The Trek BBS

The Trek BBS (http://www.trekbbs.com/index.php)
-   Star Trek Movies I-X (http://www.trekbbs.com/forumdisplay.php?f=42)
-   -   The Motion Picture question.. (http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=232132)

los2188 December 1 2013 06:11 PM

The Motion Picture question..
 
As I'm sure a lot of you know, there's been a Star Trek movie marathon on SyFy currently. It got me to thinking about a few things. This is a pretty straight forward question, but do you think The Motion Picture was a good start to the Star Trek movie saga including the TNG movies as well? I know that TMP had nothing to do with the TNG movie set, although, I still don't totally understand why the whole V'ger thing couldn't in some way be connected the Borg, but that's another long back and forth thread that's been over-analyzed to death.

BillJ December 1 2013 06:19 PM

Re: The Motion Picture question..
 
I rank TMP as my favorite Trek film. So yes I think it was a good start.

SeerSGB December 1 2013 06:32 PM

Re: The Motion Picture question..
 
Quote:

BillJ wrote: (Post 8962090)
I rank TMP as my favorite Trek film. So yes I think it was a good start.

^ This. For all its flaws, TMP is the one ST movie that I can guarantee I'll watch a least once a month.

I also think TMP marks the transition point where Trek goes from pulpy 60s sci-fi to trying to be a more dramatic, serious, sci-fi franchise.

BillJ December 1 2013 06:39 PM

Re: The Motion Picture question..
 
I just watched TMP this morning on SyFy and I own the thing on both Blu-ray (theatrical) and DVD (Director's Edition). :lol:

LOKAI of CHERON December 1 2013 07:22 PM

Re: The Motion Picture question..
 
Quote:

SeerSGB wrote: (Post 8962114)
Quote:

BillJ wrote: (Post 8962090)
I rank TMP as my favorite Trek film. So yes I think it was a good start.

^ This.

This x2!

CorporalCaptain December 1 2013 07:29 PM

Re: The Motion Picture question..
 
Quote:

los2188 wrote: (Post 8962084)
I still don't totally understand why the whole V'ger thing couldn't in some way be connected the Borg, but that's another long back and forth thread that's been over-analyzed to death.

There are at least five very straightforward reasons why not.

The first is that the Borg hadn't been written yet when TMP was created, so the writers of TMP had no intention of involving the Borg, by default.

Second, when the Borg were created, there was no effort to connect their origin with V'GER. Neither the origin nor the fate of V'GER has been mentioned in on-screen canon outside of TMP.

Third, if Spock is right that the machine planet is represented in V'GER's memory, then V'GER digitized the machines that modified Voyager 6! Oops! Except that they were machines and probably didn't feel any emotion. Ergo, if it was Borg or a Borg precursor all on one planet, then V'GER would have gotten rid of the Borg.

Fourth, Spock called them machines and not cyborgs.

Fifth, the construction of V'GER depended upon machines being unable to fully decipher the Voyager 6 probe. But full-blown Borg, having the experience of an entire collective of assimilated carbon-based life forms to draw upon, should not have had that fundamental handicap.

There are just too many things that don't jibe and which would require tweaking and qualification, for it to be a natural fit.

---

On the question of whether TMP was a good enough start, I was disappointed with TMP when it first came out, and I still am. However, when stacked up against the other Star Trek films, I rank it near the top. This tells me not only that making good Star Trek movies must be a lot harder than I want it to be, but also that probably my expectations at the time were way too high. And that's not to say that TMP is objectively awful, because it isn't. It's not awful, but it has a lot of problems. It also has a lot of good things going for it.

SpocksLeftEar December 1 2013 09:28 PM

Re: The Motion Picture question..
 
The first and the best. Period.

BillJ December 1 2013 09:30 PM

Re: The Motion Picture question..
 
Quote:

CorporalCaptain wrote: (Post 8962273)
...

I agree with all of your reasons why the V'ger/Borg connection makes no sense. :techman:

Maurice December 1 2013 09:42 PM

Re: The Motion Picture question..
 
Plus, to make V'ger connected to the Borg is small-universe at its worst. Space really shouldn't be the shallow end of the gene pool where everything is inbred.

The Old Mixer December 1 2013 09:47 PM

Re: The Motion Picture question..
 
TMP comes off as much more of a standalone than part of the TOS movie series that follows.

BillJ December 1 2013 10:01 PM

Re: The Motion Picture question..
 
Quote:

Maurice wrote: (Post 8962750)
Plus, to make V'ger connected to the Borg is small-universe at its worst. Space really shouldn't be the shallow end of the gene pool where everything is inbred.

Agreed. I wish Pocket Books would agree.

Quote:

The Oy! Mixer wrote: (Post 8962777)
TMP comes off as much more of a standalone than part of the TOS movie series that follows.

Agreed again. I've often said its the best of the TNG films. :lol:

los2188 December 1 2013 10:09 PM

Re: The Motion Picture question..
 
Quote:

CorporalCaptain wrote: (Post 8962273)
Quote:

los2188 wrote: (Post 8962084)
I still don't totally understand why the whole V'ger thing couldn't in some way be connected the Borg, but that's another long back and forth thread that's been over-analyzed to death.

There are at least five very straightforward reasons why not.

The first is that the Borg hadn't been written yet when TMP was created, so the writers of TMP had no intention of involving the Borg, by default.

Second, when the Borg were created, there was no effort to connect their origin with V'GER. Neither the origin nor the fate of V'GER has been mentioned in on-screen canon outside of TMP.

Third, if Spock is right that the machine planet is represented in V'GER's memory, then V'GER digitized the machines that modified Voyager 6! Oops! Except that they were machines and probably didn't feel any emotion. Ergo, if it was Borg or a Borg precursor all on one planet, then V'GER would have gotten rid of the Borg.

Fourth, Spock called them machines and not cyborgs.

Fifth, the construction of V'GER depended upon machines being unable to fully decipher the Voyager 6 probe. But full-blown Borg, having the experience of an entire collective of assimilated carbon-based life forms to draw upon, should not have had that fundamental handicap.

There are just too many things that don't jibe and which would require tweaking and qualification, for it to be a natural fit.

---

On the question of whether TMP was a good enough start, I was disappointed with TMP when it first came out, and I still am. However, when stacked up against the other Star Trek films, I rank it near the top. This tells me not only that making good Star Trek movies must be a lot harder than I want it to be, but also that probably my expectations at the time were way too high. And that's not to say that TMP is objectively awful, because it isn't. It's not awful, but it has a lot of problems. It also has a lot of good things going for it.

I understand all of what you said and I'm not in any position to argue what you just said, but just to clear things up, I was referring to a Borg/V'Ger connection AFTER Decker 'merged' with V'Ger. At that point the usefulness, if you will, of carbon based units, became clear to V'ger, thus integrating them into their make up so to speak.

Also, I'm well aware that the Borg probably wasn't so much as a passing thought by the powers that be in Star Trek at the time. But that doesn't mean much of anything. Scotty implied to a small degree and if it can be interpreted that way, that Kirk was still alive in the TNG episode "Relics", even though later on in Generations....blah, blah, blah, and you know the rest. The point being is that things can be changed to fit scenarios.

But as I said before, I will not argue with what you typed. :)

King Daniel Into Darkness December 1 2013 10:09 PM

Re: The Motion Picture question..
 
TMP isn't enough like the series or the following films to be a "fitting" first Trek movie. I still like it, but it's more like an odd AU than a piece of the puzzle.

CorporalCaptain December 1 2013 10:16 PM

Re: The Motion Picture question..
 
Quote:

los2188 wrote: (Post 8962885)
I understand all of what you said and I'm not in any position to argue what you just said, but just to clear things up, I was referring to a Borg/V'Ger connection AFTER Decker 'merged' with V'Ger. At that point the usefulness, if you will, of carbon based units, became clear to V'ger, thus integrating them into their make up so to speak.

Consider what Maurice said.

Quote:

Maurice wrote: (Post 8962750)
Plus, to make V'ger connected to the Borg is small-universe at its worst. Space really shouldn't be the shallow end of the gene pool where everything is inbred.

---

Quote:

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: (Post 8962888)
TOS isn't enough like the series or the following films to be a "fitting" first Trek movie. I still like it, but it's more like an odd AU than a piece of the puzzle.

You mean "TMP isn't" I assume. (If so, then) I agree, and that was one of the bigger problems I had with it.

King Daniel Into Darkness December 1 2013 10:22 PM

Re: The Motion Picture question..
 
Whoops! Fixed (thanks!)


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:45 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.