• 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!

Been rewatching Trek's 1-10 before XI comes out. My thoughts.

I am not Spock

Commodore
Commodore
Due to the new Star Trek movie being released in May this year, I have been recently rewatching the previous Trek films on DVD, and revising my opinions on some of them. So far, I have rewatched the first five movies. I will review the others later.

Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979) I was previously a bit cold on this film. The first big screen venture of the Starship Enterprise and her valiant crew turned out to be more 2001:A Space Odyssey than Star Wars. Audiences at the time were expecting a thrilling, effects-laden adventure. And what they got was a more cerebral, spiritual piece. Having been born in 1982, I wasn’t around to experience the critical lashing this film got at the time. I found TMP a bit boring when I saw it as a 13 year old. But upon reevaluating it, it is clearly the biggest and most epic Trek picture to date. Few of the other films have the same grand scale, the same sense of awe as The Motion Picture. Critics called the eight minute fly-around shot of the NCC1701 self-indulgent. But the music fits with the visuals so perfectly, that it all works. Jerry Goldsmith’s score was, and remains, outstanding. Also, this is the only Trek movie venture so far which had a ‘proper’ movie director (Academy Award winner Robert Wise). The rest were directed by TV directors or stars of the show. Visually and musically, TMP is stunning. And cinema is a visual medium, is it not? The VFX still hold up remarkably (at the time, this movie was one of the most expensive productions of all time).

There are many scenes where the actors are simply staring at special effects (especially the trip through the V’Ger cloud), the plot is a retread of the TOS episode ‘The Changeling’, and Decker and Ilia are obvious early templates for Riker and Troi, but the film still has its great moments. There are some great dialogue scenes between Decker and Kirk, and between Kirk, McCoy, and Spock (my personal favourite being the ‘reserve activation clause’ scene). B+

Star Trek II: The Wrath Of Khan (1982) Still holds up very well, despite some Eighties looking hairstyles. TWOK is simply a classic movie, Star Trek or otherwise. Director Nick Meyer brought us a timeless tale, one which fits in with other classic boys own adventure movies like Raiders of The Lost Ark. A great story is a great story, whether it is Horatio Hornblower on the seven seas, a wagon train in the 1800s, or a starship crew in the 23rd Century. TWOK is a pure slice of comic-book escapism, with moments of almost operatic melodrama. (There is a reason why this SF subgenre is called space opera) If the first film was a ‘hard sci-fi’ 2001 thought provoking piece; then the sequel is much closer to the Star Wars ‘space opera’ ethos. The production design of its predecessor was jettisoned in favour of a more maritime look. The film feels a lot closer in spirit to the original series (which blended high-concept ideas with action-adventure) than its immediate forebear. Holds its place as one of the best films in the canon. A+

Star Trek III: The Search For Spock (1984) The general consensus on this one seems to be ‘Nay’, but I’ve always rather liked it. Say what you want about Harve Bennett as a producer, but he certainly introduced shocking concepts into Trek. He wasn’t afraid to kill off Spock or destroy the Enterprise. In recent years, Trek became too complacent and refused to take dramatic risks. Kirk stealing the Enterprise and risking it all for his friend always struck me as a heroic move. I can’t find much to complain about with this film. I have always enjoyed it. Chris Lloyd turns up the camp factor to eleven with his manic performance as Kruge, and William Shatner ups his own camp factor to eleven as well. In fact, some of the Shat’s greatest ever moments occur in TSFS (I love this film’s ‘I…have….had…enough of….YOU!’ almost as much as TWOK’s famous ‘Khaaaaaaaan!’). TSFS really opened up the Trekverse for the first time, and showed us that there was more to the universe than just the Enterprise (we saw other Federation ships, Vulcan, civilian merchant freighters, et al). A few small criticisms. Robin Curtis wasn’t nearly as good as Kirstie Alley as Saavik. They ought to have written Saavik out altogether if Alley wasn’t available to reprise the role. And Bibi Besch as Carol Marcus was missed, too. Why wasn’t she involved in the film? And Captains Esteban and Styles really are a pair of douches, written that way to make Kirk look better. B

Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home (1986) Another fan favourite, and indeed one of my personal favourites. TVH seems to never get old to me. Every time I watch it, I still get entertainment from it. The final part of the ‘Genesis Trilogy’, TVH succeeded in bringing Trek to the mainstream, thrilling devotees and newcomers alike. For the first time in the movie series, Trek tries doing comedy, and it largely succeeds. And I like the fact that for once, there isn’t really a tangible villain (the Whale Probe isn’t really evil, per se; its just trying to communicate). The plot, although ostensibly about saving the world again, took on a more original twist. Time travel has been overused in Trek over the years, but then again, some of the best episodes and movies involved the device. My only criticism really is that the Whale Probe isn’t explained in any significant detail. It just shows up, and then goes on its merry way. We don’t know much about its background. For lack of a better word, this environmental cautionary tale just feels…nice. It remains as an entertaining, feelgood family film, twenty three years after its debut. A

Star Trek V: The Final Frontier (1989) I hate to be cliché, but TFF is a very troubled production. Plagued by a low budget, and inferior FX work, the film barely made a profit. The plot feels like a draft of one of Gene Roddenberry’s various ‘The God Thing’ projects; which wasn’t realised very well. Moments of awkward, forced humour (‘I know this ship like the back of my hand’) and some truly bizarre character moments (what is up with that Scotty/Uhura thing?) don’t help matters much. In its defence, I do feel that some of the Kirk/McCoy/Spock moments are worthwhile. The campfire and the jail cell scene are quite good, admittedly. Some of these such moments feel more like TOS than many of the other movies. De Kelly is great in the deathbed scene with his father. Luckinbill as Sybok isn’t bad, either. Despite some OK dialogue, though, the film just falls apart. The end is very anticlimactic. The effects work was rather on the poor side. Definitely one of the weakest entries in the series. But the character moments nearly save it. Nearly. D
 
They're pretty good reviews, and I agree with you on more or less all of it.

TMP I've always considered to be a great work of art, rather than a great action/adventure/sci-fi movie, but TFF to me has few redeeming features outside of the purely character driven moments you mentioned.

I'm looking forward to reading your reviews on the next few films, if you're still planning to do that :)
 
I agree with most of your ratings. ST I was a let down when I watched it all the way through for the first time. Years later, as an adult, I was able to appreciate the F/X and anti-climactic ending. My main beef is that there is so much build up in the film until V'ger is found. After V'ger and Decker merge, the movie basically ends pretty fast. It felt rushed and unbalanced in the end.

In terms of ST V, it was the one film that could be considered the 80th episode of Star Trek. The best parts are the character discovery of McCoy and Spock. Although Khan has the number one villain spot in my book, Sybok did pretty well. He wasn't evil, just misguided as a result of his ego and arrogance. The F/X wasn't much and the humor went over the top with the malfunctioning Enterprise. I would give it a rating of C+/ B- because as you review the remaining 5 films, you will notice a decline in story quality and plot holes as big as nebulas.
 
My issue with TMP was not the 8-minute grand tour of the Enterprise or the staring at special effects, but wooden acting and lack of chemistry. I don't know if it was Wise or Shatner who was to blame but Shatner's acting in this film is kinda horrible. Luckily Nimoy and Kelley are better, but then, they usually are.

I watched I-IV and VI this weekend and am now trying to decide whether I should watch V or forget about it. I haven't seen it in 5 years or so.
 
I agree with most of your ratings. ST I was a let down when I watched it all the way through for the first time. Years later, as an adult, I was able to appreciate the F/X and anti-climactic ending. My main beef is that there is so much build up in the film until V'ger is found. After V'ger and Decker merge, the movie basically ends pretty fast. It felt rushed and unbalanced in the end.

In terms of ST V, it was the one film that could be considered the 80th episode of Star Trek. The best parts are the character discovery of McCoy and Spock. Although Khan has the number one villain spot in my book, Sybok did pretty well. He wasn't evil, just misguided as a result of his ego and arrogance. The F/X wasn't much and the humor went over the top with the malfunctioning Enterprise. I would give it a rating of C+/ B- because as you review the remaining 5 films, you will notice a decline in story quality and plot holes as big as nebulas.

Yeah, both TMP and TFF suffer somewhat from a certain 'anticlimatic' nature. The ideas are pretty good, actually, but the execution feels a little..off. TFF could have been better if it had a higher budget. The scene with McCoy switching off his dad's life support was excellent, and I wish the film had more moments like this.
 
The odd number TOS films were better than the even number ones. The TNG movies were total dreck, from First Contact on. The only good thing that happened in those four films was when Data said "$hit!"

Star Trek "The Motion Picture" was made together from ideas and actually filming from the unsold "Star Trek: Next Phase". It is a decent movie, but very slow. It did have kind of a Stanley Kubrick type of feel. The uniforms were god-awful however, white with those silly belt buckle things. Typical 70s design.

Star Trek II, III and IV were a story arc, II and IV were excellent. III wasn't too bad in my opinion, Christopher Lloyd did a good Klingon. IV was a great film too, and probably the funniest one of all.

Star Trek V sucked. Bad. Really bad. The only thing that was good about that film was Kirk and McCoy getting drunk at a campfire roasting "Mashmellons" (which what Marshmellows will be called in 300 years.) The whole Vulcan hippy, annoying, and stupid half brother of Spock wanting to go to the center of the Universe to meet God was so dumb.

Star Trek VI was a decent film, but the actors were showing their age.

TNG movies sucked. First Contact? Stupid villian, long drawn out story, the energy ribbon, the lame villian, Kirk and Picard riding horses and them getting killed.

Inserrection was basically a high budget TNG film.

Nemesis made Star Trek V a masterpiece. That movie was suck an embarrassment that Patrick Stewart retired the character and went on to X-Men.
 
^Insurrection didn't even look like it had a high budget! It looked like one of those direct to video B grade movies. Every time anyone other than ILM does the effects, Trek movies suffer, IMO.

TFF, Insurrection, and Nemesis were palmed off to other effects houses. It showed.
 
Actually, while I didn't like the movie's story, characterization, or script, I did like the way they filmed it. It looks clean, if you know what I'm trying to say.

J.
 
I recently rewatched The Wrath of Khan in memory of Ricardo Montalban, and to be honest, I was bored to tears. Don't get me wrong, Ricardo Montalban is frigging awesome as Khan, but the rest of the flick, besides the battle in the Mutara Nebula is just plain boring as hell.

The training cruise just seemed like a pointless attempt to make Kirk and Spock and Scotty look heroic and the trainees look like lumbering dumbasses. The plot, overall, is pretty dumb (how can one confuse one planet for another, and shouldn't they have avoided the Ceti Alpha system, knowing what evil lurks there?). And, for that matter, why couldn't Terrell and Chekov ordered a beam out and flipped Khan the bird as they were beaming away?

Besides Montalban's performance, I found myself yawning and looking at the clock, until I finally turned it off, wishing I'd watched The Naked Gun or McStroke instead to honor Montalban.
 
^Yeah, Chekov and Terrell not knowing what planet they beamed down to was pretty idiotic. And they really ought to have known to avoid the Ceti Alpha star system in the first place.

I just rewatched TUC and Generations. I'll post my reviews of them later.
 
^Insurrection didn't even look like it had a high budget! It looked like one of those direct to video B grade movies. Every time anyone other than ILM does the effects, Trek movies suffer, IMO.

TFF, Insurrection, and Nemesis were palmed off to other effects houses. It showed.

This I do not understand.

While I agree TFF's effects were really weak for 1989, I thought INS and NEM's effects were pretty good. Nothing overly groundbreaking (did they need to be?), but nothing cheap looking or cringe worthy. I remember seeing the E-E for the first time during Nemesis and thinking "Wow! The ship looks good! Fantastic detail!"

Then again, maybe I am just not that discriminating as others.
 
^Insurrection didn't even look like it had a high budget! It looked like one of those direct to video B grade movies. Every time anyone other than ILM does the effects, Trek movies suffer, IMO.

TFF, Insurrection, and Nemesis were palmed off to other effects houses. It showed.

This I do not understand.

While I agree TFF's effects were really weak for 1989, I thought INS and NEM's effects were pretty good. Nothing overly groundbreaking (did they need to be?), but nothing cheap looking or cringe worthy. I remember seeing the E-E for the first time during Nemesis and thinking "Wow! The ship looks good! Fantastic detail!"

Then again, maybe I am just not that discriminating as others.

I'll give you Nemesis, but I heartily disagree about INS. I remember watching the Captain's Yacht detach and actually wonder if the special f/x had gotten worse from First Contact, as seeing the Enterprise hull that close looked like something out of a PC game.
 
I didn't care for the Ent-E after FC. In following films, the ship appeared to dark and looked too computer generated. I do agree that the F/X were there for Insurrection and Nemesis. What killed these films was the stories and the directing (especially in Nemesis). In regards to ST III, it always felt like a bridge between ST II and IV. It was neither the greatest nor the worst. I felt that there should have been more to the Saavik/ David relationship. His death would have had more meaning. Her character (played by Robin Curtis) was also too wooden. Her acting could be contributed to the actions of the director of the film (Nimoy). Even though Vulcans do not display emotion, they do feel them. Spock taking Captain Pike to Talos IV was an emotional act of loyalty, justified by personal logic.
 
And Bibi Besch as Carol Marcus was missed, too. Why wasn’t she involved in the film?

As Harve Bennett told Bibi Besch herself, it was no reflection on her acting, but if Carol was in ST III, when David did his big reveal about protomatter, she would have been tainted too. To keep the script in balance her character would have had to die on Genesis along with David. Bennett was a great believer in stories having kharmic balance. To get back Spock, a seemingly impossible ask, Kirk had to battle the elements of nature and lose David - and the Enterprise.

Carol was written into early scenes of ST VI (the "last roundup" of the crew) but the scenes were cut as the script took shape.
 
The TNG movies were total dreck, from First Contact on.

TNG movies sucked. First Contact? Stupid villian, long drawn out story.

Blasphemy. First Contact is the best Star Trek movie after The Wrath of Khan and The Voyage Home. We only got three really top notch epic Star Trek films and those are them. The parts that took place on the Enterprise had the reverance and respect for the events of the series and the kind of riveting space action that Wrath of Khan had. At the same time, the scenes on earth had the fun, humour, and affection for the characters that The Voyage Home had. Its villain wasn't as great as Khan or even Chang, but she was still cool and memorable nonetheless.
 
Here’s my next batch of Trek retro movie reviews, in anticipation of Trek 11 this year:

Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country (1991) This one is debated quite fiercely amongst Trek diehards. Is it a classic, worthy of being placed in the annals of fame beside director Nick Meyer’s previous opus ‘Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan’? Or is it a plot-hole filled romp through where many have boldly gone before? My reaction to TUC has always been more in the former camp. I quite like it. I think it is a fine production, and a worthy send off for the original crew, as they make way for Picard and company in the succeeding film. Christopher Plummer is wonderful as the Shakespeare-quoting mustache-twirling nemesis General Chang, and David Warner gets a much better role here (if just as brief in duration) than in The Final Frontier.

The original crew, by this stage, really were beginning to show their age, though. That’s not to say they don’t all get some nice moments to shine in VI. Spock gets the lion’s share of the attention, and Nimoy has some great lines. Some fans take issue with the Vulcan mind-meld telepathic ‘rape’ scene with Valeris. I always found it a powerful scene. Spock really gets emotional in this film, and goes over the edge. Shatner and Kelly are good, too. Bones and Kirk’s dialogue when they’re incarcerated in Rura Penthe is very fun, and reminiscent of the original series.

The score by Cliff Eidelman was always one of my favourite Trek movie soundtracks. Some find it too un-Trekkian and militaristic, but I find that it is very epic and well-suited to the political manifestations of the film’s storyline. It’s sort of similar to Gustav Holst’s ‘The Planets’ (at least, to my ears). The special effects also hold up pretty well, 18 years later. The movie does not look too dated at all. However, some of the sets are obviously reused. The Federation President’s office is a simple redress of The Next Generation’s Ten Forward Lounge. Meyer’s script is fast-moving, entertaining, and a perfect close to Kirk’s character arc in the movies in that he finally learns to forgive the Klingons for causing his son’s death. He does load a few too many literary allusions in there, though, for his own good. Don’t get me wrong, I love Shakespeare and the ilk; but lines like the supposed Vulcan proverb ‘only Nixon could go to China’ , and Spock implying that Sherlock Holmes is one of his ancestors, are very clumsy and ill-conceived at best. TUC is nevertheless a good Trek film, and a very enjoyable end to the adventures of the Original Series characters. Until this May, that is! A-

Star Trek Generations (1994) I loved the feature debut of the Next Gen cast so much when I was 12 years of age in ’94, that I wore out the VHS by watching it nearly every day. I think Generations gets a bad rap. It’s not the abhorrent pile many claim it to be. Maybe it’s nostalgia talking, or maybe I’m looking at it through rose-coloured glasses, but I’ve always thought GEN was just fine as a Trek film. It isn’t the best one, but it’s by no means the worst. The 23rd Century segment at the beginning, starring Ferris Bueller’s mate, is quite good. It is a bit odd to hear Scotty jabbering away in modern Trek technobabble, though.

Now that I’m a bit older (and hopefully wiser) I can see a few flaws in the film. The Next Gen movies are often described as representing no more than feature length TV episodes. And this is quite true. There isn’t much here that couldn’t have been done on the series (save for the impressive Ent-D destruction sequence, which still looks mighty fine today. ILM’s effects work still holds up rather well in Generations). It’s even directed by a television director. They try and disguise the Enterprise sets designed for TV by lighting them in a more cinematically dark style. The result is that it looks like someone has turned off all the lights on the vessel. Riker exits Picard’s ready room at the beginning, into a completely darkened bridge!

The Nexus premise is admittedly full of Borg Cube sized plotholes, too. Why couldn’t Jean Luc go back further in time, and arrest Soran on the Enterprise? Why doesn’t he see another Picard on Veridian III when he returns with Kirk? Why isn’t his wife in the Christmas fantasy sequence Beverley? (she is a redhead, though…) Why does he throw away the priceless Kurlan Naiskos artefact from ‘The Chase’ (TNG)? The film is full of many such questions. Did he ever escape the Nexus at all? Is First Contact, Insurrection, Nemesis, DS9, Voyager, and ENT all a figment of Picard’s imagination?

And, of course, there’s the infamous death scenes (yes, I did mean scenes, plural). It was a shame to see the poor old Enterprise D go down in flames, because she wasn’t apparently cool enough for the silver screen. And the manner of her demise I have always found wanting. Even as a mere 12 year old child at the time, I thought that it was rather silly that a 20 year old Klingon garbage scow could take down the Federation flagship. But at least the crash scene was visually arresting. Then there’s the downright blasphemous (to many Trekkies) death scene of Kirk. It wasn’t a heroic ending. But, then, many Greek heroes met with untimely, or ignoble ends. Jason of the Argonauts was felled by a beam of wood from his ship. Kirk also didn’t die alone, like he said in TFF. (Although what people say doesn’t often come true. And in a way, he was alone. He was on an unknown planet, in another century, with a guy who he didn’t know)

Generations is a fun ride. And that’s all it is. A ride is temporarily enjoyable, satisfying, and exciting. But it’s not very deep. Generations’ plot doesn’t hold up under intense critical scrutiny. I enjoy it for what it is. I can enjoy the Next Gen films if I just turn my brain off and don’t think too much about the plotholes. Generations is an OK movie. It certainly isn’t the dog many think it is. It has it’s problems. But Malcolm McDowell as Soran isn’t really one of them. I think he’s a decent villain, with some quotable lines: ‘Time is the fire in which we burn’ B-
 
I was looking forward to your reviews, but your likening of GEN and dislikening of TFF is very odd to me.

Don't worry, I hate GEN.
 
My like of GEN is probably nostalgia talking. I was but a wee 12 year old when it came out.

It has its flaws, but it isn't that bad.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top