I don't think STV is that terrible

TMP felt more real to me than TFF did.

 

I think the scenario was more 'real' (and no Deck 72) but none of the characters seemed like real people to me.

 

You know what's so RIGHT about Star Trek V? Nothing.

That said, I loved the soundtrack.

 

I tend to look at Star Trek V in the same way I look at, say, Batman & Robin. On some level that film is enjoyable for the sheer barefaced way it updates the cheesy feeling of the 1960s Adam West series, and if watched in that context (rather than, for example, as being a sequel to Batman and Batman Returns) then there is much to enjoy. STV: TFF is much the same. With it's polystyrene rock planets, it's cardboard villain, and it's almost myopic focus on William Shatner's ego, it all comes across as a perfect carbon copy of the essence of sixties Trek. But in the 1980s.

Which is not to mistake it for actually being a good movie, of course. Perish the thought.

 

I enjoyed ST:V it just doesnt hold up well coming off of Voyage Home.

I really dont understand the hate for this Movie.

I absolutely hate Generations.

 

Generations is the Mona Lisa compared to ST V. To each their own. Both films have been dissed by their creative teams.

 

I don't understand the hate for Generations. The reasons have always seemed weak and contrived to me. Kirk's death is really the only major misstep there.

 

I think for Generations you need only go as far as the writer's commentary on the DVD. They know it, and nail it. Too many cooks in the kitchen, insisting on a checklist of things to include. Klingons, Ent D destruction, Kirk, Kirk's Death, Data emotion chip sub-subplot.

If you remove the Lursa Betor stuff, you probably get a better movie.

 

Many movies can be improved, and it's easy to think how in hindsight. Take Kirk's well publised death in GEN, they had to reshoot due to audiance reaction to the original, did they improve it. Some might say not after they basically dropped a Bridge on him.

 

Unfortunate that the death of Kirk was to be part of a young feature writing team, and not in the hands of veterans. I'm sure Ron Moore would admit (not sure about Braga) that he could do a lot more with Kirk now, than he did then.

Back OT, ST V is not good.

 

um, so it's "bad" because it includes a bunch of stuff?

again, makes no sense as a reason to dislike it.

 

'too much' stuff.

 

ok, so it's packed with too much stuff going on, but is it good stuff or bad stuff?

 

I think the problem is that there are many 'good' ideas, when taken separately. The Nexus had potential, Soran as a sympathetic villain, the Duras sisters coming back for revenge, Data's emotion chip, the destruction of the Enterprise, Kirk's death. However, trying to cram all of those ideas into one movie, regardless of whether they fit together or not, kind of ruins the film.

A lot of these ideas needed more time and effort to rise to their full potential, however with so many ideas fighting for time in this movie, none of them get the right amount. The meeting of Picard and Kirk and Kirk's death illustrates this perfectly. I honestly thought there would be more time devoted to Kirk and Picard working together. Instead the great meeting of the great captains is hastily shoved into a few scenes near the end, fizzling out into one of the most anti-climatic death scenes ever.

Generations does have good ideas. It just has too many ideas that don't exactly fit together, and not enough time to explore any single idea properly.

 

I see Trek V as being filled with lost opportunities due to an over-reaching storyline that kept getting watered down as it moved into production. A madman cult leader taking the Enterprise on a quest to find God? It still could have worked. IMO it was a sirloin concept, but on a meatloaf budget with zero development time.

 

I think it's partly this, as well as partly the fact that Generations had the shortest prep time of any Trek feature film ever. While The Undiscovered Country had a miniscule nine months to get from from outline to finished product, Generations trumped even that because they were given the order that they had to be in cinemas mere months after TNG ended it's television run. The script had to be outlined/written while the television series was still in full production on it's seventh season, and to be honest it shows. Cracks appear throughout the script of Generations in a way that they may not have done if there had been a bit of buffer time between the end of the series and the production of the movie.

The Final Frontier has got it's production problems (as a result of the '88 writer's strike), but on the whole the concept was properly storyboarded and thought out in advance. It all went to shit after they went into production, though.

 

What was wrong with The Final Frontier.

Give a list of reasons please.

 

a "sirloin concept" that was basically already tried in "way to eden."