about reviewing this movie. i won't quit watching either of these guys the way i stopped watching the nostalgia chick, but this will forever be a blemish on any credibility they once had.

We see the dam. It was made on concrete. There is no way that 600 people could build that dam and the complex machinery, ropes instead of chains is immaterial, operating the spillways with hand tools. There is no way that the dam itself could have been built without the use of machinery, 300 years or not. There just isn't enough people there to provide the needed manpower to pull it off.

All of your examples are from civilizations where they have at their disposal THOUSANDS of people available to provide the manpower to get the work done.

BTW, a blacksmith is technology, ore refining is technology, a bellows is a MACHINE! A lever lifting the gates for their irrigation system is MACHINE. They claim that if you build a machine to do the work of a man you take something away from the man. Using that reasoning they shouldn't have bellows, wheels, levers, or anything else we see them using. No carts or anything else we see in the village that helps carry something. By by fishing poles, boats and that pier too.

They are Grade A Hypocrites.

You know, I had a similar-ish thought as well. These people are as against technology as the Amish are. The Amish use a degree of technology as well, but it's pre-electricity stuff: non-automated and can be built by hand and must be operated by hand.

Watching this makes me want to see a Trek-review with Linkara and Mike Stoklaza (Mr Plinkett)




...Why did Doug choose Star Trek-month again? He doesn't seem to give a shit about any of it.

Well I think its not bad to have those movies reviewed for once from an "usual" movie viewer perspective to see how it holds up to non-trek fans.

I mean... the People who did review it yet... SF Debris and Plinket coming to my mind... are all Trek fans and have the Trek-nerd-perspective on that.
But the "usual" people see the movies diffrent then "we" Trekkies.

I've heard that in the black holes of the clip there are actual ads, like the ones in the beginning. That kinda confuses me - I've never seen any of the mid-ads (i've seen it only in Spoony's Highlander Source, 6 months ago), in fact I haven't seen beginning ads on Blip.tv for about 2 months now.
I'm not using AdBlock (I think), I can see gif/java ads near and below the clip window. I have Opera 11, maybe it has some sort of adblockers that I'm unaware of...
Last time I've seen ads they were about some EU social project... maybe Blip.tv doesn't show me any ads anymore because they have nothing Europe-oriented? (Central Europe to be precise)

And just to clar something out - I have nothing against ads that are helping TGWTG reviewers. I love your work :)

Yeah, a lot of people have been reporting that. I really don't know what the explanation there is. You of course don't have to if you don't want to, but if you did want to look into it, you could always contact Blip and ask them what the deal is, but we're good either way. ^_^ It's not like you're actively TRYING to circumvent ad revenue for us or anything.

I use Ad-Block, but have specifically put in filter rules that exempt TGWTTG and other reviewer sites from Adblock, and yet... I got some short video ad clips for Star Wars 3D some time ago, and then nothing. Never seen any of those ads in the middle of a video that everyone talks about.

The explanation is simple :
If you don't live in the US, you don't have to watch commercials unrelated to your country.
This is also why your revenue now has plummeted probably, as Blip now doesn't show commercials outside the US ( except in extremely rare occasions where it amazeingly is allowed ).

What do you mean? I'm in the UK and I get them.

Do you guys really not get revenue for everyone that sees your ads? Do you only get paid for them every time an American sees them?


As for the review, like I mentioned in a prev review, I don't hold to the idea of good ones and bad ones by the movie's order. I think they all bring something to the table, and with DS9 throwing in so many doses of epic battles, I think it made sense to have a more moral story. It felt like more of an episode and that's how I took it.

I also don't believe that the movie is trying to tell us that we should all be hippies - I mean, if we're watching ST then we're already failing that, right? It also kinda balances what Spock said - it's one thing for a person to give themselves up for the greater good, but he wasn't saying that it's okay for us to abandon our morals and sacrafice another race for the benefits it might give us - otherwise the prime directive goes all to hell!

Plus, what is it with the actresses portraying Trill? If I remember correctly, their society is kind of idyllic, so maybe that's it, but I'm yet to see one who hasn't made my eyebrows shoot up.

And finally, I do also like Nemesis for the reasons our Critic brought up. There are parts I think are out of touch with normal ST but I liked that it ended with a possible hope for a resolution between the federation and one of it's longest held enemies. Plus Tom Hardy is always awesome.

Peace and love, my hippie friends. ...And why no look at the new movie? I know it's technically not in the same running but... c'mon :)

Trill - Home of the finest ass in the quadrant

So are the ads in the middle a regular thing now or is it only because of Star Trek Month? I noticed that the Nostalgia Chick's new videos don't have ads in the middle.

Great review.
By the way, Is it me or F. Murray Abraham's character "Ru'afo" screams like Earl of Lemongrab from Adventure Time?
Computer: You really smell like dog buns.
Ru'afo: 22:56

I also thought Earl of Lemongrab when I heard that scream. And yes, he certainly does look like he smells like dog buns.

I cannot say, that I have the same feelings about this movie - in fact, I have no feelings about this movie at all. From every other Star Trek movie, I have some recollection of the plot, the characters and the best moments. But this movie just vanished. There simply was nothing memorable, nothing special and also no epicness on any level. That's the real reason, I think of this movie so poorly.

It's forgettable and bland. Pretty much like you put it: A bad episode out of the series and stretched to full length, nothing more.

On Nemesis: I liked that one and the though it was pretty convoluted, it made much more sense, than many peolpe give it credit for - except Picard in a buggy...

Sorry, the actions of the villain in Nemesis made no sense whatsoever, and he looked like some emo space-goth.

Thats prety much exactly my opinion too.

That movie is just... kind of... there.
Feels like a lame TV episode. I did get almost nothing good out of it (even the Soundtrack was lame, althoiugh Goldsmiths other Soundtracks.. even for bad movies... were good).
But, even with the obvious flaws, failures and plotholes... I still do not see that movie as an offense to my intelligence... or the intelligence of the human population in general... unlike Generations or (if you count it as Star Trek movie in the first place...) that piece of crap JJ Abrahams made.

And I prefer a movie I dont care about anytimes over a movie that makes me angry.

Finally. A Star Trek movie review with both the Nostalgia Critic and Linkara. It’s every TGWTG and Star Trek fans’ dream. =)

I preparation for this review, I watched the special features on my Insurrection DVD just to see what was going on behind the scenes. They were doing a Trail of Tears in the stars for this movie along with an intergalactic fountain of youth. I still like this film. I also had the chance to catch the end of it on Sci-Fi (not SyFy, damn it) this past weekend.

It’s implied that the Ba’ku banned ELECTRONIC technology, not ALL of technology.

Yeah. I agree that mentioning some thing but skimming over them is a bit annoying.

I also dig the HMS Pinafore moment, Linkara. I can do it in the shower. …Yeah, I said it.

Man, Linky, I can tell why you really hate this movie more that the 5th one. This makes me wish I had all the Star Trek series in my collection right now. I also find it weird that the Enterprise hasn’t participated in every major Dominion war battle, including the ones for Bajor and Cardassia Prime. “…I am such a nerd.”

The Sona didn’t transport the villagers normally because the Enterprise crew have set up transporter emitters in the village.

I still don’t find this film as lame as the 5th film. Also, like with Star Wars, I have nothing to hate in Star Trek.

Thanks, Doug, for turning off Linkara before he give us some plot holes on “Star Trek: Nemesis,” which “I“ also love and enjoy watching. I love the music, the involvement of the Romulans, the dark atmosphere like the 6th movie, and Tom Hardy (who played Shinzon) played a really good villain, and I look forward to see him as Bane in “The Dark Knight Rises.”

FINALLY- Fangheart, Ravensong, and jymz13, please back off and leave me alone. Does the term “cyber-bully” mean anything to you people? If not, then why did you sign onto this site?

I knew it wouldn't be a typical day on TGWTG unless I'd see your stupid ass comment.

WOW!!! I'm so glad I've never seen this movie! God that was terrible! That kind of lame lazy message is the kind of thing that would piss me off!
I'd love to hear somewhere in the reboot universe that some one just invades that planet of hypocritical Hippies and killed them all and strip mined the planet for all it's magical properties like in AVATAR! that or the Borg attacks them! IRONY!!!
I do admit I don't watch Star Trek but I do gotta wonder why in this space series there aren't very many aliens! I can only think of 3-4 species; Klingons, Volcans, Romulains(even though from what I've read they're the same as Volvans), and maybe those green people Kirk is always screwin'!
Nemesis I was always curious of because the effects from the trailers looked cewl, but I've heard very baaaaaaad things!

I don't understand why so many people would hate Nemesis. I highly recommend it.

Obviously talking to them civily isn't going to work, just report them for being abusive to the administers. Its the only thing that you can do.

First off, I want to say that I have loved every one of these Star Trek reviews, and I especially love crossovers. Ending this series with a crossover with Linkara, the greatest Star Trek fan on this site, was a stroke of genius. (I am, however, disappointed that you won't be doing a more detailed review on Nemesis.)

I somewhat disagree on some of the things you said about the people in Insurrection though, NC. The way I interpreted it, I don't think Star Trek was trying to preach the idea of "no technology, it's evil". It's just that some cultures have their own unique ideas on how they should live, and they prefer to stay away from people who live differently or have different opinions.

I think you made a good point when you said that the aliens look way too human. One thing that bugged me, even in the original series, is that the aliens often looked human. I get that they didn't have much money to work with, but it doesn't make sense that Spock always got to be the oddball while humans got to blend in with almost no problem.

I am disappointed that you guys didn't make any comments or jokes about the part where Data chats up Worf about boobs. I think that was a missed opportunity. I would have liked to see more of a reaction to that, even if it was a very insignificant part.

Overall, I really enjoyed the review, and I especially liked the parts where Linkara ranted and raved about continuity and factual issues, simply because I love to listen to him when he goes on a tangent about the things he is passionate about. XD

However, I also feel that the review lacked some depth. I guess there wasn't enough content there in any of these Star Trek movies to hash over too deeply, but I feel like there were a few things that were glossed over in each review. Then again, NC isn't as much of a Star Trek nerd as Linkara is. Perhaps all of these should have been crossovers with Linkara? Now THAT would have been fun, and possibly more thorough.

I just feel like these reviews ought to be informative and show us some insights. They should be more than a collection of jokes and commenting on scenes. I just feel like you could have done more with these reviews, even though the jokes were brilliant and made me laugh out loud at times.

So yeah, I don't know if anybody will actually read this comment. It's the first detailed comment I've ever made here. Just my two cents, take it or leave it. And feel free to disagree with me if you wish. ;)

I hate to be the party pooper, but there's still one stinker that we MUST review...Nemesis.

Did you not watch the end of the Insurrection review? He already covered Nemesis right there.

06:19 - "They're vegetarian?" (Troi, upon hearing the alien guests are eating the floral arrangements on the banquet table)

No, sorry, as a biologist I have to nitpick this. The correct term the scriptwriter was looking for is "herbivore".

Humans, who are omnivores, can chose to be vegetarians, but we still won't be able to start grazing on random vegetation, because we cannot digest cellulose!

Nemesis starts with a dune buggy chase… how is that not on the list :/

It's a PLANET! 600 people with no technology to speak of aren't going to stop you from setting shop on the neigbouring continent you Federation imbeciles! Why do you need to relocate this bunch of hippies? Let them have their little village and tiny lake. You can set up a city-sized research complex, and the never need to even know, let alone have grounds to oppose you. There is no moral dilemma here whatsoever.

I've never seen this movie, but that glaring plot hole alone would have probably destroyed my enjoyment of the film. Star Trek in general has the annoying habit of treating planets that are not Earth like small towns.

The explanation given as to why they don't just set up a colony is that the Sona require ten years of regular exposure to the planet's atmosphere to BEGIN reversing their condition and most of them won't survive that long.

Meaning they're still going to die because we didn't harvest the rings, but the movie completely forgets that point because otherwise they can't have a forced happy ending.

Which is hilarious considering Geordi regrew his EYES in a very short time period...days was it? Complex optic nerves and the entire eye regrew. Tenn years my butt! If that much cellular regrowth occurred in a matter of days then they just contradicted themselves.

As far as I remember from the novel (wich I read back when the movie came out so I might be wrong) the use of that collector-thing would make the whole planet inhabitable for... some reason.
So its "relocate or kill".

Finally. You tackle my most hated Star Trek movie. How do you go from First Contact, to this? It's fitting you kept Linkara on the back burner for this one. It's not quite Uwe Boll, but it was damn close.

The awkward bed scene with sci-fi guy and Linkara's intro is damn good. Awesome new videos Doug. Liking the evolution of the Nostalgia Critic.

Do I get banned for saying that Linkara is annoying? Well, to be fair, all the screeching and general screaming in a high-pitched voice in all these reviews from a bunch of people, and the pretentious headwear, and the reverbs as if everyone filmed their pieces in a bare concrete basement, is annoying too. I'll have my coffee now.

Nah, you're allowed to have your opinion. ^_^

And THIS is why Linkara is classier than kagella.

Your babies. I want them now.


... Wait, what? Why the hell did I type that?!?

I wonder what Linkara think of nemesis? :3

Kudos to you. ^_^

Even if said opinion is WRONG, but yeah they're allowed to have it, sure.

Alright then...please STOP! my sister just yellled at me because soemone screaming!

You did this and not Nemesis?

Nemesis was terrible imo, it actually broke the pattern of good even numbered Star Trek movies

The rule of thumb for bad Star Trek movie is singing.

Nemesis is an even numbered Trek so it doesn't count plus its far too young to be considered nostalgic in any sense of the word. Oh and as much as I also love SfDebris that theory is flawed - The Motion Picture has no singing nor has Search for Spock.

Nemesis gets around this by basically taking all the notolgia you've ever had for the franchise and pissing alllllll over it.

I can't believe this is anyone's least favorite movie. It's not great but holy crap, really?

I know. I have no idea why you'd pick this over Nemesis despite the "odd number" rule: That leaves JJ Trek as the 'bad' one and Nemesis as the 'good'. It lifted the "curse" through outright sucking.

This movie was merely meh. It was bad in a lot of little ways but I never really felt like "HOLY SHIT THAT PISSES ME OFF" at any point, ever. Even looking back at it, it's almost a fond memory through sheerly being one of the least awful TNG movies.

Nemesis: Quite possibly the worst Star Trek movie out of all of them by a mile.

Personally, I think the "odd number" Trek thing is a load of hooey. I enjoy Search for Spock just as much as Wrath of Khan and Voyage Home, and as a movie unto itself even! And, re: Nemesis, I've yet to see it, myself, and frankly I'm unsure I want to. I may need to eventually just to judge it properly but I'm sort of putting it off.

Keep putting if off Bill, it's pretty bad XD

I'm not a fan of Nemesis. By the time it came out I had become jaded with Star Trek. Between this awful movie, and the tv shows, which had really deterioted (Voyager, which was never that great, had become stale, and Enterprise pretty much always sucked), I felt like the franchise was on death's door.

I still went to see Nemesis in theaters, despite my growing disinterest in Star Trek. I still had fond memories of TNG and DS9 to fuel me. And it was just ... okay, I suppose. It was was better than Insurrection, which isn't saying much, but it wasn't even THAT much better. As even Star Trek movies go, it's definitely the worst, and it's really sad that this is the last time we see the TNG cast. But, I find, that when I watch it now, it's not quite as bad as I remember. The odd/even rule still somewhat holds up, until you get to Star Trek 11 (2009) which is great. Still, I always liked Generations and The Search for Spock, and feel they are much better than Nemesis. Ah well, I guess the odd/even rule doesn't really hold up well for me.

Honestly, I like all of the Star Trek movies to some degree. Even the worst ones, like this one, had some great character moments that were real treats for people who were fans of the tv shows.

Honestly, the even/odd rule doesn't apply to me either, but that's because I genuinely liked The Motion Picture (the updated DVD version is much better than the original edit, kinda like an inverse of the Star Wars SEs), and despite fake Savvik in 3 (I just pretend it's a different character than Kristie Ally's in STII) I liked it as well. Really, Generations and Insurrection are the only two Trek movies I out and out hate.