Why is everyone more robotic than V'Ger in TMP?

[Christopher]

And my understanding is that a lot of the things that annoy me about the pacing and other directorial choices in TMP are owed to the studio/director/somebody trying to recapture the success of Kubrick's 2001 movie.

I still say that's oversimplistic. First off, 2001 was far from the only SF movie from that era that had that tone. It wasn't unusual for the futuristic movies of the era. Second, Wise had already made his own SF movie with a very similar tone 8 years earlier, The Andromeda Strain; and you could say there was a similar coolness to Klaatu in Wise's The Day the Earth Stood Still if you go back 20 years more. Third, Robert Wise was around well before Kubrick and was far more prolific. Wise had already directed more films before Kubrick's feature debut than Kubrick would direct in his entire career.

 

[Galileo7]

For the record, I'm 44, and I don't like TMP and never have. It's a beautiful movie with a lot of great elements - but the pacing kills it for me. I love the refit Enterprise. I could have done without 12 minutes of continuous beauty shot, though.

And my understanding is that a lot of the things that annoy me about the pacing and other directorial choices in TMP are owed to the studio/director/somebody trying to recapture the success of Kubrick's 2001 movie. Which I also found brilliant but plodding as hell.

I have always been a fan of TMP, loving the majestic refit Enterprise including the drydock flyover on the big theater screen, but I can still absolutely agree with your thoughts here too.

 

[Mojochi]

Eyes Wide Shut and Barry Lyndon also have kind of cold people. Was that a Kubrick thing? Oh, Cockwork . . . hmm. Must mull.

Doesn't get much more humanless than Full Metal Jacket. Kubrick was never concerned about presenting a human element as much as presenting a concept. His movies aren't stories at all, let alone pieces about people. They are concept art. The Full Metal Jacket concept is "Indoctrination". Eyes Wide Shut, for what it's worth is "Excess". Dr. Strangelove? "Blind stupidity"

The closest he ever got to people being real, fleshed out humans, is The Shining, & even that is not about them being people so much as being instruments in the situation. Ultimately, the only character that matters in The Shining is the hotel

As to why we're getting that dampened humanity in TMP? I honestly feel like that's the direction Gene wanted to go, with his ever widening ego about his impact on our culture. I've always said that while I still like TMP, the characters in it behave more like what we'd come to expect in TNG than anything we'd seen in TOS. An android, Troi, in those 1st couple season being more uptight sounding than any of them, Riker & Picard exercising their professions with one another on screen, instead of Kirk & Bones bantering their personalities about.

TMP was to be the NEW take on Star Trek, and frankly, people didn't respond to it all that well, with that cast, which is why it got retooled to feature almost the exact opposite cast dynamic in TWoK, taking us back to who & what we enjoyed about the people we knew. It DID work, with much struggle, when TNG finally came around. Heck, even the story for TMP was meant to be the next phase, which was to be more akin to TNG. I always found it incredibly telling that the theme music for TNG is the theme from TMP, because that's the emotional cue you should be coming in with. TMP is closest to what they wanted for the next cycle, that cycle becoming TNG, but it just fell flat with our original cast imho, which relied much more on the main 3 being a relationship we were married to already

 

[Smellmet]

I have always been a fan of TMP, loving the majestic refit Enterprise including the drydock flyover on the big theater screen, but I can still absolutely agree with your thoughts here too.

Agreed. I'm the same age as USS triumphant but I love TMP, and have come to appreciate it even more as I've got older. That being said if I found myself watching this movie with a non trek fan I'd probably be cringing at the flyover sequence, whereas on my own I'd be basking in all it's starship porn glory.

 

[XCV330]

Yeah, but they're on a space station and then the Moon. It's all the same kind of controlled outer space environments, so their portrayal would've been informed by the real space program.

if they knew what they know now, it would be loud fan noises, hot sauce stains on the galley walls, every square inch of stowable space crammed with stuff going back 10 years..(and supposedly, in the case of Mir, pinups on the bulkheads)

 

[FreddyE]

but they were on such a tight schedule, with little time to rehearse, they just went with a delivery that is a bit off..

I think a "tight schedule" is an understatement.... didn´t they go from prepping for "In Thy Image"..to "uh...lets just blow up the script we have and make a movie" in two weeks or something?

 

[Therin of Andor]

I think a "tight schedule" is an understatement.... didn´t they go from prepping for "In Thy Image"..to "uh...lets just blow up the script we have and make a movie" in two weeks or something?

No, the shoot ran much longer than many movies. Check out Walter Koenig's "Chekov's Enterprise" for an hilarious blow-by-blow diary.

I love TMP and saw it as a newbie fan. I don't have a problem with the acting (that isn't backed up by the script). Kirk, Spock and Ilia have scripted reasons for being "stiff". I really only knew random eps of TAS (in b/w) and about six TOS episodes (that were re-presented when colour TV came to Australian TV). As I met avid Trek fans throughout 1980 and 1981, I was surprised by how many hated TMP (although they had often watched it many times in the cinema).

I was lucky in that I read the novelization and played the soundtrack LP before seeing the movie.

Many Trek friends tell me it is simply not possible to love both TMP and the 2009 movie equally, but those two movies provided me with such full-immersion cinema experiences, like no other films have ever done.

 

[Smellmet]

Many Trek friends tell me it is simply not possible to love both TMP and the 2009 movie equally.

Yeah, that's a total fallacy. Both TMP and the 2009 movie are at the top of my rankings right alongside TWOK.

 

[Galileo7]

...
Many Trek friends tell me it is simply not possible to love both TMP and the 2009 movie equally, but those two movies provided me with such full-immersion cinema experiences, like no other films have ever done.

Absolutely agree. TMP and 2009 are Trek experiences at it's best.

 

[grandmoffjon]

Many Trek friends tell me it is simply not possible to love both TMP and the 2009 movie equally, but those two movies provided me with such full-immersion cinema experiences, like no other films have ever done.

Two high budget transformative film events (although on opposite sides of the spectrum), which aren't perfect but treat Star Trek like big cinematic spectacles. They aim high and I think they mostly succeed and both should be placed high in the Star Trek film ranking. They are also the top two films at the box office rankings.

 

[Commishsleer]

aracters were Kirk and Scott.

Part of it is the dubbing. I've seen clips of scenes on the bridge with the live sound versus the looped ones (to deal with the rear-projector background noise, etc.) and the performances are better there.

Might have made a difference if the dubbing had been better.

The scientists in The Andromeda Strain come off as much more animated. They have actual personalities. They display anger, sarcasm, bitterness, fear, excitement, awe. The characters in TMP are flat boards by comparison.

Love the Andromeda Strain and liked the characters. It was so tense. I was waiting and waiting for the woman to "see" her mistake.
I really didn't like anyone in TMP. There was none of the warmth of the series. In contrast I sympathised with the Andromeda Strain team who were civilians risking their lives to save everyone. Compared to that Kirk and Spock seemed strangely self-centered for most of TMP. Even McCoy seemed obnoxious.

 

[Mojochi]

Many Trek friends tell me it is simply not possible to love both TMP and the 2009 movie equally, but those two movies provided me with such full-immersion cinema experiences, like no other films have ever done.

It's certainly possible. It helps to not compare or relate them. You accept them on their own merits

The simplest answer is that the cast said they weren't having fun and their job was tedious.

Which might be connected to...

Part of it is the dubbing. I've seen clips of scenes on the bridge with the live sound versus the looped ones (to deal with the rear-projector background noise, etc.) and the performances are better there.

There's nothing more tedious than voice-over work. It doesn't even really feel like acting, compared to how they worked on the TV show.

Another interesting observation to take note of, is that one of the failings of the animated series they'd done a few years earlier, besides the mediocre animation itself, was the lackluster voice performances, which were similarly wooden & lacking in dynamic compared to the show, & performed by many of those same uninterested actors. I think maybe those guys weren't all that good in the sound booth back in those days

 

[Maurice]

Wise may have directed a lot more fllms than Kubrick, but he's rarely mentioned in the same breath with him. Kubrick was obsessively meticulous, that's why he made so few films comparatively.

 

[Christopher]

There's nothing more tedious than voice-over work. It doesn't even really feel like acting, compared to how they worked on the TV show.

There was plenty of looped dialogue in TOS. Just about every scene shot outdoors had its dialogue completely re-recorded, as is normal in Hollywood because of the difficulty of capturing good audio on voices when there's plenty of unpredictable environmental noise around, or because of the need to cover the sounds of passing aircraft or trucks (not something you'd want to be audible on an alien planet). Pretty much all the dialogue in TOS's outdoor scenes has that distinctive "standing in front of a mike in a recording studio" sound, since they weren't as good at faking an outdoor ambience then as they are now.

See also Bilar in "Return of the Archons." Part of the reason his performance is so creepy is because it was dubbed by a voiceover actor (possibly Walker Edmiston) and has that stilted, studio-recorded sound. Since all his scenes were outdoors and therefore 100% of his dialogue had to be looped anyway, it was simpler to use an available voice actor than to bring Lev Maurer back in to dub the role.

And good voiceover acting absolutely is acting, and many terrific actors have made names for themselves with their superb voice acting, like Kevin Conroy, Mark Hamill, Tara Strong, Jennifer Hale, Kevin Michael Richardson, etc. It's just a matter of having a good voice director and the time and training to do it properly. Heck, I can name at least two notable actors -- Michael Dorn and Morena Baccarin -- who, in my opinion, didn't really become good actors until they took up animation work and learned how to use their voices expressively.

Another interesting observation to take note of, is that one of the failings of the animated series they'd done a few years earlier, besides the mediocre animation itself, was the lackluster voice performances, which were similarly wooden & lacking in dynamic compared to the show, & performed by many of those same uninterested actors. I think maybe those guys weren't all that good in the sound booth back in those days

The veteran voice performers in the cast -- Doohan, Takei, Barrett, and Nichols (with her singing and stage experience) -- did better at it than Shatner, Nimoy, and Kelley. And Shatner managed to up his voice-acting game considerably in the 6 episodes of the second season, perhaps because production was less rushed, or perhaps because they had a different director that season.

Wise may have directed a lot more fllms than Kubrick, but he's rarely mentioned in the same breath with him. Kubrick was obsessively meticulous, that's why he made so few films comparatively.

The point is not to start some silly argument about which director is better. The point is simply that it seems naive to assume that the only reason Wise made the directorial choices he did was because he was imitating Kubrick. Wise had decades of directing experience that significantly predated Kubrick's work, so he was probably drawing on his own reservoir of experience. As evidenced by the similarities of TMP to Wise's own The Andromeda Strain, and perhaps even in some ways to The Day the Earth Stood Still with its cool, intellectual hero (though that's probably stretching the point).

 

[Mojochi]

And good voiceover acting absolutely is acting, and many terrific actors have made names for themselves with their superb voice acting, like Kevin Conroy, Mark Hamill, Tara Strong, Jennifer Hale, Kevin Michael Richardson, etc. It's just a matter of having a good voice director and the time and training to do it properly. Heck, I can name at least two notable actors -- Michael Dorn and Morena Baccarin -- who, in my opinion, didn't really become good actors until they took up animation work and learned how to use their voices expressively.

Oh, I'm not disputing any of that, but voice work can be tedious, & much easier to miss the mark, for any number of reasons, because of how removed it is from what other acting experiences are like. I know, because I do some. That said, TAS does have some pretty lifeless voice work, & now that I'm connecting the two, it is fairly reminiscent of TMP's performances... unengaged actors

The veteran voice performers in the cast -- Doohan, Takei, Barrett, and Nichols (with her singing and stage experience) -- did better at it than Shatner, Nimoy, and Kelley. And Shatner managed to up his voice-acting game considerably in the 6 episodes of the second season, perhaps because production was less rushed, or perhaps because they had a different director that season.

I'd agree with all of that too. In fact, I seem to recall some of the main three didn't care for having to do TAS in general, because at the time they thought of it as beneath them, (Don't know if that's true or not), whereas the rest were probably happy for a gig, & not suffering that hubris. Hell, with the way they do animation now, I'd kill for a quality animated Star Trek production., but at that time, they might not have been all that into it

 

[Christopher]

Hell, with the way they do animation now, I'd kill for a quality animated Star Trek production.

There are two Trek animated series currently in production or development, so no homicide necessary, just subscriptions to CBS All Access and a cable service carrying Nickelodeon.

 

[pfontaine2]

Now, I love TMP, but I don't understand the cold, emotionless acting from the TOS cast who we're used to seeing hamming it up..Everyone from Shatner to Nimoy to Kelley and especially Collins are just very stiff and awkward..

Frankly I've always attributed the stiff acting to the fact that it's an incredibly tense situation. An object of incredible destructive power is heading towards Earth. Kirk and crew have an incredibly short period of time to get an untested ship up and running, investigate the problem and come up with a solution to save Earth and its inhabitants.

Kirk tries to take advantage of an impossible situation. He wants his command back, makes rash decisions (it can be argued that he partially responsible for the deaths of Sonak and the other individual on the transporter), forces the ship to warp when its not ready and nearly destroys it etc. As each incident happens, he grows more tense and withdrawn. It's only with McCoy's helpful analysis and Spock's eventual arrival that Kirk starts to loosen up and trust his instincts rather than push against an impossible deadline. Even as Kirk starts to trust his instincts, his actions result in Ilia's apparent death on the bridge.

Through this prism, Kirk's stiffness makes sense. There's no time to joke, no time to appear anything less but "in control" of the situation. Spock's arc through the story is well documented and he does go from detached to engaged throughout the story. Kirk does as well but it's terrifying to watch his own arc as he begins to regain his old "mojo".

 

[XCV330]

I don't like TMP except as a sleeping aid. But I was thinking about it, and one of my favorite movies, Sand Pebbles. Wise did both of them. They are both long ponderous voyages where the stakes are high. One has McQueen, the other has that perv from Tales of the Gold Monkey.

Robert Wise's previous dangerous voyage film, Sand Pebbles is a much better film, equally gorgeous in its way, with an outstanding cast and a good script. Its pacing might be considered slow now, but it's very re-watchable.

I think the fault lies with GR and Livingston. The slo-mo moments of TMP, like the ship flyaround and the journeys through Vger could have been alright if the script had been better, instead of a rehash of an OK TOS episode which was supposed to be rehashed for TV where it would have been about as pointless as most of TNG season 1. Actors can only do so much. As usual, Kelley got most of the good lines and kept it watchable.

 

[Qonundrum]

Spock and McCoy were on the mark. Kirk was stolid if not stilted, I can sorta believe it was because he was trying to find his way around - which is the theme of the story as McCoy kept harping on about obsession and people knowing their jobs...

But I'd swear, the underlying reason was the fact everyone in the audience could the linings of underwear under those pajama costumes. Assuming any were worn, there's one scene where this bloke who I think was wearing a dark tan. the silhouette wasn't that of what Borat wore in that one movie and that pastel lime green hue would just about fit into the TMP palette too...

Like I said it's only an impression I get. I don't for the life of me seeing someone who's a teenager or in their 20s now liking TMP - I think most people of that age group who watch it now would be like 'huh?' and be bemused by all the long shots of the enterprise and vger, surely it's the older guard who appreciate the movie, but obviously with the caveat that they liked it at the time back in the day maybe? I dunno, I'm nearly 45 and I've always loved it. I guess there's some older die hard TOS fans that still hate it for being so different to what they were expecting but surely the biggest portion of the films fan base will be the 40 and overs.

I dunno I'm obviously not basing this on any facts, it would be interesting to hear from any younger fans on here who like the movie.

I dunno. Each "era" has a contingent of young people more interested in previous eras' entertainment, though to be fair most of them are more likely going to be geeks and nerds and dweebs and not the phony "geek chic" nonsense that was shallow hipster fodder last decade.

Or is it forbidden for anyone under 70 to enjoy the movie "Sunset Boulevard"?
(you know it's going to be awful when I have to openly laugh at my own jokes...)

These generational generalizations get silly after a while anyway. Look at the old TV game show "Match Game" from the 1970s where (for the most part) young-adult Baby Boomer contestants all squirm and look delightfully ridiculous not trying to say double entendre responses to lead-in questions whereas all the panelists are of the (Silent and/or Greatest and/or Interbellum and/or Lost Generations since a couple people were born in the 1910s!) and are clearly having a genuine enjoyable, lighthearted good-natured thrill with it all. Then note how most revivals haven't worked, except the latest one and that's only because they vet the panelists to see if there's chemistry between the panelists as that's what keeps up the show. And they need to: The latest incarnation is so base they don't bother with any creativity at all, just using single entendre questions leading to obvious answers that would make even the tail-end of the 70s run (1982) look bold and risque by comparison and the tail-end was all driven by the same handful of template questions. Yet those were sadly more creative, in part because even the contestants - for a while - were not allowed to mention body parts, the humor was getting around the censors or being ankle-deep in it since the 70s edition did loosen up without going too far. Certainly not wading hip deep in it the way it's done today. Now we're surprised if anyone on the latest revival DOESN'T say the obligatory naughty body part, either as euphemism or dictionary term. But get a kid who's sat through the new version to sit through the 70s that built it all (yes, it started in the 1960s but the 70s take is timeless).

 

[HaventGotALife]

This is a fish-out-of-water story. The well-oiled machine of Kirk, Spock, and McCoy is over. They haven't seen each other, moved on with their lives. Decker is astute, commanding, and competent. McCoy doesn't want to be there. Spock is hurt, hiding his emotions because the rejection of the Kohlinar, is analogous, and taps into Sarek's coldness explored in later movies (So human). Bones attempts banter, Spock deflects and ignores. For a reason. V'Ger has "completely embarrassed him." He is connected to this power, drawn to it emotionally, and fearful of what it says about him. He wishes to be completely Vulcan. He can never have that. And the journey of these movies, for Spock, is to embrace his passions, accept them as a part of himself.

"You lied."
"I exaggerated."
"You have feelings. The computer knows this. As my son, they will surface."
"Tell her, I feel fine."
"Logic, logic, and logic. Logic...is the beginning of wisdom, Valeris, not the end."
"Cowboy Diplomacy."
"Jim, I just lost my planet. I can tell you, I am emotionally compromised."

But, before he dies, he justifies ("Jim!"), hides his emotions. Remember, Kirk has to pull his chair to look at Spock's face, as he cries, in the Motion Picture. Dead inside because being dead is all he can try to hide his shame.

Kirk is unimaginably overwhelmed. "Damnit, Bones! I need you! Badly!" He is losing his grip, off his game, in the one place he's never been uncomfortable: the bridge of the Enterprise.

And, Bones is snarky, hates being there.

Did I mention this is a mission to save Earth? That failure, is death of all the life, on the planet? Added to that, V'Ger doesn't open its mouth until Ilia is dead? We don't know who it is, what it wants, but it is headed for Earth.

It's Kirk's worst mission. And he saves the day.