RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 140,915
Posts: 5,478,188
Members: 25,053
Currently online: 505
Newest member: johnclever25

TrekToday headlines

New Star Trek Funko Pop! Vinyl Figures
By: T'Bonz on Nov 26

QMx Mini Phaser Ornament
By: T'Bonz on Nov 26

Stewart as Neo-Nazi Skinhead
By: T'Bonz on Nov 26

Klingon Bloodwine To Debut
By: T'Bonz on Nov 25

Trek Actors In War Of The Worlds Fundraiser
By: T'Bonz on Nov 25

Star Trek: The Next Generation Gag Reel Tease
By: T'Bonz on Nov 24

Shatner In Haven
By: T'Bonz on Nov 24

Retro Review: Covenant
By: Michelle on Nov 22

Two Official Starships Collection Previews
By: T'Bonz on Nov 21

Saldana: Women Issues In Hollywood
By: T'Bonz on Nov 21


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek Movies > Star Trek Movies I-X

Star Trek Movies I-X Discuss the first ten big screen outings in this forum!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old September 2 2012, 04:51 PM   #46
Green Lantern
Fleet Captain
 
Green Lantern's Avatar
 
Location: The bad of whoever pays for the night.
Re: Is Wrath of Khan Overrated

BillJ wrote: View Post
Green Lantern wrote: View Post
Personaly, every TNG film tops any TOS film. Generations being my favourate.
Bias is a bad, bad thing. I love TNG, but the films are a putrid mess. Even First Contact fails simple logic. We have the Borg come all the way across the galaxy then go back in time or else we don't have a movie. If the Borg beam just five drones down to 21st century Earth, it falls PDQ and again we don't have a movie.
Bias is not a bad thing, it's what you do with it that matters
NrobbieC wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
Green Lantern wrote: View Post
Personaly, every TNG film tops any TOS film.
Bias is a bad, bad thing. I love TNG, but the films are a putrid mess.
Ah, the pot and the kettle get along famously :P

I agree that every TNG film is so much better the TOS ones. I also feel every spin-off topples TOS.
I have seen them by the way so my opinions are based on something I'm not trying to flame anyone.
I don't actully like the TOS films that much, however I do enjoy the TOS series alot. Still prefer TNG though. I don't like Voyeger at all, and I've only seen one episode of enterprise 9don't like it0, and one and a half of DS9 (from what I can renember, I liked it.
BillJ wrote: View Post
NrobbieC wrote: View Post

I agree that every TNG film is so much better the TOS ones.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the vast majority of movie goers disagree with you.
But.......HE'S GOT ME ON HIS SIDE!!!!!
teacake wrote: View Post
I consider Generations a TOS film.

Kirk is so freaking huge that he squashes the TNG stuff into tinsel.
No, Generations is more of a TNG film due to the basic fat that only Kirk and Scotty have memerable apearances, and Scottys was just a cameo. Really, Kirk was the onlt TOS member that is in it much, but he's not even in it for half the film, but most of the TNG cast are in the film alot, so that makes it a TNG film. The film also has more of a TNG feel in general.
Green Lantern is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 2 2012, 05:02 PM   #47
NrobbieC
Commander
 
NrobbieC's Avatar
 
Location: Burton, UK
Re: Is Wrath of Khan Overrated

sonak wrote: View Post
Green Lantern wrote: View Post
AllStarEntprise wrote: View Post
Is Wrath Of Khan overrated?
Yeah, it is. It's not even the best film of the TOS films, let alone all of them. Personaly, every TNG film tops any TOS film. Generations being my favourate. The first film ever was the worst one, they all looked so camp in that. Still prefer it to Voyeger though. Voyeger sucks.

you think INS or NEM top TWOK, TVH, or TUC?


That's an interesting perspective. Is it the action, the characters, ? I'd be curious to read why.
For me personally, it is largely the characters. TOS guys feel I dunno, wooden, it's not that they're unlikeable as such, just boring. They just don't demand attention on screen (with the exception of Sulu in Flashback). For example in Generations Shatner is pretty much in the background, he's overwhelmed by the others because they're much better actors. Or is that just because Shatner's terrible?
And there's also the quality of the effects when compared to the other stuff. The spin-off Treks, for me, look newer that stuff that's new now (except early TNG but that has a few issues), including XI which hasn't aged well, but then I'm not really a fan of that style of special effects - Transformers and the like. But I could be bias having grown up on them. Sometimes older stuff will look good (Aliens, for example) but it is good Trek hasn't been given the Lucas treatment and continually been edited and re-mastered whenever the software gets an update.
The TNG films also have much better pacing, the actions faster and the drama doesn't waffle on.
I split the TNG and TOS films up, because of the difference in quality - so I'd say TWoK is one of the better TOS films, but not a great Trek film or general film.

That's just my view on the whole thing, I'm not very good at explaining my opinion.
NrobbieC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 2 2012, 05:14 PM   #48
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Is Wrath of Khan Overrated

NrobbieC wrote: View Post

For example in Generations Shatner is pretty much in the background, he's overwhelmed by the others because they're much better actors. Or is that just because Shatner's terrible?
The only Next Gen actor Shatner shared the screen with was Stewart and he more than held his own and he would've thumped Frakes, Sirtis, Burton, Dorn and McFadden if he'd been on screen with them.
__________________
"If I hadn't tried, the cost would have been my soul." - Admiral James T. Kirk, Star Trek III: The Search for Spock
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 2 2012, 05:38 PM   #49
NrobbieC
Commander
 
NrobbieC's Avatar
 
Location: Burton, UK
Re: Is Wrath of Khan Overrated

BillJ wrote: View Post
NrobbieC wrote: View Post

For example in Generations Shatner is pretty much in the background, he's overwhelmed by the others because they're much better actors. Or is that just because Shatner's terrible?
The only Next Gen actor Shatner shared the screen with was Stewart and he more than held his own and he would've thumped Frakes, Sirtis, Burton, Dorn and McFadden if he'd been on screen with them.
He also shared the screen with Malcolm McDowell. Had the scenes on the Enterprise-D been going on at the same time, they would've held my attention a lot more.

I disagree though, I mean Frakes isn't brilliant and McFadden was pretty underused but they're still better than Shatner imo. His performances never seem natural to me, it seems like he's just trying to get attention and it falls flat on its arse with me.
NrobbieC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 2 2012, 06:40 PM   #50
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Is Wrath of Khan Overrated

NrobbieC wrote: View Post

He also shared the screen with Malcolm McDowell. Had the scenes on the Enterprise-D been going on at the same time, they would've held my attention a lot more.

I disagree though, I mean Frakes isn't brilliant and McFadden was pretty underused but they're still better than Shatner imo. His performances never seem natural to me, it seems like he's just trying to get attention and it falls flat on its arse with me.
McDowell wasn't part of the Next Gen cast and honestly, he out acted both Stewart and Shatner in the film.

There's a reason Shatner still gets work fifty years into his career and the Next Gen cast struggles outside of Stewart and Spiner. They're bit actors and nothing more, just like Nichols, Doohan, Takei and Koenig. Who Stewart and Spiner would act rings around.
__________________
"If I hadn't tried, the cost would have been my soul." - Admiral James T. Kirk, Star Trek III: The Search for Spock
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 2 2012, 06:43 PM   #51
NrobbieC
Commander
 
NrobbieC's Avatar
 
Location: Burton, UK
Re: Is Wrath of Khan Overrated

BillJ wrote: View Post

McDowell wasn't part of the Next Gen cast and honestly, he out acted both Stewart and Shatner in the film.
It doesn't matter, when the initial thingy was about the film.
And I agree.
NrobbieC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 2 2012, 06:51 PM   #52
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Is Wrath of Khan Overrated

NrobbieC wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post

McDowell wasn't part of the Next Gen cast and honestly, he out acted both Stewart and Shatner in the film.
It doesn't matter, when the initial thingy was about the film.
And I agree.
I thought you were talking about the cast of The Next Generation. My mistake.

Shatner as an actor, goes in whole hog in everything he does. He acts with a zest that is missing from most actors today. For me, that zest is what makes Jim Kirk such a great character.

And without Shatner and Nimoy, there is no Captain Picard for us to compare and contrast with.
__________________
"If I hadn't tried, the cost would have been my soul." - Admiral James T. Kirk, Star Trek III: The Search for Spock
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 2 2012, 08:07 PM   #53
LOKAI of CHERON
Commodore
 
LOKAI of CHERON's Avatar
 
Location: Post-apocalyptic ruins of my once mighty Homeworld.
Re: Is Wrath of Khan Overrated

lurok wrote: View Post
The age factor thing someone quoted is bullshit. A good film is a good film no matter when it was made or when you saw it.
Agreed!
My Name Is Legion wrote: View Post
...but grist for humor is nonetheless the film's primary resonance for most non-trekkies.
Eh?
__________________
YOU MONOTONE HUMANS ARE ALL ALIKE... FIRST YOU CONDEMN, THEN ATTACK.
LOKAI of CHERON is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 2 2012, 08:54 PM   #54
Galileo7
Fleet Captain
 
Galileo7's Avatar
 
Location: U.S.A.
Re: Is Wrath of Khan Overrated

teacake wrote: View Post
I consider Generations a TOS film.

Kirk is so freaking huge that he squashes the TNG stuff into tinsel.
Agree.
Galileo7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 2 2012, 09:36 PM   #55
CorporalClegg
Admiral
 
CorporalClegg's Avatar
 
Location: Land of Enchantment
Re: Is Wrath of Khan Overrated

Absolutely it is.

I think this thread proves it. There is unrequited obsession with it among Trekkies. I have no idea where it comes from--I can only guess it has something to do with the nostalgia goggles.

Fans act like it's one of the greatest films ever, and it simply isn't. It isn't even one of the greatest SF&F films of all time. I could easily name 20-25 genre films I would put before it just off the top of my head--even ones I don't like.

The single biggest problem with it is breaks so many of the most basic rule of story telling.

The most significant of these no-nos is "show don't tell." Every major plot-point (specifically those that directly related to the antagonist) occurred off-screen. The audience was then introduced to them later via exposition. Your first grade teacher told you not to do that. The rule still applies to hack directors.

Secondly, all three climaxes were resolved with some kind of deus ex machina. It's really hard to take your heroes seriously if they can pull rabbits out of their hats on a whim. Obviously, this has become a major point of contention with the later Trek series and a valid critique. My only question is: why does TWOK get a free pass?

It introduces a completely pointless subplot: The Genesis device. On the surface, it served three purposes: moved the plot along, was an outlet for Khan's revenge (see above), and was a set-up for the next film. On the other hand, it added nothing to the main plot and theme. In fact, I would only argue it handicapped the movie.

Don't believe me? Imagine for a seconded the whole Genesis bit was completely omitted from the film. Or if that's too much, pretend the Marcuses are still just in phase one of the project. Now go through all the major moments of the story and think of all the different ways things could have been advanced. Khan's revenge suddenly becomes so much more poignant and focused, and the story isn't stumbling over itself to fit this cumbersome gizmo in somewhere.

As for it being there to set-up the next film, that's just another one of those silly no-nos. Think of all the great duo/trilogies. The first story is either completely stand alone or the stories are completely connected. The ones that try to dangle strings generally just fall off the radar. This, for example, is why the Donner Cut of Supes II works so much better for a lot of people.

Now I admit this film does have its merits. Montablan's performance, while not great, is at least very entertaining (as Dennis and teacake have pointed out) and probably worth the price of admission.

The ending is also very touching despite being stunt theatrics that are completely askew from the rest of the plot.

But the problems are just too glaring. They drag it down from would could of potentially been a great film to just an average space adventure.

Is it the best Star Trek film? Well I suppose that could be argued. (I would say no.) But that really isn't saying much. Despite the fan fair, Trek films pretty much range from mediocre at best to abysmal at worst.

That's not to say I don't enjoy them. I can sit down and enjoy any of the eleven. But I don't have any false perception as to where they rank in the annals of cinema.
__________________
Konnichi wa!
CorporalClegg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 3 2012, 12:06 AM   #56
Admiral Buzzkill
Fleet Admiral
 
Re: Is Wrath of Khan Overrated

LOKAI of CHERON wrote: View Post
My Name Is Legion wrote: View Post
...but grist for humor is nonetheless the film's primary resonance for most non-trekkies.
Eh?
Grist for humor is nonetheless TWOK's primary resonance for most non-trekkies.
Admiral Buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 3 2012, 01:20 AM   #57
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Is Wrath of Khan Overrated

My Name Is Legion wrote: View Post
LOKAI of CHERON wrote: View Post
My Name Is Legion wrote: View Post
...but grist for humor is nonetheless the film's primary resonance for most non-trekkies.
Eh?
Grist for humor is nonetheless TWOK's primary resonance for most non-trekkies.
But for the jokes to work, the audience has to be aware the film exists.
__________________
"If I hadn't tried, the cost would have been my soul." - Admiral James T. Kirk, Star Trek III: The Search for Spock
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 3 2012, 01:33 AM   #58
MANT!
Rear Admiral
 
MANT!'s Avatar
 
Location: Mare Island Naval Shipyard
Re: Is Wrath of Khan Overrated

I do find that "The Best Trek Film" by the fan's vote is TWOK...however the best Trek film measured by the real measure of number of "butts in the seats" was The Voyage Home..

To me it's what ever Trek film I'm in the mood for at the time...but it's NOT Nemesis, Insurrection, Generations or The Final Frontier.. all those were stinkburgers period..

In the main TWOK created the Trek Film franchise mold to which they were
made ( modest budgets, decent special effects, for max return on the investment)

It's Economical Space Opera, something that TMP didn't grasp and Nemesis forgot..


I find that the TNG films try too hard to be action movies without remembering that the TNG series wasn't about the action it was about the DRAMA..


Picard wasn't an 80s action hero..but they tried to make him one..

and that's why the TNG films, for the most part, missed the target.

First Contact's flaws made TWOK seem like Citizen Kane in comparison.

It's not that I didn't enjoy First Contact, but it's story isn't as well constructed as Khan
or The Voyage Home.. and of all the Trek films, The Voyage Home has the best construction..

But I like Wraith of Khan MORE than The Voyage Home..Maybe it's watching the Shat meet his match in overacting..
__________________
Ryan Ladson Geddings 03-06-1989 to 11-27-2013
Requiescat in pace
MANT! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 3 2012, 03:13 AM   #59
Captain Nebula
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: Is Wrath of Khan Overrated

BillJ wrote: View Post
Why? The Motion Picture footage serves the purpose it was intended to. Remember, the home video era hadn't taken off yet so I doubt anyone actually remembered those shots even being in TMP. And why would you ditch the amazing model work done by ILM?
A lot of it was good FX back when it came out in '82. Now it just looks crappy. Except for the fight in the nebula.

Also:
The shuttle docking in the Engineering section when the ship is in 'drydock', but the crew entering the ship in the Photon Torpedo bay.

The Enterprise looking like it already has battle damage in Engineering before the Reliant even fires on it.
Captain Nebula is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 3 2012, 05:20 AM   #60
Maurice
Vice Admiral
 
Maurice's Avatar
 
Location: Maurice in San Francisco
View Maurice's Twitter Profile
Re: Is Wrath of Khan Overrated

Captain Nebula wrote: View Post
The Enterprise looking like it already has battle damage in Engineering before the Reliant even fires on it.
Explain.
__________________
* * *
“Tact is the ability to tell someone to go to hell in such a way that they look forward to the trip.”
― Winston S. Churchill
Maurice is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:13 PM.

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