• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Am I alone in preferring the odd numbered TOS films?

Honestly, I think we can blame TFF for the whole "odd-number" thing, which was then applied retroactively to tar TMP and TSFS, both of which have their virtues.

The even-numbered movies are still better, though. :)
 
3 had the disadvantage of being the "middle" movie in a sort of trilogy, but it's still fun to watch.

TMP has extremely passionate fans who enjoy every Hai Karate scented unnatural-fiber covered bulging pelvis in the film, so I'll just say, it that it has its moments.

5 again had to start over after the previous 3 film arc. But that doesn't justify it being a really bad film (yes, there are going to be people who like TFF too, but in my mind they are contrarians who will also argue that Plan 9 From Outer Space is a good movie, also, just to be the lone voice in the wilderness)

I don't think odd numbers have anything to do with it. It just worked out that way.
 
3 had the disadvantage of being the "middle" movie in a sort of trilogy, but it's still fun to watch.

TMP has extremely passionate fans who enjoy every Hai Karate scented unnatural-fiber covered bulging pelvis in the film, so I'll just say, it that it has its moments.

5 again had to start over after the previous 3 film arc. But that doesn't justify it being a really bad film (yes, there are going to be people who like TFF too, but in my mind they are contrarians who will also argue that Plan 9 From Outer Space is a good movie, also, just to be the lone voice in the wilderness)

I don't think odd numbers have anything to do with it. It just worked out that way.

Final Frontier has a better script and story than VI and does more world-building than II, IV or VI. It’s visually better directed than VI, but is basically let down by anything that actually cost money, but what money there was was front loaded at the beginning of the film. It also has a better supporting cast, and the second tier TOS cast got more limelight than in VI, with the exception of Sulu, who got a nice cup of tea and a different chair.
Shatner actually knows more about framing a scene than Nimoy by the looks of things, which is surprising given how much success Nimoy has in that arena, but not that surprising when you consider how long Shatner has been in the game and how prolific he is. He’s also had the strongest non-Trek career of any of the original cast as far as acting roles, but the trend is always to gently bash Shatner. I would even say Shatner did more in his fifteen minutes in generations than Nimoy did in Unification I&II by simply getting a horse to walk sideways, and probably put more effort in. But maybe that’s unfair, as one was a feature film that put Shatner and Stewart on Times front cover, and Unification was essentially promo work for Star Trek VI.
Plan 9? It’s a mid tier fifties b movie. And as dull as that suggests.
 
Nemesis kind of throws a huge spanner in the works when it comes to odd v. even.

I'm enjoying the love TMP is getting here, it gets shat on all the time among people I know but it presents space with a grandeur that the other films don't. I will say that TMP is kind of a lesser Solaris, but it is good and it's a bit daft to compare a Tarkovsky to a popcorn flick
 
3 had the disadvantage of being the "middle" movie in a sort of trilogy, but it's still fun to watch.

TMP has extremely passionate fans who enjoy every Hai Karate scented unnatural-fiber covered bulging pelvis in the film, so I'll just say, it that it has its moments.

5 again had to start over after the previous 3 film arc. But that doesn't justify it being a really bad film (yes, there are going to be people who like TFF too, but in my mind they are contrarians who will also argue that Plan 9 From Outer Space is a good movie, also, just to be the lone voice in the wilderness)

I don't think odd numbers have anything to do with it. It just worked out that way.

It is two very different things to say something is a "good movie" and something is a "likable movie."

For me, TFF is an extremely LIKABLE movie. That said, I have no illusions about it being a really "good" movie.

By how I operate, one is in no way linked to the other. There are plenty of "good movies" that I can't stand as well.
 
2 and 4 are regarded as fan favorites. 3 is okay but an acquired taste. I found 3 kind of boring in my younger years but grew fonder of it later but not as good as 2 and 4. Motion picture was a piece of garbage.
 
It's funny how diverse even Trekkies are. TMP is the best movie, it's a piece of garbage. TUC was the best movie ever made...it's mediocre and so on.

Not to sound Pollyannaish but I really did like all 13 films at least to some degree. TFF is number 13 on my list but it still has good moments and I still watch it from time to time. TMP is my favorite...it made me a Trekkie when I watched it on VHS just before TVH came out. TWOK is a great film, IMHO. TSFS had great moments too.

TVH is good fun. It's a good pressure release film after TWOK and TSFS. I liked the 4 TNG films as well, with FC easily being my favorite, and one of my top 3 Star Trek films overall. I loved the Borg and how they were portrayed there. Insurrection was a let down--it should have tied into the Dominion War somehow. It's ok, but could have been better. And I always joke I'm one of the 10 people that liked Nemesis.

And I liked the 3 Abrams films with Beyond probably being my favorite, if for no other reason that Earth is barely even mentioned. It was nice to finally go somewhere else for a change.
 
The Motion Picture is my favorite Trek movie. But what do I know? Star Trek Into Darkness is runner-up!
Agree. My two favorite ST films are odd numbered TMP and even numbered STID too. They are so entertainingly different, but are still both Trek at it's best.
 
Last edited:
For some reason I think the humor in V works better than IV, IV feels a lot more desperate for laughs, forced and cheap included, maybe because it was such a complete reversal of the past two films.

But I do consider III pretty lowly, a big step down from II despite a few moments, and I'm not sure why III and IV aren't considered pretty equivalent, for their differences I think they have much more in common in that they mostly undid their predecessors.
 
I tend to prefer watching the odd numbered TOS films over the even numbered ones, and I'll give a few reasons why:

1) Each of the 3 odd numbered films feel like they could've been TOS episodes on the big screen. Each in some way attempts to have a grand scope and truly feel like space adventures, rather than adventures that happen to be set in space.

2) The plotlines of I, III, and V reflect themes found in the original TV series. I being about the unknown; III about friendship coming above rules, regulations and anything else; V about man and the divine - it is similar to the episode where the crew meets Apollo in a sense.

3) The cast and crew all look great for some reason in the odd numbered films. Shatner in particular is perhaps in the best shape of his life in TMP. His perm in III is not embarrassing as it is in II. He is not obviously chubby or puffy and drenched in makeup in I, III or V as he is in IV. The rest of the crew look generally good in the odd numbered films.

4) They feel more space westerns rather than Melville inspired revenge stories or political thrillers, or the sadly dated 80s comedy of IV.

5) They all have a certain campy, goofyness about them that makes TOS appealing.

6) There is a level of emotion between the characters in those films that isn't truly present in the other films. I is about the characters discovering themselves and re-discovering each other; III being about going against rules, codes, and traditions to save a friend; V is the only film to show chase the banter between the Trio that made TOS so endearing.

7) I and V feel less like milkruns and more like independent voyages by the crew to confront some threat. II is an adventure the crew happens to get caught up in, and IV is a time travel episode (which outside of City on the Edge of Forever I never liked in TOS)

8) There's more world-building in I, III and V. The living machine creature introduced in I; the Starfleet nightlife scene in III (seedy bar and all) as well as the Genesis planet; Paradise City and all its TOS' banality (including a three breasted alien babe) in V as well as Sha-Ka-Re and the existence of what could be called "demonic" entities in the ST universe.

By contrast, II is a much more human centric affair - it's man against man. IV is a preachy film about saving whales. VI while a GREAT film is essentially a Cold War thriller with Star Trek thrown in. Also, each of the even numbered films focuses on the theme of James Kirk getting old in some way or another and it's depressing to see your hero's age being hammered over and over again. II with the whole Kirk becoming a relic theme. IV with the glasses bit. VI with Kirk being closeminded due to age and becoming, politically, a dinosaur as a new 'galatic' order emerges around him that he doesn't like. I don't like seeing Jim Kirk as a bitter older man - I like seeing him be daring, be in command, doing cool space stuff. Not ruminating over turning 50 or how he can't exist in this new Underdiscovered Country.

For me, I, III and V capture the STAR in Star Trek. They feel like voyages and adventures. The other films are better films all around, but they lack a certain something.

Am I alone in this assessment?

Good post. You are not alone, but most definitely in the minority.

Though I think TSFS is a good film that gets unfairly dinged for Kirstie Alley's absence.

TMP has it's good points and I can see why some would prefer it over TVH, which could be a bit too campy for some.

But you are not going to have much company on TFF despite some nice moments.

I think it is fair to say that 90% of fans would have TWOK (despite the Checkov & missing planet gaffes) & TUC both in their top three of the six TOS movies, with most having them in the top 2 spots.

The #3 spot would be closer. TFF would be bottom.

I think tiers is the best way to look at it, and the consensus view is:
Tier 1 = Excellent = TWOK, TUC (FC)
Tier 2 = Good = TMP, TSFS, TVH (Gen)
Tier 3 = Poor = TFF (Nem)

I would put Insurrection in Tier 2, but I am in the minority there.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top