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.
Your head must be an... Interesting place.The Motion Picture is my favorite Trek movie. But what do I know? Star Trek Into Darkness is runner-up!
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.
Motion picture was a piece of garbage.
I think not.
Your head must be an... Interesting place.![]()
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.The Motion Picture is my favorite Trek movie. But what do I know? Star Trek Into Darkness is runner-up!
I like pseudo-intellectualism, I like action and fun.
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?
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.