Yes, I love this movie. Some hardcore Trekkies dislike it because it has plot holes, but Siskel & Ebert are correct: This movie is emotionally stirring and action-packed, and Patrick Stewart has a commanding presence which Shatner lacked in the earlier films and episodes. This is my favorite Star Trek movie.
This was a thoroughly excellent movie. It was first-rate as a Trek film, and first-rate simply as a film. The best of the 13 so far. The scenes between Data and Zefram Cochrane could have been played badly - but they were spot on. Patrick Stewart seems to need films, rather than 50-min episodes, for his quality as an actor to come through.
Major plot holes, but that's nothing new to Star Trek. I do think they prevent it from being the best in the franchise, though. A fun movie, and the best TNG entry by far, but I'd still put it behind 2 and 6.
Shatner had a great presence but I agree Stewart is a different class of actor. It helps that the writers of First Contact were TNG staff writers who knew how to play to his strengths and give him some meaty scenes.
First Contact was such an improvement over Generations. It's a shame the other TNG movies couldn't quite capture that magic. I love all the Star Trek movies, but if I had to pick a favorite, it'd be this one.
Star Trek: First Contact really should have been the first TNG movie. It even has the word "first" in the title. Generations was an unneeded film, that did no favours for either TOS or TNG.
@@StarshipYorktown Generations was absolutely needed and there´s noting such epic in any of the movies as the two captains part. Generations haters never have any true arguments besides the same typical clichés about the movie.
@@anothergalaxys4780 Ask yourself this: besides the destruction of the Enterprise-D and the introduction of Data's emotion chip, was anything else substantial carried over from Generations to First Contact? Not really. I would argue that First Contact could easily have been the first TNG movie, and that the Enterprise-D could have been the hero ship in First Contact instead of the Enterprise-E. All that said, I don't hate 'Generations'. I just think it was an unnecessary film that was rushed into production. There was no reason for Kirk and Picard to ever appear together on screen. I enjoyed watching them act together, but the script could have been done better.
James Cromwell played Stretch Cunningham, Archie Bunker's work buddy from the 1970s All in the Family, that's how long he's been around. In one episode, Stretch dies and Archie discovered at the funeral that Stretch was Jewish. He says to Edith, A Jew named Cunningham? That ain't supposed to have no Hammmm in it, Edith.
Even better was the joke Archie told at the funeral about a conversation between a rabbi and a priest: Rabbi: Is it true you can’t have sex? Priest: Yes, that’s right. Is it true you can’t eat ham? Rabbi: That is correct. But with regard to the sex, you ought to try it sometime. Its a whole lot better than ham. (Forgive me, I took some liberties with the exact wording. But that was the essence of the joke.)
He co-starred with Andy Griffith on a pair of NBC TV movies in the late 1970s where Griffith played a small town police chief (sort of a mix between Andy Taylor and the TV series version of ITHOTN'S Chief Gillespie) Cromwell played one of the deputies. Several years later, he reunited with Griffith on Matlock playing a cantankerous judge who throws Matlock in jail for contempt!
It's my second favourite in the entire franchise. My first (and perhaps, bizarrely to many) is the original, Star Trek: The Motion Picture. I've watched both films too many times to count!!
4:09 Imagine Siskel watching Cromwell in L.A Confidential the following year, and probably thinking "He's now three for three." Three great scene-stealing turns in three years, and he's still going strong in his late 80s, as Succession fans will attest (that eulogy scene!)
Just got done watching their reviews of Wrath of Khan and Voyage Home and they weren't calling Kirk's crew campy then. They gushed at those films, and it's disappointing to see them diss them later on like this.
That is true; during their review for Undiscovered Country Ebert said that all the even-numbered Trek films had been good and the odd-numbered ones were bad. Except that Ebert actually gave a thumbs up to both the first and third Trek films!
It's not a dis, the original series DOES have elements of campiness in it. Remember that nearly every episode ends with a joke and whimsical music no matter how serious or dark the episode story was. The shots and staging of the filming is often theatrical with two-three characters posing in frame, with some performances being over the top (no I'm not shitting on shatner). In comparison TNG takes itself much more seriously. Sometimes to its detriment. Personally I prefer TOS but I enjoyed them both.
@@koalabrownie we’re going to have to agree to disagree on how to define “camp.” To me camp is knowingly being over the top or silly. TOS was not that. Humorous yes, campy no.
Ebert: Star Trek movies have been uneven over the years.....straying from their roots in the TV series where theyre about ideas, not simply action...... JJ ABRAMS: Hold my beer......
My only objection here is that the review gave away far too much. I didn't remember that all those years ago the destruction of the cube was given away by trailers and reviews. That would have been a good thing to keep secret.
While I think it’s the second-best movie in the series, as a longtime Trekkie, it’s hard not to ignore the continuity errors with Picard’s revenge angle and the Federation not wanting Picard involved. But yeah, it’s a great-looking and well-acted movie and all by a first-time feature film director that happens to be a Trek veteran. It’s literally the best of both worlds.
Picard isn't perfect. He's not a robot. After dealing with the Borg for so long, it's bound to get to you. Also, he's never had the Queen in his head since his first assimilation. He's been dealing with other ships and Borg. This time, it's a lot more personal
They mentioned Cromwell. He’s actually the most memorable aspect of the movie for me, and I don’t mean it in a good way. I found his performance obnoxious.
Go and watch " Star Trek: First Contact (1996) Trailer #1 | Movieclips Classic Trailers " on YT - they tell you pretty much the whole movie there too. Don't want spoilers, don't watch or read anything at that time.
Yes, I love this movie. Some hardcore Trekkies dislike it because it has plot holes, but Siskel & Ebert are correct: This movie is emotionally stirring and action-packed, and Patrick Stewart has a commanding presence which Shatner lacked in the earlier films and episodes. This is my favorite Star Trek movie.
This was a thoroughly excellent movie. It was first-rate as a Trek film, and first-rate simply as a film. The best of the 13 so far. The scenes between Data and Zefram Cochrane could have been played badly - but they were spot on. Patrick Stewart seems to need films, rather than 50-min episodes, for his quality as an actor to come through.
Major plot holes, but that's nothing new to Star Trek. I do think they prevent it from being the best in the franchise, though. A fun movie, and the best TNG entry by far, but I'd still put it behind 2 and 6.
Shatner had a great presence but I agree Stewart is a different class of actor. It helps that the writers of First Contact were TNG staff writers who knew how to play to his strengths and give him some meaty scenes.
First Contact was such an improvement over Generations. It's a shame the other TNG movies couldn't quite capture that magic. I love all the Star Trek movies, but if I had to pick a favorite, it'd be this one.
I always wished the TNG crew got the movie success of the TOS crew hoping it would continue the cycle of series to screen with the other shows.
Generations has a lot of magic. Not as good as FC, but not so fat as a lot of people say. Two captains scene is better than any scene on this one.
Star Trek: First Contact really should have been the first TNG movie. It even has the word "first" in the title. Generations was an unneeded film, that did no favours for either TOS or TNG.
@@StarshipYorktown Generations was absolutely needed and there´s noting such epic in any of the movies as the two captains part. Generations haters never have any true arguments besides the same typical clichés about the movie.
@@anothergalaxys4780 Ask yourself this: besides the destruction of the Enterprise-D and the introduction of Data's emotion chip, was anything else substantial carried over from Generations to First Contact? Not really. I would argue that First Contact could easily have been the first TNG movie, and that the Enterprise-D could have been the hero ship in First Contact instead of the Enterprise-E. All that said, I don't hate 'Generations'. I just think it was an unnecessary film that was rushed into production. There was no reason for Kirk and Picard to ever appear together on screen. I enjoyed watching them act together, but the script could have been done better.
James Cromwell played Stretch Cunningham, Archie Bunker's work buddy from the 1970s All in the Family, that's how long he's been around. In one episode, Stretch dies and Archie discovered at the funeral that Stretch was Jewish. He says to Edith, A Jew named Cunningham? That ain't supposed to have no Hammmm in it, Edith.
Even better was the joke Archie told at the funeral about a conversation between a rabbi and a priest:
Rabbi: Is it true you can’t have sex?
Priest: Yes, that’s right. Is it true you can’t eat ham?
Rabbi: That is correct. But with regard to the sex, you ought to try it sometime. Its a whole lot better than ham.
(Forgive me, I took some liberties with the exact wording. But that was the essence of the joke.)
He co-starred with Andy Griffith on a pair of NBC TV movies in the late 1970s where Griffith played a small town police chief (sort of a mix between Andy Taylor and the TV series version of ITHOTN'S Chief Gillespie) Cromwell played one of the deputies. Several years later, he reunited with Griffith on Matlock playing a cantankerous judge who throws Matlock in jail for contempt!
Nice to see them so excited for it :)
Easily one of the best - if not the best movie in the franchise.
It's my second favourite in the entire franchise. My first (and perhaps, bizarrely to many) is the original, Star Trek: The Motion Picture. I've watched both films too many times to count!!
4:09 Imagine Siskel watching Cromwell in L.A Confidential the following year, and probably thinking "He's now three for three." Three great scene-stealing turns in three years, and he's still going strong in his late 80s, as Succession fans will attest (that eulogy scene!)
I knew these guys had good taste
Just got done watching their reviews of Wrath of Khan and Voyage Home and they weren't calling Kirk's crew campy then. They gushed at those films, and it's disappointing to see them diss them later on like this.
What lol? Siskel says here that Shatner's crew was fun albeit campy. It's not mutually exclusive to enjoy a movie while still thinking of it as campy.
That is true; during their review for Undiscovered Country Ebert said that all the even-numbered Trek films had been good and the odd-numbered ones were bad. Except that Ebert actually gave a thumbs up to both the first and third Trek films!
@@jwyh4162 I guess, lol, "campy" no matter any additional words used is not an adjective I'd like applied to TOS Star Trek.
It's not a dis, the original series DOES have elements of campiness in it. Remember that nearly every episode ends with a joke and whimsical music no matter how serious or dark the episode story was. The shots and staging of the filming is often theatrical with two-three characters posing in frame, with some performances being over the top (no I'm not shitting on shatner).
In comparison TNG takes itself much more seriously. Sometimes to its detriment. Personally I prefer TOS but I enjoyed them both.
@@koalabrownie we’re going to have to agree to disagree on how to define “camp.” To me camp is knowingly being over the top or silly. TOS was not that. Humorous yes, campy no.
Ebert: Star Trek movies have been uneven over the years.....straying from their roots in the TV series where theyre about ideas, not simply action......
JJ ABRAMS: Hold my beer......
My only objection here is that the review gave away far too much. I didn't remember that all those years ago the destruction of the cube was given away by trailers and reviews. That would have been a good thing to keep secret.
That is very early in the film and is not a victory for the Federation given that the Borg now use time travel as a weapon.
It happens at least two times or more in the first trailer.
While I think it’s the second-best movie in the series, as a longtime Trekkie, it’s hard not to ignore the continuity errors with Picard’s revenge angle and the Federation not wanting Picard involved.
But yeah, it’s a great-looking and well-acted movie and all by a first-time feature film director that happens to be a Trek veteran. It’s literally the best of both worlds.
What "continuity errors"??
Picard isn't perfect. He's not a robot. After dealing with the Borg for so long, it's bound to get to you. Also, he's never had the Queen in his head since his first assimilation. He's been dealing with other ships and Borg. This time, it's a lot more personal
First Contact will always be my favorite Star Trek movie.
They mentioned Cromwell. He’s actually the most memorable aspect of the movie for me, and I don’t mean it in a good way. I found his performance obnoxious.
I hated his whole subplot.
This is my favorite, then khan, voyage home. I would same nemises, motion picture, #5 and generations the worse
Generations?? No Star Trek film is a bad as Star Trek Into Darkness
the director of this one, Jonathan Frakes, shares the same zodiac combination as the great Stanley Kubrick: Leo Dragon, the Magnificent Maestro
wtf is this review? it just says the whole movie.
i guess they didnt care about spoilers in the 90s
Go and watch " Star Trek: First Contact (1996) Trailer #1 | Movieclips Classic Trailers " on YT - they tell you pretty much the whole movie there too. Don't want spoilers, don't watch or read anything at that time.
Still the best.
Much better than wrath of kahn!
Star trek first contact is the best tng movie
THEY ARE BOTH EARTH PEOPLE. THUMBS DOWN
this movie sucks butt
Absolutely. All the TNG movies are crap.