Just watched Star Trek V The Final Frontier

Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies I-X' started by stonester1, Jul 12, 2008.

  1. guardian

    guardian Commodore

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Maybe the guy digging for water in the open desert should have been digging near one of those handy palm trees that actually DO need water to live.

    It was a perfect strom of the worst kind for the franchise. First time director, apparently no decent screenwriter available, no decent FX house available, pressure to make it 'funny'

    Couldn't agree more with that post.

    And disrespect for the ship and minor characters is WORSE than ignoring them.

    They had nothing for Sulu in TWOK---so be it
    They had nothing for Chekov in TSFS--so be it.

    Better than insulting them.
     
  2. Kirk1980

    Kirk1980 Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2006
    Location:
    Connecticut
    Well, there was literally no ILM left for TFF and Paramount was looking to maximize profit by cutting costs...maybe they all just gambled they found a diamond in the rough.

    The gamble failed.

    Yeah, I hope Shatner apologized about the out of character humor. Judging by his book, he thought that sucked, too.

    I gotta admit, though, his idea was BIG. And it could have been amazing, intellectual and insightful had it been allowed to be closer to a real God than just some pissant alien entity.

    Too bad Paramount executives think.
     
  3. gomtuu20

    gomtuu20 Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2008
    Location:
    Beyond Antares
    While they are not my favorites by any stretch, Ins and Nem are vastly superior films when compared to V. While they may have been somewhat..........um...lacking, they at least weren't insultingly stupid like V was. It is just painful to watch.
    And Uhura was most certainly fat.
     
  4. Luminus

    Luminus Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2005
    Location:
    The Singularity
    That explains the "Oh, Please," comment by Kirk in response to the Admiral. The Admiral just favored Kirk, that's all.

    I just finished watching this movie several hours ago. You guys are wrong for criticizing the effects of a movie that was made nearly 20 years ago. Did you think the effects sucked, WHILE you were in the movie theater watching it? I think not.

    Still, the movie did suck, but the character work was fantastic. Except for Sybok and the Romulan who inexplicably looked exactly like a human and therefore was pointless as a Romulan. The Cytherian(sp?) was interesting, but how in the world was the landing party able to land on what was clearly a Neutron Star?
     
  5. Peach Wookiee

    Peach Wookiee Cuddly Mod of Doom Moderator

    Joined:
    May 12, 2001
    Location:
    Peach Wookiee
    I disagree. She's no twig, but she looks healthy and within height/weight proportion. She looked darn good for her age as well as having had a child.
     
  6. RobertScorpio

    RobertScorpio Pariah

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2008
    Location:
    San Diego
    Ummm...no way. NEMESIS is a wreck..a stupid ass clone of WRATH OF KHAN with crappy CGI and very bad acting from the leads...

    And, as I said before, NEMESIS couldn't even beat V's box office with 2003 dollars..THAT is insulting...

    THE VERDICT IS IN

    Nemesis=DUMB BORING MOVIE. Killed TNG franchise..

    V= NOT A GREAT FILM, NOT EVEN GOOD..but far funner than NEMESIS

    Rob
    Scoprio
     
  7. Grant

    Grant Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2006
    I kind of hope that was a joke..........

    "Did you think the effects stunk in 1989" :wtf:

    YES, YES, they sucked in 1989. Do you realize how bad those effects looks on a 60 FOOT screen???

    I was cringing---it was embarrassing. A dozen years after the low-budget Star Wars original, 7 years after the very competant effexts of WOK, 5 years after theeven better effects fron TSFS---they looked horrible.

    I don't care about TOS' low budget roots---these were major motion pictures and well below standard FX did not fly in 1989.

    They weren't attempting cutting edge, complicated, ambitious shots---simple blue screens and ship shots looked terrible. The 'God face'---a joke.

    Defend the characterizations and concept and potential of the movie, but please don't go there with the FX.
     
  8. Luminus

    Luminus Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2005
    Location:
    The Singularity
    Oh, please. Every movie from that decade had bad effects (compared to today's standards), so what are you talking about?
     
  9. Grant

    Grant Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2006
    Now I KNOW you're joking!!

    You had me going there............
     
  10. Luminus

    Luminus Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2005
    Location:
    The Singularity
    List, please.
     
  11. ScatmanRescueMe

    ScatmanRescueMe Lieutenant Commander

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    I am totally amazed at the question.........

    "what are you talking about?" :confused:

    You don't understand the concept that the FX actually stunk in 1989?

    'All movies back then are bad compared to modern FX' :lol:

    No, I too, saw TFF in theaters and the FX were a GIANT step back from TSFS, TWOK & TVH. Let alone the star Wars movies Aliens etc.
    Many, many reviews commented on how horrible the FX were compared to contemporary movies (not movies 19 years in the future:lol:)

    Shatner & Bennett hated the FX and said they were not what they expected or were promised by the company.

    I'm not saying the quality of the FX can make a good movie worthless or a bad movie great, but by any objective standard they are BAD. VERY BAD.
     
  12. Luminus

    Luminus Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2005
    Location:
    The Singularity
    I thought you guys were criticizing from Today's point of view. I've been re-watching old 80's movies and they just all suck in terms of effects, that's why I started this debate. My memory of watching them for the first time was that the effects were good. Hell, that scene in the Terminator where Arnold cuts his eye out and slices up his arm was down-right unwatchable to me back then (very graphic:lol:). Now, it's a joke.

    Some people just see more problems with effects than others. Hell, some people think Nemesis has bad effects. I, for one, can't understand why.
     
  13. gomtuu20

    gomtuu20 Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2008
    Location:
    Beyond Antares
    Except for some CGI of ship that Picard and Data were in while trying to escape, I thought the Nem fx were pretty good. The movie itsself was lacking, but the fx were done very well.
     
  14. Nebusj

    Nebusj Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Well, there's the moment when the Death Balustrade of Death is supposed to impale Shinzon, but instead it just lightly bounces around his chest, and Stewart and Hardy look around as if Mom is going to yell at them for roughhousing.
     
  15. RobertScorpio

    RobertScorpio Pariah

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2008
    Location:
    San Diego
    If the FX were good, then they would not have been an issue as much as they were in some of the reviews of the time...INSURRECTION and NEMESIS just look to flat with their CGI. I'll take the FX of WRATH OF KHAN/THE MOTION PICTURE, even with their flaws, over the flat CGI of the last two TNG movies...

    Rob
     
  16. Anticitizen

    Anticitizen Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2008
    Location:
    Black Mesa Research Facility
    RobertScorpio, I am very much in agreement about the CGI vs. models. I think FX believability went sharply downhill when CGI replaced the models. The word you used to describe the CGI is perfect... flat. The shots from TSFS of the Enterprise entering Spacedock with its battle damage, under scrutiny of spotlights, just looks so goddamn REAL. Because it is. They filmed a real, large model of that ship. I can never put my finger on what makes the CGI so lackluster but there's some factor that takes away from the realism.

    That said, effects aside, I'll take the story and characterization from The Final Frontier over any of the TNG movies.
     
  17. Luminus

    Luminus Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2005
    Location:
    The Singularity
    Geesh! Impossible crowd. I liked the effects for Nemesis. I even like the strange-looking FX of Insurrection (not the animal).

    EDIT: And the Final Frontier has NOTHING on First Contact.
     
  18. Haggis and tatties

    Haggis and tatties Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Location:
    Glasgow
    STV might not have lit the Trek movie world on fire but its a fun movie at its core, and i think the shat did well on giving the movie a very TOS feeling about it in its interaction between the cast and characters, yes the effects are not great but they do the job, and i would rather have a character filled and flawed Trek story then the Picard and Data show that we had in Nemesis when all our fave other character took backseats and my as well have been cardboard cut outs in the back ground.

    Not that Nemesis is not a watchable movie, and to be honest i think Trek wise we have all been really lucky as all the Trek movie are at least very watchable over and over again....
     
  19. Luminus

    Luminus Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2005
    Location:
    The Singularity
    I can't watch Nemisis without analyzing and disecting it. It just has too many flaws. Insurrection is not a movie. It's a 2-hour episode and a weak one at that.
     
  20. Kryton

    Kryton Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2006
    Location:
    In ur Starbug
    Ugh...I just watched TFF with Rifftrax and even THEY couldn't save it. I'm one step closer to suicide now. Bleah. :mad: