ST:TMP - The Motion Picture.

[Neo]

ooo no... i would not Dave.. you are doing much better than me at the moment..

 

[Dave]

Do you think that Starfleet was going through a pastel phase during this movie?

TPTB rediscover real colours before 'The Wrath of Khan'.

 

[Tabitha]

the uniforms were nasty indeed, but it doesn't excuse the fact that this movie was lame lame lame.

I re-watched TMP recently, hadn't seen it for a very long time, I was very disappointed - it's like the editor got fired before post even began.... All those long scenes where nothing happens, staring out the viewscreen... I'll excuse them the long shots of the new Enterprise, but really, what were they thinking? Booooring!

 

[ray gower]

Took the opportunity to watch this again today.

Okay as a film on the big screen it sucked. The pastel uniforms are awful and it significantly lacks action. But if we ignore the long shots of nothing much, it makes for a good extended original series episode.

It reminded me why I enjoyed Star Trek so much and set up TNG so well

 

[Dave]

Originally posted by ray gower
Okay as a film on the big screen it sucked... It reminded me why I enjoyed Star Trek so much and set up TNG so well

But the fans never asked for a big screen movie, they wanted to continue the original series. It was originally going to be Star Trek II (TV series) and it would probably have been much better that way (minus the expensive 'Star Wars' copied special effects that were just "boring".)

As it was I think TNG is better than Star Trek II ever could have been, and the move to the big screen made it possible to have 10 movies and counting (which I doubt would have happened if Star Trek II had happened.)

Many of the Star Trek II stories were re-used in TNG. The music from TMP was used in TNG. Decker and Illia resemble Riker and Troi more than a little. So, yes TNG does owe quite a little to TMP.

 

[WarlikeMenelaos]

I just re-watched 'The Motion Picture' after getting into a lengthy discussion about it somewhere else.

When I was younger I thought the movie was so boring and was, for me, the worst of the Star Trek films (followed by Insurrection if anyone wanted to know) However upon rewatching it there are several things that I noticed that make the film shoot up in my estimation.

It was never meant to be an all out action popcorn flick (like Star Wars) Gene Roddenbery was more or less in full control of this film and he wanted a more philisophical '2001: A Space Oddessy' feel to it. The long drawn out bits were padding because, as already mentioned, most of this was originally intended for Star Trek II (the series) however, there are artistic reasons for having some of these scenes.

The 'Enterprise flyby' scene was there for three purposes, one to reintroduce the audience to new look Enterprise (and show off how beautiful she looked!), secondly they wanted to get a sense that Kirk really missed the ship...almost as much as the fans, the third reason was to get over the sheer size of the Enterprise.

Despite the original series being great, we never got a really good idea of just how big the Enterprise was. In the Motion Picture they show it, they use every trick to show off the size of the ship (including little guys in space suits)

Later in the movie we get the huge V'Ger cloud which makes the Enterprise look tiny. That's to get over the overwhelming size of the cloud and an attempt to amplify the total alieness and threatening nature. I thought it was extremely successful in giving us a feel of something so inhuman, so totally cold and....well....unfeeling.

The character stories present in the film are also very 'Star Trek', Kirk is now an Admiral who isn't really comfortable with his position. This story arc is even extended over into Wrath of Khan. He doubts himself several times in the movie, including the transporter accident, the wormhole and even when he tells McCoy that he needs him....badly.

Spock also has a journey, at the start he wants to rid himself of all emotions but by the end of it, through his experiences with V'Ger he realises that emotions are a part of him, an important part.

As a stand alone movie it is pretty decent, underrated in my opinion. However, it's true strength lies in its ability to reintroduce us to our old friends and shows us what's unique and amazing about Star Trek. It isn't some old sci-fi show, it has meaning and depth that goes beyond 'omg, big bad alien fleet....we'll have a battle for a while until some odd plot device saves us....plus we'll add in loads of explosions for...err...fun!'

The movie ends with the line 'The human adventure is just beginning...'

How right it was considering the success enjoyed by its sequels, Star Trek had finally returned to audiences around the world...and did so in style.

...

...

The uniforms were awful though!

 

[steve12553]

AS someone who saw the original series on tv, first run,as a teenager and then waited teen years with nothing but the cartoon show, I loved the movie. I had no problem ignoring its flaws. I was enrapped by the long lingering shots of the Enterprise. It was Star Trek, by God and I loved it. THe cast was brought back one by one and reintroduced to us. The Earth was in danger and the Enterprise crew was there to save it. Life was good again.

 

[AE35Unit]

I watched this yesterday,its been ages since I saw it. Enjoyed it immensely apart from the use of music from TNG instead of the original music. (Its the director's edition)
Oh and the wormhole episode. It was created by the overly keen use of the warp drive apparently but it was over done.
And I guess the 4 minutes where the crew were in awe of the giant cloud containing Vger was to impart a sense of wonder onto its audience.

 

[coolbox62]

The last 2 years of the 5 year mission of the Enterprise was the Animated Series (1973-74) that is why Kirk said that line to Decker in ST:TMP and also when the Enterprise got refitted, the class of starship was Enterprise class not Constitution class because the original Enterprise (NCC-1701) was Constitution class.

 

[Huttman]

I watched this yesterday,its been ages since I saw it. Enjoyed it immensely apart from the use of music from TNG instead of the original music. (Its the director's edition)

TNG 'borrowed' it from the motion picture, not the other way around. Only new FX and some editing were changed in the director's cut, not the music.

 

[Rodders]

I personally thought that this was a better film than a lot of people give it credit for. OK, it could be long winded, but it looked great, a good story and don't forget, it had the unenviable task of reintroducing established characters as well as a change in the look and feel of the series.

I was not old enough to appreciate it at the time, but i'd love to go back and see what people like us where saying in the day.

 

[Dave]

Are you saying I'm old?

What was I saying at the time? That it only got made because of the whole Star Wars phenomenon that had made sci-fi films suddenly profitable again. That film-makers somehow believed that special effect could make a film without a story.

I appreciate now more that that they were trying to introduce new characters - Illya and Decker - that could possibly go on and result in a new series. That they bear more than a passing resemblance to the original TNG 'casting book' for Riker and Troi makes it even more clear.

But at the time I couldn't understand why they did that at the expense of ditching the original triangular character relationship - Bones-Kirk-Spock - that had made the series what it was.

In a way, it was for the better, because it meant we went on to get small screen TNG and big screen TOS.

I've not seen the new abomination yet. I am told that it is very good. Do I go or wait for the DVD??

I hated TMP so much that I never went to see 'The Wrath of Khan' - what a mistake that was. It still gets voted the best trek film even today.

 

[logan_run]

I am in the minority here. but i liked it better then wrath of kaughn,

 

[BAYLOR]

Visually impressive but not very exciting.

 

[KGeo777]

I am surprised there is so little discussion on this one.
I was kind of disappointed when I saw it in 79--it was slow, the characters seemed stilted but looking at years later, it's better than I initially thought.
I think the weakest aspect to it are Ilya and Dekker--they are not interesting enough to have such a focus and then she gets turned into a robot.

The stuff I did like--even in 79--was the opening--that klingon ship stuff was so cool.
And the transporter accident and the wormhole scene and Spock's trip through V-Ger.
It did have elements that were Star Treky but back then everything was compared to Star Wars.

If it didn't give the same type of thrill or didn't try to it was dismissed immediately.
I think they had a very difficult task because they could do anything with it--and with so many choices, it was hard to come up with something that would fit all aspects of Star Trek.

I was surprised the NG was so lazy and just recycled TMP theme instead of creating their own.

I like the klingon theme best though.

 

[CupofJoe]

I like ST:TMP more than most of the other ST films [especially the original cast films].
I think it was good that they didn't try to leap too much on the Star Wars wave. Yes it is Sci-Fi but its not all magic swords, sorry I mean Light Sabres and huge space battles. That wasn't what Roddenberry was about.
Ilya and Dekker were deadly dull. There was none of that magic and undefinable chemistry between the characters.
Even that would probably have been made to work if we had seen their back story develop on screen in a TV show.
All in all, they do feel remarkable like a first draft of Decker and Troi from TNG...
An aspect of the film I really like is the soundtrack that slips between music and sound-effect effortlessly. And for some reason reminds me of Aaron Copland.

 

[Rodders]

I remember going to see this at the cinema as a child. I enjoyed it, (it was set in space, after all), but i don't think that i understood it well. I think it gets better on subsequent viewings as an adult. I think it's a well underrated episode.

 

[BAYLOR]

At the time Paramount was unhappy with the 40 million dollars cost of the film which at the time ,was a huge sum. The film did make back its money. For the sequel Wrath of Khan , Paramount wanted to do the film for cheaper money which the did and they wanted more action in the films . Gene Roddenberry was not put in charge but given the title of Executive Consultant.

 

[KGeo777]

I think they needed someone human for Ilya--that Deltan business was stupid. And she needed to be more emotional at the beginning, someone who could be sympathetic to the audience.
Also the support crew had so little to do. That was a big blunder.

Another cool thing was the V-ger probe. That column of light was a neat alien concept.
It felt more like 2001 than Star Wars.
As if they were saying--we want to do real science fiction, not just comic book soap opera.
But I think they made a mistake by making Kirk personally compromised--that he was rusty.
I wasn't crazy about the Spock kolinar business either. They should have ditched that.

On the series Kirk would face things that were a lesson to be learned but it was usually about ideology--not about his personal status.
That was a big problem I had with ST 2. He became kind of a fuddy duddy and that was done only so they could shoe-horn in the character arc of him needing to face a death situation---which was convenient amnesia since he faced it every week on the series.

The lack of a real antagonist also was jarring since we expect some kind of threat and once they made it about the alien wanting to experience emotion...it was too Roddenberry-ish. He always had to go for that love angle. For a movie aimed at mass audiences, that kind of sucked, but it would have been hard to pick a story that had all the required ingredients.

 

[Droflet]

Oh dear, are we STILL talking about this trainwreck? It was a terrible, boring movie. Let it die with whatever dignity it has left.