ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

Nero

silvik123

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1245

Report this Feb. 20 2010, 4:19 pm

What do you think of Nero as a villain character? Was he a good villain for the film? Was his attentions bad and focused as you would like them to be? Did he had depth as a villain?
How would you rate him next to other Star Trek villains? Your thoughts and opinions please.

SpaceTherapist

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6370

Report this Feb. 20 2010, 7:03 pm

I really do not think this was a typical "villain" focused movie like other Trek movies. The real story was Kirk and Spock's relationship and Nero was merely the catalyst.

So therefore he was a good catalyst for this particular movie.

KALEL

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1512

Report this Feb. 21 2010, 1:02 am

I agree with you, ST. I do think, however, that they could've played him up more because I think Bana is a really good actor, and apparently has the chops to play a really good villian.

SpaceTherapist

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6370

Report this Feb. 21 2010, 1:46 pm

Quote (KALEL @ Feb. 20 2010, 2:02 am)
I agree with you, ST. I do think, however, that they could've played him up more because I think Bana is a really good actor, and apparently has the chops to play a really good villian.

I agree with you too. He could have been fleshed out a little more.

JM1ICEMAN

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1633

Report this Feb. 21 2010, 8:26 pm

Quote (SpaceTherapist @ Feb. 21 2010, 1:46 pm)
Quote (KALEL @ Feb. 20 2010, 2:02 am)
I agree with you, ST. I do think, however, that they could've played him up more because I think Bana is a really good actor, and apparently has the chops to play a really good villian.

I agree with you too. He could have been fleshed out a little more.

I agree with you both.
Nero was a good villain for what he was there for.
He would have kicked Shinzon's ass across the galaxy...course a tribble could kick Shinzon's ass across the galaxy, and tribbles don't have feet!
While Nero's back story may have been much more interesting, his purpose was served well for the movie as a secondary story plot to that of bringing the crew together in this alternate time line, making him a better plot device then most villains are.

Narada

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4008

Report this Feb. 22 2010, 2:59 am

Quote (SpaceTherapist @ Feb. 20 2010, 7:03 pm)
I really do not think this was a typical "villain" focused movie like other Trek movies. The real story was Kirk and Spock's relationship and Nero was merely the catalyst.

So therefore he was a good catalyst for this particular movie.

I very much agree with you. I also believe there are deeper meanings within the character for people who wish to analyze further. One example is the comparison to Captain Nemo.

MrsStarbuck

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4329

Report this Feb. 22 2010, 6:12 am

Some of you make a good point that he was an effective plot device, and I agree with that. But at the same time it feels to me like such a missed opportunity to create what could have been an epic villain, ONLY to move the plot along and drive the team together.

Therefore, I have to stick with the opinion that I've held since I saw the film, that Nero is a lame villain, with no depth to him at all, no real motivations for what he's doing (as seen on screen anyway) and to have been handed to an actor like Bana, who would have been capable of so much more, it such a complete shame.

Now if you were to ask me what I think of the Nero from the comic, then it would be a different matter, but I still maintain that they can not expect people to read the comic to get the maximum that they can from the film.

Nor should they have to be familiar with Captain Nemo. Narada, you know I agree with you that the Nemo thing is fantastic, but for the average moviegoer, it shouldn't be a detail that is relied on to stand instead of good on-screen character development.

Like obviously there were comparisons to Khan and Ahab...but if you'd never heard of Ahab then I don't think Khan would have been reduced on screen for lack of those connections being made.

Therefore, to me the Nemo thing felt like a lazy connection that the writers hoped would do their job for them.

Just my opinion, and you all know by now that I really struggle with Nero...I guess he's just never going to work for me.

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Feb. 22 2010, 9:25 am

Nero was a much more purely menacing villian than just about anyone who had come before (with the exception of Khan). That is quite seperate from being "deep" or "well thought out" or even "properly motivated." Fortunately for me, all I really care about is "is this guy menacing enough to scare me?"

Just because he's not "well thought out" doesn't mean he wasn't effective in what he was put on screen to accomplish. Not every villian needs to be The Joker, Darth Vader, or Khan Noonian Singh. A great villian is a rare thing in movies. To expect a movie franchise with 11 films to have Hannibal Lecter in every movie is unrealistic.

I think it's obvious that Nero is a whack-job. His motivations are questionable becuase he's absolutely seering with rage, agony and (perhaps even) insanity. To me, that's just as dangerous and menacing as someone who has a clear purpose, motivation, and background. Haven't you ever seen some a-hole throw things around a room in anger? There's no "motivation" there...the guy's just an a-hole! To me, these kinds of people are FAR more dangerous than any others.

The movie isn't about the villian in this case. It's about Kirk and Spock. I remember reading an article almost a year before the movie came out where Bana said "my role isn't even really that big, and the movie is not really about me at all..."

I think that summs it up. It's not "lazy." It's what was intended. We don't go to the movie to see Nero, we went to see Kirk and Spock...so why spend extra screen time fleshing him out? Khan had the advantage of having an entire 1-hour episode backing him up and adding that "depth" that the fans seem to crave.

MrsStarbuck

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4329

Report this Feb. 22 2010, 9:31 am

Quote (Vger23 @ Feb. 21 2010, 3:25 pm)
I think it's obvious that Nero is a whack-job. His motivations are questionable becuase he's absolutely seering with rage, agony and (perhaps even) insanity. To me, that's just as dangerous and menacing as someone who has a clear purpose, motivation, and background. Haven't you ever seen some a-hole throw things around a room in anger? There's no "motivation" there...the guy's just an a-hole! To me, these kinds of people are FAR more dangerous than any others.

Well, I know I go on about this all the time (sorry) but, to me, the Nero from the comic WASN'T a 'whack-job' as you put it. I don't think anyone will ever be able to convince me personally that he wasn't a missed opportunity...but that's just my opinion.

And yeah, obviously I'm one of those people who likes a bit of depth with their villains...sucks to be me when watching STXI I guess :laugh:

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Feb. 22 2010, 9:42 am

Quote (MrsStarbuck @ Feb. 22 2010, 9:31 am)
Quote (Vger23 @ Feb. 21 2010, 3:25 pm)
I think it's obvious that Nero is a whack-job. His motivations are questionable becuase he's absolutely seering with rage, agony and (perhaps even) insanity. To me, that's just as dangerous and menacing as someone who has a clear purpose, motivation, and background. Haven't you ever seen some a-hole throw things around a room in anger? There's no "motivation" there...the guy's just an a-hole! To me, these kinds of people are FAR more dangerous than any others.

Well, I know I go on about this all the time (sorry) but, to me, the Nero from the comic WASN'T a 'whack-job' as you put it. I don't think anyone will ever be able to convince me personally that he wasn't a missed opportunity...but that's just my opinion.

And yeah, obviously I'm one of those people who likes a bit of depth with their villains...sucks to be me when watching STXI I guess :laugh:

Oh, don't mistake me at all...I LOVE a deep, menacing, nasty villian too!

But, I go to movies like "No Country for Old Men" and "Silence of the Lambs" to see those villians. I go to Star Trek movies to see Kirk and Bones. So, I really don't care very much about the bad guys in Star Trek. Usually, they're not very good...and that's due in large part to the fact that the writers of these movies through the last two decades recognize that the "baddie" is there to serve a plot function...NOT to drive the story. So, you can't focus on a baddie at the expense of the other characters that the audience is PAYING to see.

"Star Wars" was different. Darth Vader was a central aspect of those stories. Nero, Kruge, Soran, Klaa, Chang, etc. are not focal points of the Trek universe...and that's exactly how they come off in the movies.

MrsStarbuck

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4329

Report this Feb. 22 2010, 10:25 am

Quote (Vger23 @ Feb. 21 2010, 3:42 pm)
Nero, Kruge, Soran, Klaa, Chang, etc. are not focal points of the Trek universe...and that's exactly how they come off in the movies.

You're totally right, but this is why (out of the films mentioned that I've actually seen) these are not my favourite Trek films.

But it's a good point that Nero is perhaps no worse than the other villains you listed, and his weakness should maybe not really be a criticism of the makers of STXI over other Trek filmmakers. So because of that, I'm willing to take back my 'lazy writers' comment from above.

But I still don't like Nero :p

Narada

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4008

Report this Feb. 22 2010, 3:19 pm

Quote (MrsStarbuck @ Feb. 22 2010, 6:12 am)
Some of you make a good point that he was an effective plot device, and I agree with that. But at the same time it feels to me like such a missed opportunity to create what could have been an epic villain, ONLY to move the plot along and drive the team together.

Therefore, I have to stick with the opinion that I've held since I saw the film, that Nero is a lame villain, with no depth to him at all, no real motivations for what he's doing (as seen on screen anyway) and to have been handed to an actor like Bana, who would have been capable of so much more, it such a complete shame.

Now if you were to ask me what I think of the Nero from the comic, then it would be a different matter, but I still maintain that they can not expect people to read the comic to get the maximum that they can from the film.

Nor should they have to be familiar with Captain Nemo. Narada, you know I agree with you that the Nemo thing is fantastic, but for the average moviegoer, it shouldn't be a detail that is relied on to stand instead of good on-screen character development.

Like obviously there were comparisons to Khan and Ahab...but if you'd never heard of Ahab then I don't think Khan would have been reduced on screen for lack of those connections being made.

Therefore, to me the Nemo thing felt like a lazy connection that the writers hoped would do their job for them.

Just my opinion, and you all know by now that I really struggle with Nero...I guess he's just never going to work for me.

Yes I agree with you MrsStarbuck and we also discussed this before. As Space Therapist states this movie is not meant to focus on the villain but instead about the development between Kirk and Spock and crew. So for you I can understand if you feel it is a missed opportunity because the villain was not fully developed. I agree he was not fully developed but they also give clues to his back story in other forms. In this way he is developed in an extra curricular sense and not as much directly on screen. I like this aspect because I did not feel this movie should be focused mainly on the villain. I am glad they only used him as a catalyst to bring together this crew in a new way.

Zaltar

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3014

Report this Feb. 22 2010, 4:07 pm

TOS
1. Chang
2. Krug
3. Khan
4. Sybok
5. Humanity
6. V'ger
7. Nero

TNG
1. Ru'afo
2. Shinzon
3. Borg Queen
4. Soran




NOTE: Nero had certain aspects about him that I liked but for the most part he was a Zero to me.

SpockJenkins30

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 27

Report this Feb. 22 2010, 5:10 pm

Nero was a total waste IMHO. I would rather have the crew deal with Ayel (sp?), Nero's second in command, the entire movie then deal with Nero's hissy fits (would somebody please give this man an aspirin). At least Ayel had more believability then Nero.

I understand some people don't think the villain should be that important but you still have a responsibility to at least make him believable and give us a good performance/good acting.

Character Bio
Nero = pissed off miner

Thats it. No substance whatsoever. V'ger had more appeal, that's sad lol.

SpockJenkins30

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 27

Report this Feb. 22 2010, 5:21 pm

Quote (Zaltar @ Feb. 22 2010, 4:07 pm)
NOTE: Nero had certain aspects about him that I liked but for the most part he was a Zero to me.

What aspects were there to like about Nero? I didn't think Nero was faceted (let alone multi-faceted) enough to even have "aspects"...

And yes just the thought of Nero makes me angry.  Perhaps I will give this thread a break ;)

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum