Ironically, the cantina scene in SW:ANH was inspired by the TOS ep. Journey to Babel.
ST:TMP-Why DID they think it was what fans waited for?
- Thread starter Mutara Nebula 1967
- Start date
There still would have been plenty of time for Charlie Bluhdorn to demand in that thick accent of his to make it "more like that Star Wars movie". But he didn't and neither did Jeffrey Katzenberg or Michael Eisner. I think, despite what one may think of the finished product, that those guys do deserve our thanks for giving Roddenberry and Wise the support they received. At least, before the movie came out.
Really? I've never heard that before.
I heard this quite a few years ago, biggles. I found it very interesting that Star Wars owed its existance to Star Trek. Kind of fun
You know, I've been hearing that for years. I doubt that Trek would have made it off the pre-production page in any form if it wasn't for Star Wars' success. Many shows like Galactica and Buck Rogers were in development for years prior to that. Trek, at that time, wasn't any different. There wasn't much call for sci-fi, especially space based, and what little space bassed sci-fi that was oput there wasn't exactly setting the world on fire. Which explains Roddenberry's decidedly non space sci-fi backdor pilot Earth 2. I'm not saying that Star Wars was singlehandedly responsible for Trek's revival, but it, along with Roddenberry's tenacity and maybe the fan faithful went a long way from rescuing it from syndication hell and cult obscurity like Space:1999 and Land Of The Giants is in.
And vice versa.
On the contrary, the cantina scene was inspired by most of the saloon scenes in most classic westerns (and was the only scene that remained intact throughout the 30 or so drafts of the initial script treatment). But, hey, whatever allows you to sleep well at night. Would it make you feel better to say that Star Trek invented the internet as well?
blockaderunner, it could've been both...And you don't have to get snippy...
There still would have been plenty of time for Charlie Bluhdorn to demand in that thick accent of his to make it "more like that Star Wars movie". But he didn't and neither did Jeffrey Katzenberg or Michael Eisner. I think, despite what one may think of the finished product, that those guys do deserve our thanks for giving Roddenberry and Wise the support they received. At least, before the movie came out.
Agreed. I think any Trek movie, or heck any sci-fi movie, could have been given the Star Wars treatment. There were just so many drafts and redrafts of TMP's script, from Phase II to the final product, that any one of them could have inserted more Star Wars-style fantasy that wouldn't work in a Trek film, and the trap would've been made more appealing thanks to the vast popularity of the Star Wars machine at the time. And I thank my lucky stars that TMP had at least decided to remain unique amidst the tide of ripoffs that came along.
No problem, Deep Space Nine stole it back for Quark's.
I suppose I fall into the category of those who are passionate about TMP. To me, it /was/ Star Trek: Phase II. It was more of a sequel to the original series than TNG was in a lot of ways, and it was the most progressive, I feel, of all the Trek films. I liked the hard SF approach. I also liked how the characters were challenged in subtle ways; sure, the characters went through hell in some of the other films, but it was usually big and bombastic, or "out there": "You Klingon bastards killed my son!" or "Spock's ghost, I am possessed by it, ooga booga".
Also, it was the most genuine to some Star Trek ideals I feel, in that the Big Threat is not phasered or photon torpedoed to save the day, but communicated with, understood, and allowed to depart in peace - even after doing some damage and hurting some people. Spock's journey in the film is, IMO, the best use of the character outside of some of the deeper Trek novels. If anything, the story is the most critical turning point in Spock's entire life: it's the place where he gains true wisdom in addition to intelligence, and stops fighting against who and what he is. It was also a good use of Kirk. I felt it displayed Kirk's genuine intelligence and insight, rather than focus on solely on his passion and inventive but reckless talent for destabilizing situations in order to make things happen his way.
There's a few flaws and outright goofy things, and some of the visual design doesn't come together. Plus: what the hell was the point of the transporter accident scene as a way to get rid of the science officer and leave a void for Spock to fill? It seemed more like somebody just dying to play with the oft-imagined but never shown fatal teleportation accident.
But it remains one of the few films I can watch and feel I'm actually watching science fiction, and not cowboys in spaceships with laser guns. (I say this as someone who likes cowboys in spaceships with laser guns in measured doses.)
Also, it was the most genuine to some Star Trek ideals I feel, in that the Big Threat is not phasered or photon torpedoed to save the day, but communicated with, understood, and allowed to depart in peace - even after doing some damage and hurting some people. Spock's journey in the film is, IMO, the best use of the character outside of some of the deeper Trek novels. If anything, the story is the most critical turning point in Spock's entire life: it's the place where he gains true wisdom in addition to intelligence, and stops fighting against who and what he is. It was also a good use of Kirk. I felt it displayed Kirk's genuine intelligence and insight, rather than focus on solely on his passion and inventive but reckless talent for destabilizing situations in order to make things happen his way.
There's a few flaws and outright goofy things, and some of the visual design doesn't come together. Plus: what the hell was the point of the transporter accident scene as a way to get rid of the science officer and leave a void for Spock to fill? It seemed more like somebody just dying to play with the oft-imagined but never shown fatal teleportation accident.
But it remains one of the few films I can watch and feel I'm actually watching science fiction, and not cowboys in spaceships with laser guns. (I say this as someone who likes cowboys in spaceships with laser guns in measured doses.)
^^^I think the transporter accident was there for 3 reasons:
1. To demonstrate how unready the ship was right away and create a sense of danger
2. To leave a hole for a science office so Spock could step in (rather than intorducing a character for 1/3rd of the movie and them pushing him/her out of the chair)
3. For cinematic kewlness.
1. To demonstrate how unready the ship was right away and create a sense of danger
2. To leave a hole for a science office so Spock could step in (rather than intorducing a character for 1/3rd of the movie and them pushing him/her out of the chair)
3. For cinematic kewlness.
I think it should be remembered that they were under terrible time constraints with TMP, and the decision was made (right or wrong) to use the "In Thy Image" script because it was in the can and ready to go along with the "Phase II" pre-production work that had been done. It would have taken a lot of time and $$$ to start over from scratch, and Paramount was screaming for a Star Trek movie to have in the theaters ASAP to cash in on the Star Wars fever.
I'm a big fan of TMP, actually, but I'll be the first to admit that in many ways the script seems like a two-hour series pilot - setting up elements that will be explored in future episodes - rather than a feature film.
I'm a big fan of TMP, actually, but I'll be the first to admit that in many ways the script seems like a two-hour series pilot - setting up elements that will be explored in future episodes - rather than a feature film.
I don't think there's anything wrong with the concept per se. The writing could've been tweaked, sure, but almsot any Trek plot out there could be ideal for cinema with the right team. I'm reminded of how utterly domestic Insurrection's plot was, and yet it was deemed fit to be a big screen adventure. There've been Trek episodic two-parters with grander scales in comparison.
I still assert that TMP, even keeping V'Ger in the mix, could've easily been Star Wars-ified. It would've been super-tempting to do so. Just replace the white energy bolts with little fighters and Voyager VI with some pseudo-mystic jargon and there ya go.
I expect something similar to pop up in STXI myself, but with movies instead of episodes, thus setting up sequels. These days, I think that's to be expected now. Iron Man is the freshest example in my head.
*****
On a separate and unrelated note, the pajama uniforms. I know this has been discussed to death, but if there was some prominent, strong variation of the Red/Yellow/Blue divisions for the uniforms, there'd already be a more vibrant movie.
Agreed. Despite the 'upped' budget and the ground-breaking effects at the time, TMP was about as far from Star Wars as one could get. I know a lot of people probably wouldn't agree with me, but I still feel that it's a 'logical' progression of TOS and fit the parameters of Roddenberry's original vision.
Again, I can only hope that Abrams' version of Trek lives up to the legacy of TOS and TMP. Nimoy's involvement gives me reason to believe that this might be so.
I thought that part was great. Here, after all these years, Spock FINALLY accepts his human half. He realized that's what V'ger (and himself) was missing and he knew that in order to evolve, he needed "that simple feeling."
Why the writers threw all of that away and had him go back to the old "logical" Spock was a mystery to me and the wrong direction to go, in my opinion. It made all of Spock's "soul searching" in TMP meaningless.
When did Spock "go back"? The Spock of ST II, IV, V, VI and "Unification" is a very different person to the Spock of TOS/TAS.
I don't think so. After TMP I expected the "new" Spock to embrace his human half. He went back to the "I am a Vulcan" routine as early as ST:II.
For example, in the scene where Kirk was going to take command of the Enterprise, but told Spock to stay in command, Spock replied : "You proceed from a false assumption. I am a Vulcan. I have no ego to bruise."
That line by Spock is exactly what the old Spock would say. He should have smiled and said something like "Jim, remember, I'm still half-Vulcan, I can set my ego aside if I choose."
That would have better reflected Spock's new outlook on things.
That's why TMP was sometimes referred to as "Where Nomad Has Gone Before."
I remember when I first watched it and they talked about "The Creator" I kept expecting Kirk to say "Nomad....is that you???"
In this day of old tv shows being remade into big-budget films, I often think of TMP as the FIRST of these remakes or reimaginings. the difference is, it was made close enough to the time of the original series that the original cast was retained, instead of a new, younger cast being inserted. If you think of TMP that way, the differences between it and TOS aren't as startling. It also allows for the extreme difference in tone.
My sister, who reads a lot but has seen little of any TREK, finally saw TMP this year and thought it felt like an adaptation of an Arthur Clarke novel.
My sister, who reads a lot but has seen little of any TREK, finally saw TMP this year and thought it felt like an adaptation of an Arthur Clarke novel.
Similar threads
- Poll
