Star Trek The Motion Picture: The Director's Edition (By Robert Wise)

[RyanKCR]

Re: Star Trek The Motion Picture: The Director's Edition (By Robert Wi

Still ducking admitting you were wrong about going off about CGI in TMP, eh GFS?

Anyone who knows anything about the labyrinthine production of TMP ought to realize it wasn't as simple as you make it out. There were lots of politics involved, and lot of people pushing their own interests (Roddenberry included, but Trumbull and others as well) that resulted in things like the FX company turnover (even the people who worked on it can't agree on the whys and hows of that...and I know several personally), the hiring of Wise, how much control Roddenberry actually had, etc. It's easy to say Roddenberry was too inexperienced to make this decision or Paramount should have done that. Easy to say, but not necessarily factually correct.

Given the conflicting stories by the people who worked on the film and tall tales that have risen up around the production, it's very hard to definitively say who's to blame for what. To do so without consideration of all those aforementioned different points of view is to trundle out opinion as fact.

But this is the Internet after all, so perhaps I expect too much...

If I say yes will you drop the issue because its not the topic of the thread and has become a huge distraction, yes I was wrong on that point everyone pointed that out to me and now you too why do you want to keep going on about it? There is a word for that kind of thing: smug, and it isn't a compliment.

My original point was that there were scenes in the original edit of the film where there was no dialog and nothing was happening except special effects, viewers got bored and were taken out of the film, the as to weather or not they were cg effects or something else is really distracting from my point and I think you don't want to acknowledge the fact that those scenes were in need of shortening and indeed were shortened by Robert Wise. Why haven't any of you acknowledged this point, I am big enough to admit when I am wrong about something so why don't you admit that I am right. The whole reason Robert Wise gave us a great directors cut of the film was because he was unhappy not being able to really refine the movie in '79, but Paramount gave him a great chance to do a director's cut before he passed away in '05 and I am glad he did it. You are forgetting forget that The Motion Picture was a disapointment in '79 to most fans, so much so that many fans don't even want to see the directors cut because they don't think that it could have been improved in any way. The point of this thread is to discuss why we have a directors edition not how the movie effects were originally done, so please keep to the topic!

The effects never took me out of the movie, in fact they made me more interested in what was going on. It was one of the main things about the film I liked and I was about 7 or 8 when I first saw it just after Star Wars.

 

[plynch]

Re: Star Trek The Motion Picture: The Director's Edition (By Robert Wi

The effects never took me out of the movie, in fact they made me more interested in what was going on. It was one of the main things about the film I liked and I was about 7 or 8 when I first saw it just after Star Wars.

That must ha' been what RW was after. I remember reading somewhere tat he was really into long shots (Klingon ships, Enterprise in drydock, all the VGer cloud stuff). Since his version leaves so much of that in (frankly I was surprised how little dif. it was from the theatrical) that pace must have been his desire. Kinda anti-Star Wars (except for the first establishing shots of the blockade runner and then the huger Imp Destroyer).

The length and hugeness and waiting, esp. on a big screen was all part of the film, communicating how far out and immense and different all this was, compared to prosaic earth experience. Movies (even "motion pictures") are a good part spectacle. Something I must remember when I am not remembering STXI in a great light. Be well.

 

[Maurice]

Re: Star Trek The Motion Picture: The Director's Edition (By Robert Wi

That must ha' been what RW was after. I remember reading somewhere tat he was really into long shots (Klingon ships, Enterprise in drydock, all the VGer cloud stuff). Since his version leaves so much of that in...

Maybe by the time the DE was made he was persuaded to leave those long sequences, in, but back in 1980 that wasn't what he wanted, as the following quotes (originally posted in a recent thread specifically about what Wise originally wanted) reveals:

STARLOG: There's the scene when Kirk is being taken by Scotty around the Enterprise in that spacepod shuttle.
WISE: That is one minute and 30 seconds [too] long, and the flight inside V'ger is about two minutes too long.*

WISE: ...I think we could have trimmed it by six-and-a-half minutes--at least!

--Robert Wise, "A Very Sloppy Way to Make a Movie" (Best of Starlog Vol. VI), which is described in the introduction as having been conducted "In 1980, a few months after the release of the 1979 film."
​

Emphasis (underlines) mine.

 

[Jeyl]

Re: Star Trek The Motion Picture: The Director's Edition (By Robert Wi

Maybe by the time the DE was made he was persuaded to leave those long sequences, in, but back in 1980 that wasn't what he wanted

A man can't change his mind?

 

[plynch]

Re: Star Trek The Motion Picture: The Director's Edition (By Robert Wi

Interesting. I like the Ent flyaround. It was appropriate in 1979 when we were all jonesing to see it. Coulda used more time to see it in JJTrek, actually.

 

[Chrisisall]

Re: Star Trek The Motion Picture: The Director's Edition (By Robert Wi

Coulda used more time to see it in JJTrek, actually.

Yes, JJ's movie had a curious lack of ship pron, actually.

 

[plynch]

Re: Star Trek The Motion Picture: The Director's Edition (By Robert Wi

That must ha' been what RW was after. I remember reading somewhere tat he was really into long shots (Klingon ships, Enterprise in drydock, all the VGer cloud stuff). Since his version leaves so much of that in...

Maybe by the time the DE was made he was persuaded to leave those long sequences, in, but back in 1980 that wasn't what he wanted, as the following quotes (originally posted in a recent thread specifically about what Wise originally wanted) reveals:

STARLOG: There's the scene when Kirk is being taken by Scotty around the Enterprise in that spacepod shuttle.
WISE: That is one minute and 30 seconds [too] long, and the flight inside V'ger is about two minutes too long.*

WISE: ...I think we could have trimmed it by six-and-a-half minutes--at least!

--Robert Wise, "A Very Sloppy Way to Make a Movie" (Best of Starlog Vol. VI), which is described in the introduction as having been conducted "In 1980, a few months after the release of the 1979 film."
​

Emphasis (underlines) mine.

Nice detective work on the Starlog article!

 

[Maurice]

Re: Star Trek The Motion Picture: The Director's Edition (By Robert Wi

Maybe by the time the DE was made he was persuaded to leave those long sequences, in, but back in 1980 that wasn't what he wanted

A man can't change his mind?

If you'll re-read what I posted you'll find I commenting on the idea that Wise was "was really into long shots", which was obviously not the case at the time the film was made. Maybe later he decided to keep the overlong sequence, but at the time he made the film that wasn't his thinking.

 

[Jeyl]

Re: Star Trek The Motion Picture: The Director's Edition (By Robert Wi

Maybe later he decided to keep the overlong sequence, but at the time he made the film that wasn't his thinking.

Well, neither were all those additions made to Star Trek II involving Spock's "Remember" meld with McCoy, the Genesis planet montage and so fourth. Nicholas Meyer stated in his commentary that he fought to have those scenes cut out of the movie, but now he firmly accepts them in the film today.

 

[Maurice]

Re: Star Trek The Motion Picture: The Director's Edition (By Robert Wi

Maybe later he decided to keep the overlong sequence, but at the time he made the film that wasn't his thinking.

Well, neither were all those additions made to Star Trek II involving Spock's "Remember" meld with McCoy, the Genesis planet montage and so fourth. Nicholas Meyer stated in his commentary that he fought to have those scenes cut out of the movie, but now he firmly accepts them in the film today.

Perhaps, but that wasn't the point of my replies on the subject of Wise being "really into long shots" (meaning lengthy shots/scenes/sequences).

 

[GhostFaceSaint]

Re: Star Trek The Motion Picture: The Director's Edition (By Robert Wi

Maybe later he decided to keep the overlong sequence, but at the time he made the film that wasn't his thinking.

Well, neither were all those additions made to Star Trek II involving Spock's "Remember" meld with McCoy, the Genesis planet montage and so fourth. Nicholas Meyer stated in his commentary that he fought to have those scenes cut out of the movie, but now he firmly accepts them in the film today.

Perhaps, but that wasn't the point of my replies on the subject of Wise being "really into long shots" (meaning lengthy shots/scenes/sequences).

Hey DS9Sega do you know personally if this really was due to the influence of '2001 or if that was just the way he was by then becuase the films I watched earlier by him like "The Haunting" or "Run Silent, Run Deep" don't have such long shots? Did he come to prefer these sort of shots over the years or was it just a case of imitating what is perceived to work for "respectable" sci-fi?

 

[Maurice]

Re: Star Trek The Motion Picture: The Director's Edition (By Robert Wi

Well, neither were all those additions made to Star Trek II involving Spock's "Remember" meld with McCoy, the Genesis planet montage and so fourth. Nicholas Meyer stated in his commentary that he fought to have those scenes cut out of the movie, but now he firmly accepts them in the film today.

Perhaps, but that wasn't the point of my replies on the subject of Wise being "really into long shots" (meaning lengthy shots/scenes/sequences).

Hey DS9Sega do you know personally if this really was due to the influence of '2001 or if that was just the way he was by then becuase the films I watched earlier by him like "The Haunting" or "Run Silent, Run Deep" don't have such long shots? Did he come to prefer these sort of shots over the years or was it just a case of imitating what is perceived to work for "respectable" sci-fi?

I don't know personally much about Wise. Most of the people I know who worked on the film worked on the art/VFX side. It might be better to look at Wise's other films of the period to get an idea of what his trademarks might be. Remember, Star Wars was also considered to be VERY fast paced for the era, albeit it seems kinda slow now.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Re: Star Trek The Motion Picture: The Director's Edition (By Robert Wi

I may be incorrect, but I'm under the impression that it was Wise who introduced the whole Decker-Kirk conflict, which wasn't in the Phase II script.

This would make sense, since it's almost note-for-note the conflict between Lancaster and Gable's characters in "Run Silent, Run Deep."

 

[trevanian]

Re: Star Trek The Motion Picture: The Director's Edition (By Robert Wi

I may be incorrect, but I'm under the impression that it was Wise who introduced the whole Decker-Kirk conflict, which wasn't in the Phase II script.

He CAST Decker, but the whole 'Decker as petulant' and business of serving more as obstacle than help predates Wise by many months. The Par TV guy who gave the best notes on IN THY IMAGE in 1977 (he's the one who had issues about McCoy not getting enough good material too) mentions problems with the Decker character in this vein. The quote 'Decker mellows into a team player without any particular justification' comes to mind, but that's just from memory.

 

[Maurice]

Re: Star Trek The Motion Picture: The Director's Edition (By Robert Wi

I may be incorrect, but I'm under the impression that it was Wise who introduced the whole Decker-Kirk conflict, which wasn't in the Phase II script.

He CAST Decker, but the whole 'Decker as petulant' and business of serving more as obstacle than help predates Wise by many months. The Par TV guy who gave the best notes on IN THY IMAGE in 1977 (he's the one who had issues about McCoy not getting enough good material too) mentions problems with the Decker character in this vein. The quote 'Decker mellows into a team player without any particular justification' comes to mind, but that's just from memory.

Which, ironically, remains a problem, even in the finished film.