Star Trek Beyond

[Thebestoftherest]

Really though I feel that that's not talked about enough. Were not there at least one episode TNG about a similar styled culture that assertively abandoned technology?

Usually, it's from the patronizing perspective of the Federation. The Federation is so much more advanced and enlightened.

Well maybe less similar of a situation, but more prevalent an issue given the theme, how about the TNG episode involving evicting Native Americans off their land in favor of the armistice with Cardassia?

Kind of hilarious as it's the exact opposite attitude he had in Insurrection.

Of course the people in insurrection were white so obviously their better even if their way should means they have to relay on child labor.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

Really though I feel that that's not talked about enough. Were not there at least one episode TNG about a similar styled culture that assertively abandoned technology?

Usually, it's from the patronizing perspective of the Federation. The Federation is so much more advanced and enlightened.

Well maybe less similar of a situation, but more prevalent an issue given the theme, how about the TNG episode involving evicting Native Americans off their land in favor of the armistice with Cardassia?

Kind of hilarious as it's the exact opposite attitude he had in Insurrection.

Of course the people in insurrection were white so obviously their better even if their way should means they have to relay on child labor.

Their coordination was just incredible.

[Dilandau3000]

There's no anti technology message that the movie is giving.

The Baku are a peaceful utopian society that has given up all technology. Because in real life, we have magical planets that live us live immortal disease-free lives without medicine.

It could maybe be somewhat forgiven since the Baku are actually technologically advanced, they just don't use it, so there may be some things they've done with that technology to make it more possible.

As I recall, in Peter Hamilton's Night's Dawn trilogy, one of the characters remarks that one of the low-technology planets in that setting only works because everyone's genetically engineered so disease basically doesn't exist anymore. And as for accidents, I also recall there was a side character who lost an arm who was quietly taken off world to have it replaced (just because they're not supposed to doesn't mean they didn't do it anyway).

Although one of main characters who is from that world gets quite pissed off when she learns about the various conveniences life elsewhere that she was deprived of, so at least she'd recognize the point of view of the Son'a.

[Link8909]

Personally, I find Insurrection just dull and boring.

The first half of the film is a mystery that gets undermined when it was reveled that the relocation was official orders from the Federation and you realize there was not reason to keep it a secret from Captain Picard, the crew of the USS Enterprise, or Commander Data.

Then the more interesting moral dilemma of whether to relocate the Ba'ku to utilize the fountain of youth planet for the benefit of the Federation is just barely touched upon before Captain Picard defies orders, then the rest of the film is just dull action scenes.

I know other people have said this, but I do agree, this feels like an episode of The Next Generation, and not a good one at that, in-fact as you said BridgeConsoleMasher, the series had done this premise far better than the film.

[cloudkitt]

Insurrection's problem isn't a lack of scale, it's that the problem is stupid. If being anywhere on this planet, including in orbit heals you, why do we need to relocate this tiny hippy commune?

People don't usually look at these kind of details and determine a "bad movie." It's something that'd be basically fixed with a technobabble explanation or something.

Even if that detail flub wasn't there, it's still an underperforming premise.

It's hardly a detail flub. The movie makes a big show of people de-aging on the Enterprise. No one even asks.

To say nothing of the rather antithetical message to the soul of Star Trek (that is, the anti-technology bent) that Chuck covers in his review of that movie.

There's no anti technology message that the movie is giving.

"We believe when to build a machine to do the job of a man, you take something away from the man." Yet they have perfect knowledge of a positronics to fix Data, and as people stated, usually the luddites are viewed rather condescendingly by the Federation. In this one Picard hangs up his uniform over it despite doing precisely the opposite in the Native American situation. (The Native Americans, as a point of note, used technology.)

Not that Picard making a principled stand makes for a bad movie. That's exactly my point - Insurrection isn't bad because it's small scale. But if you have a small- scale problem, if the problem is stupid, it's that more glaring because you can't fall back on compelling action. People always say "it's just a TNG episode." That's not the problem, the problem is that it's just a BAD TNG episode.

Star Trek's BEST movie isn't particularly large scale. It's just a fight between Kirk and Khan. Presumably Khan wouldn't do anything nice with the Genesis device, but the movie doesn't take time to spell out how this is the end of LIFE AS WE KNOW IT, which is the only idea every piece of new Trek has had.