Since When Is The Motion Picture A Good Trek Film?

[TigerOfDarkness]

Different movie, different time. There was a time when not everything on screen had to have an action sequence ever 15 seconds to make it "watchable". There were a lot of movies that came out in the 60's and 70's that had similar pacing. We look back at them now and call them bad movies because they're "slow". The audience used to have a much longer attention span, I think.

The world, in general, has turned into a very immediate, "Right NOW!" culture. I know people who can't manage to wait for literally 10 seconds for a programs to open on their computers. You couldn't make a movie like TMP today with that sort of pacing and of course in retrospect, it looks slow. I would imagine that when it came out, it was pretty on par with what was typical of the time, for that genre. Remember that Star Wars, just a few years earlier, broke all sorts of rules for what was considered "acceptable science fiction".

By the time that Wrath of Kahn came out (and there are still slow periods in that movie) the world was no longer accepting of movies that showed long scenes of visuals or scenes with little movement to them.

Now, in 2009, we have movies that are paced so fast that you can't take it all in in a single viewing. They're meant to be re-watched. Movies 30 years ago couldn't be re-watched other than at the movie theater or eventually on the Sunday-night movie. We didn't have the luxury of going home and watching it again. You couldn't rent it.

If a movie is actually paced so that it keeps the attention span of this ADD, Commercial length, super-fast cell phone culture, it's blasted as being "too heavy on action" but if the director takes the time to really create a beautiful scene, stretches things out, or doesn't pan the camera around 60 times a minute, the film is blasted as being too slow and unwatchable...Hollywood can't win.

I liked The Motion Picture (Star Trek I). It don't think it was that slow and had an interesting storyline, especially with Decker and the Bald Girl.

No, there wasn't any mean and crazy villian, no great shoot outs or classic lines. There was no CGI to rip out your throat. I liked it, and if you didn't, well, then yhou can kiss my green behind.

I really must object to this "either you like TMP or you have a short attention span/ADD and just want to see explosions" attitude.

I very much enjoy the vsual spectacle of 2001 - one of the archetypical "slow" movies. I enjoyed watching Last Year At Marrienbad (sp?) once (not sure I'd like to see it again).

I also enjoy TMP - however I can see that it is not what the average film goer would expect from a Star Trek movie, if they had only seen TOS.

The film attempts to have something to say, however it hides that behind endless reaction shots and pretty pictures, needless inane dialog (just how many times is Kirk going to talk about the viewer?) and then ultimately tries to emulate the "star child" ending of 2001 with the Decker/Illia light show.

I agree with earlier posters who suggested the Robert Collins ending could have played better.

In a way, it is like The Cage - heavy Reddenberry involvement and the following Trek productions went in a different direction.

 

[schatenjager]

The most common criticism of TMP is that it's "slow". You don't hear people complain that there's no character development, you don't hear that V'ger was a bad "villian", if you can call it that at all, you hear that it's badly paced. Maybe it is but compared to the rest of the movies created in the 60's and 70's of the same genre (with a few notable exceptions), it's pretty typical. It's only with the lens of today's action-driven movies that we look at it and say that it's that slow.

Added to that you have the fact that, as others have said, the audience hadn't seen the Enterprise in 10 years. You didn't have the Internet, re-runs were at the whim of the networks, you couldn't rent the original series, and aside from books, magazines, and conversation, there was little you could do to watch or experience Star Trek in any capacity.

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

I don't think TMP was too slow and thus boring. It was oppresivley sterile. It seemed like some of the cast were underacting or restrained in some way and scenes were a bit lacking in emotion. It's a very dry, dry film. There's no punch to it - I don't mean action and explosions - it's somewhat lacking in that dynamic oomph that you can find in a lot of TOS.

With the same pace and a better direction - one more focused on the human element (It is the goddamned human adventure, after all) - I don't think it would have been as overshadowed by TWOK among fandom as it was.

 

[Therin of Andor]

You don't hear people complain that there's no character development

Actually, the complaint of many TOS fans at the time was that TMP failed to recapture the old character interactions. And that character developments had happened off-screen. They hated that Kirk had accepted promotion, that Spock was purging all human emotion, that McCoy had retired and that Decker had taken the centre seat.

 

[TigerOfDarkness]

The most common criticism of TMP is that it's "slow". You don't hear people complain that there's no character development, you don't hear that V'ger was a bad "villian", if you can call it that at all, you hear that it's badly paced. Maybe it is but compared to the rest of the movies created in the 60's and 70's of the same genre (with a few notable exceptions), it's pretty typical. It's only with the lens of today's action-driven movies that we look at it and say that it's that slow.

The "notable exceptions" including Star Wars, of course.

As Therin notes, the movie was criticised for the characters being out of character. McCoy is mostly how you would expect but what of Kirk and Spock?

Added to that you have the fact that, as others have said, the audience hadn't seen the Enterprise in 10 years. You didn't have the Internet, re-runs were at the whim of the networks, you couldn't rent the original series, and aside from books, magazines, and conversation, there was little you could do to watch or experience Star Trek in any capacity.

That is probably why it did so well - people hadn't had much new Trek and went to see it a lot. The problem is that the average movie-goer wouldn't have cared too much about what the Enterprise looked like.

As I have said before, a work of art must stand on its own - having to know its context to appreciate it (or excuse its faults) renders it less than successful (IMHO obviously).

 

[schatenjager]

Exactly. I said the most common criticism was that it was slow, but to clarify, that's the most common criticism today. When it came out, the critics weren't complaining about it being slow, they were talking about the things that we talk about today in faster paced movies. For it's time, it was a pretty good movie in most respects. For a Star Trek movie, it might seem slower than today's versions but it's still very much, and always has been, a Good Star Trek film.

 

[noknowes]

My mind is being boggled by this right now. Since JJTrek came out (I love it btw) a lot of people have understandingly been doing Rankings of all the Trek films. What has shocked me, is how many people are putting TMP not only in the top 3 but sometimes as Number 1.

Now this just boggles my mind. I'm a pretty darn big Trek fan, grew up on The II-IV Trilogy and grew into TNG Era from there, but as a kid I never liked TMP and even as an adult I don't care for it. I think its up there with Final Frontier for worst Trek film ever.

It's not even that its that bad per se. It's just so boring, horribly paced and I didn't care for any of the cast additions. I just don't get why people would have this one ranked highly.

So I just want to hear from those that love TMP, why they love it and point out some good stuff about it. I am pretty sure the people who love it are Trekkers who have been around since TOS was on the air originally, but I guess time will tell on that.

Just to clarify, not trying to attack TMP or people who like it, just trying to see WHY people like it. I just don't get it.

And before anyone asks, II, III, IV and VI are some of my favorite movies ever.

You are right.I found it boring, dull ,grey and very little dialogue.

the best bits were the enterprise flyby special effects and the enterprise itself was awesome.so were the klingon ships.

the characters were cardboard cut outs and VERY STIFF.

the interior eecor was awful.

grey,grey........costumes showed penis outlines protuberance.
distrurbing.

they looked like orderlies on their way to the mortury

 

[trevanian]

costumes showed penis outlines protuberance.
distrurbing.

they looked like orderlies on their way to the mortury

I guess orderlies on the way to the mortuary don't care if the corpses can see their outlines (and you might want to steer clear of WATCHMEN if outlines and such bother you)

 

[TigerOfDarkness]

Exactly. I said the most common criticism was that it was slow, but to clarify, that's the most common criticism today. When it came out, the critics weren't complaining about it being slow, they were talking about the things that we talk about today in faster paced movies. For it's time, it was a pretty good movie in most respects. For a Star Trek movie, it might seem slower than today's versions but it's still very much, and always has been, a Good Star Trek film.

IIRC, it was called "The Motionless Picture" at the time.

Slow needn't be a criticism, slow can be good. Boring is a criticism and there are people posting here saying it's boring.

I have to admit to liking it - despite its faults, but I can see it has faults and I can see why people say it's boring.

 

[Garth Rockett]

Actually, the complaint of many TOS fans at the time was that TMP failed to recapture the old character interactions.

To me, this is the movie's biggest sin and the reason I can't rate it higher than merely "okay." Aside from Bones, none of the big three feel like the same characters we fell in love with from TOS for the bulk of the film.

I understand that taking Kirk and Spock from where they are at the beginning of the film and returning them to a more familiar state by the end is part of the film's story, but their return to form comes far to late for me to enjoy them. Contrast this with TWOK, where Kirk is again out of sorts as the film begins, even to the point of making a nearly fatal mistake when he first encounters Khan. Kirk is snapped out of his funk and back to the classic characterization at that point, bluffing his way out a no-win scenario and outthinking his opponent. We get to see the big three acting much as they did in TOS for over half of the film, so the arc works much better there than in TMP.

In addition, another part of TOS' appeal to me is the depiction of the future as a bright, exciting place. In TMP, all the colors are muted, both on the uniforms and the ship, giving the whole affair a rather bland, lifeless look. Couple that with a Kirk who is not Kirk and a Spock who is not Spock for 95% of the movie, and it's hard for me to garner much enthusiasm for the film.

The pacing is not that great, although I like the Enterprise flyby. It's the V'Ger scenes that go on too long for my tastes.

I don't consider TMP to be a terrible movie, but it's not a good movie IMO. I give it credit for trying to be something special and epic, but ultimately I think it's failing is that it tries to be the revisionist version of Star Trek that Gene Roddenberry tried to peddle after he started believing his own hype, rather than Star Trek as it actually had been a decade earlier.

 

[RyanKCR]

Actually, the complaint of many TOS fans at the time was that TMP failed to recapture the old character interactions.

To me, this is the movie's biggest sin and the reason I can't rate it higher than merely "okay." Aside from Bones, none of the big three feel like the same characters we fell in love with from TOS for the bulk of the film.

I understand that taking Kirk and Spock from where they are at the beginning of the film and returning them to a more familiar state by the end is part of the film's story, but their return to form comes far to late for me to enjoy them. Contrast this with TWOK, where Kirk is again out of sorts as the film begins, even to the point of making a nearly fatal mistake when he first encounters Khan. Kirk is snapped out of his funk and back to the classic characterization at that point, bluffing his way out a no-win scenario and outthinking his opponent. We get to see the big three acting much as they did in TOS for over half of the film, so the arc works much better there than in TMP.

In addition, another part of TOS' appeal to me is the depiction of the future as a bright, exciting place. In TMP, all the colors are muted, both on the uniforms and the ship, giving the whole affair a rather bland, lifeless look. Couple that with a Kirk who is not Kirk and a Spock who is not Spock for 95% of the movie, and it's hard for me to garner much enthusiasm for the film.

The pacing is not that great, although I like the Enterprise flyby. It's the V'Ger scenes that go on too long for my tastes.

I don't consider TMP to be a terrible movie, but it's not a good movie IMO. I give it credit for trying to be something special and epic, but ultimately I think it's failing is that it tries to be the revisionist version of Star Trek that Gene Roddenberry tried to peddle after he started believing his own hype, rather than Star Trek as it actually had been a decade earlier.

Some of what you said here is part of why I think TMP is a great film. No flashy, unrealistic, in your face colors. I didn't know who these people were when I saw the film because it was pretty much my first exposure to Trek. All the lingering shots help sell it for me as being believable. Keep in mind I saw this movie when I was eight and just becoming a big Star Wars fan and I liked it better then Star Wars.

Because of the coloring and pacing it felt real. TWOK made the ship look and feel like a model with cardboard cut out sets, etc.

 

[Stardate]

Because of the coloring and pacing it felt real. TWOK made the ship look and feel like a model with cardboard cut out sets, etc.

Totally agree on the pacing(no Earth to Vulcan in 3-4 minutes crap). It felt real and more believable then the other trek films. Regarding TMP uniforms i like it but i can see TOS color uniforms working if they had made darker color variations f.c. navel blue, burgundy red e.c.c.

 

[Docbrown777]

Toooorpedooooooo Away!!!!

 

[RyanKCR]

Because of the coloring and pacing it felt real. TWOK made the ship look and feel like a model with cardboard cut out sets, etc.

Totally agree on the pacing(no Earth to Vulcan in 3-4 minutes crap). It felt real and more believable then the other trek films. Regarding TMP uniforms i like it but i can see TOS color uniforms working if they had made darker color variations f.c. navel blue, burgundy red e.c.c.

I never really paid attention to the uniforms but I did like Kirk's admiral uniform. It looks the best. I think your idea of the darker red blue and gold would have been great.

 

[Prons]

I liked it a lot. I usually can't sit through long movies like that, but I didn't have much problems with TMP. I thought the speical effects, the colors, the sound were all great. I loved the background music especially that big ominous BABOMBBBBBBBBB noise that happens whenever the VGER comes on screen.

 

[GalaxyX]

grey,grey........costumes showed penis outlines protuberance.
distrurbing.

Yeah I didn't need to see a detailed outline of Decker's ummm......equipment. I have no idea how they even thought of letting costumes like that into production.

 

[TigerOfDarkness]

grey,grey........costumes showed penis outlines protuberance.
distrurbing.

Yeah I didn't need to see a detailed outline of Decker's ummm......equipment. I have no idea how they even thought of letting costumes like that into production.

And having done that, how come they left the Decker Penis shot in the finished movie???

 

[FalTorPan]

My mind is being boggled by this right now. Since JJTrek came out (I love it btw) a lot of people have understandingly been doing Rankings of all the Trek films. What has shocked me, is how many people are putting TMP not only in the top 3 but sometimes as Number 1.

Now this just boggles my mind.

"It is strange how the ways of different people on different planets differ." -- Lattis of Marva, The Lost Skeleton of Cadavra

 

[ManaByte]

The Motion Picture is the most true-to-the spirit of TOS of all of the movies. From II-on they are MOVIES. TMP really feels like a classic STAR TREK story told on the big screen. It gets better with age, and doesn't deserve the flack it gets.

 

[Stardate]

You are absolute right ManaByte. Some of the flacks are getting to Beavis and Butthead mentality f.e. costumes showing penis outlines and Decker penis .