I really like The Motion Picture now

[heavylids]

As I've stated in previous threads, I really disliked this film when I was younger. But over time I've developed an appreciation for it. I'm watching it now and I find myself enjoying it even more than the last time. I love how slow paced some moments are in this movie. Especially the shots of the new Enterprise. It really allows the viewer to completely absorb and appreciate the cinematography.

I feel like this movie is either loved or hated. Is this true?

 

[number6]

I'm right down the middle.. I thought it was ok. It looked amazing on a theatre screen, but the story was taken from an episode, the acting was subdued and the effects sequences were too long.
It still has the charm of being the first, after long years of rumour and anticipation..Star Trek movies stopped being special after the fourth..Everyone kinda figured there'd be a few one every few years after TUC.

 

[Gorn Captain]

I like the movie because it helps me sleep. I know that sounds like an insult, but it's not. I used to run the videotape late at night during summer vacation as a kid, and now from time to time, I will play the DVD, watch the movie for a long while, then drift off. Then in the morning I will go back and watch the last 45 minutes.

 

[sonak]

It's nothing like TOS. A failed effort to have Star Trek do cerebral, slow sci-fi which they thankfully did not repeat in any other movies.(so far)

Star Trek is space opera not 2001.


That, and the premise is a ripped-off version of TOS' "the changeling" padded with special effects and a 45-minute crew reunion opening.


But the effects are cool and the music is good, and there are some good character bits here and there.

 

[ShamelessMcBundy]

The director's edition is much better than the regular version.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I like it, but it's far from being a great film. It's slow, pretentious and clumsy. Still, some of the effects are great and the scale of what was attempted was remarkable.

 

[scottydog]

TMP is one of those movies one needs to appreciate in its historical context. In its day, it was a good movie and exactly what star trek fans were craving for after going more than a decade without any trek post-TOS.

It hasn't aged well, but that doesn't bother me. All I know is that I was mesmerized, with chills up my spine, watching it in that Philadelphia movie theater back in 1980.

 

[gottacook]

TMP is one of those movies one needs to appreciate in its historical context. In its day, it was a good movie and exactly what star trek fans were craving for after going more than a decade without any trek post-TOS.

It hasn't aged well, but that doesn't bother me. All I know is that I was mesmerized, with chills up my spine, watching it in that Philadelphia movie theater back in 1980.

Hey, I saw it in Philadelphia too - at the big-screen Fox theater (on the west side of City Hall) that was torn down later in 1980 for an office tower - but the "craving" of this long-denied fan wasn't totally met by TMP, sorry to say. I recall very well the 1970s drought, when (other than the brief network run of the animated series) fans had only reruns with bad syndication cuts, book adaptations, and the occasional related book such as Gerrold's World of Star Trek. So I too was very enthusiastic when I entered the theater, but reality intervened quickly: the flaws in post-production, the tin-ear dialogue (e.g., Kirk saying "radio" as if he'd never used the term "subspace radio" himself), the weird casting of Persis Khambatta (I could never tell whether she was a bad actor or was just called upon to play Ilia that way; someone like, say, Madeline Stowe in the role would not have made you wonder what the answer to that question was), the ludicrous story resolution (must all officers named Decker suicidally act to end a threat by a hugely destructive force? Guess so).

What I mean is that I would have loved to love TMP at first sight, but it wasn't meant to be. (And the network TV edit a few years later only made things worse.)

I remember that the Philadelphia Inquirer's film critic at the time initially swooned over TMP and then backtracked two weeks later, writing (I still remember this, it was so absurd) "with some reservations, I liked it very much..." By contrast, the Daily News' reviewer had it right the first time, noting the TV episode-like aspect of the movie (i.e., that there was a moment of tension at semi-regular intervals, analogous to what one would see before a commercial break).

Excellent modelmaking, though. Real craft of a sort we're not likely to see again in the CGI era. I did love that Enterprise, on the outside at least.

 

[scottydog]

What I mean is that I would have loved to love TMP at first sight, but it wasn't meant to be.

TMP was certainly flawed but at least it got the movie franchise going, albeit long after it should have got going!

Plus it paved the way for Wrath of Khan, which was an excellent movie that was loved by critics and fans alike.

 

[Dusty Ayres]

Excellent modelmaking, though. Real craft of a sort we're not likely to see again in the CGI era. I did love that Enterprise, on the outside at least.

Bullshit. CGI does spacecraft just as well as traditional model methods do, and doesn't cost a fortune to make, time and money to film, or room to store (the only reason the Enterprise looked good in this movie is because the movie was made for 40 million and they were able to afford to shoot great photography for the film-the shots of the Enterprise in Star Trek V: The Final Frontier were shite and then some.) The CGI Enterprise in the 2009 film was just as good as a model version.

 

[sonak]

TMP is one of those movies one needs to appreciate in its historical context. In its day, it was a good movie and exactly what star trek fans were craving for after going more than a decade without any trek post-TOS.

It hasn't aged well, but that doesn't bother me. All I know is that I was mesmerized, with chills up my spine, watching it in that Philadelphia movie theater back in 1980.

um, this is not really the case. It did well at the box office, but critically, it was not popular with the fans. I'm not sure where you get the idea that it was "exactly" what star trek fans were craving, but if you read fanzines and stuff at the time, massive disappointment was the usual reaction.


There's a reason why TWOK went in a totally different direction, and why TMP is almost ignored in future films.

 

[Pauln6]

Excellent modelmaking, though. Real craft of a sort we're not likely to see again in the CGI era. I did love that Enterprise, on the outside at least.

Bullshit. CGI does spacecraft just as well as traditional model methods do, and doesn't cost a fortune to make, time and money to film, or room to store (the only reason the Enterprise looked good in this movie is because the movie was made for 40 million and they were able to afford to shoot great photography for the film-the shots of the Enterprise in Star Trek V: The Final Frontier were shite and then some.) The CGI Enterprise in the 2009 film was just as good as a model version.

Maybe if they can make the CGI look as grainy and imperfect as the models I'll agree with you. CGI has certainly improved since the days of B5 but I still prefer the models myself. The TMP Enterprise has never been bettered.

 

[Gojira]

I used to not care too much for it but as I have gotten older and also view it in its historical context I have come to really enjoy it.

I really like how everyone comes together onto the Enterprise, how Kirk wrestles the center seat away from Decker and finds he may be too rusty and in over his head. McCoy is cantankerous as ever but he really does well in being Kirk's adviser during the mission.

Spock is wrestling with his humanity and this movie really begins the journey of him embracing his humanity. The scene where Spock unexpectedly walks on the bridge to come and rescue the ship from its troubles is my favorite scene of the entire movie.

Plus it is exciting to find out just what V'Ger is/was and with Ilia playing the part of the V'Ger probe is pretty cool too.

The slow fly-by and reveal of the refitted Enterprise never gets old for me.

I like the Director's cut of the film and it is one of my favorite top Star Trek movies.

I like Star Trek I-IV and VI pretty equally and they are my favorites.

 

[gottacook]

Excellent modelmaking, though. Real craft of a sort we're not likely to see again in the CGI era. I did love that Enterprise, on the outside at least.

Bullshit. CGI does spacecraft just as well as traditional model methods do, and doesn't cost a fortune to make, time and money to film, or room to store (the only reason the Enterprise looked good in this movie is because the movie was made for 40 million and they were able to afford to shoot great photography for the film-the shots of the Enterprise in Star Trek V: The Final Frontier were shite and then some.) The CGI Enterprise in the 2009 film was just as good as a model version.

Hey, I was simply trying to draw attention to the (presumed) demise of the modelmaking craft. That was also the era of the Close Encounters mothership, with all that wonderful detail (including, so I've read, a little Enterprise and other in-jokes), as well as the Dykstra shop's models in Star Wars and (god help us) Battlestar Galactica. I'm afraid all of that knowledge of the craft will simply disappear. CGI may indeed give us one day such things as convincing performances by actors who are dead in real life, but I am allowed, aren't I?, to already become nostalgic for practical effects techniques.

 

[heavylids]

I for one prefer models over CGI. Unless the filmmakers put as much effort into the effects as Danny Boyle did in Sunshine, models always seem more real. Most CGI these days looks like a god damn video game.

 

[Gojira]

I cannot honestly tell the difference between models and CGI. But it is sad that CGI has put models out of business because I have a lot of respect and admiration for the art.

 

[Expo67]

Excellent modelmaking, though. Real craft of a sort we're not likely to see again in the CGI era. I did love that Enterprise, on the outside at least.

Bullshit. CGI does spacecraft just as well as traditional model methods do, and doesn't cost a fortune to make, time and money to film, or room to store (the only reason the Enterprise looked good in this movie is because the movie was made for 40 million and they were able to afford to shoot great photography for the film-the shots of the Enterprise in Star Trek V: The Final Frontier were shite and then some.) The CGI Enterprise in the 2009 film was just as good as a model version.

Hey, I was simply trying to draw attention to the (presumed) demise of the modelmaking craft. That was also the era of the Close Encounters mothership, with all that wonderful detail (including, so I've read, a little Enterprise and other in-jokes), as well as the Dykstra shop's models in Star Wars and (god help us) Battlestar Galactica. I'm afraid all of that knowledge of the craft will simply disappear. CGI may indeed give us one day such things as convincing performances by actors who are dead in real life, but I am allowed, aren't I?, to already become nostalgic for practical effects techniques.

Is there something about the original Battlestar Galactica that you don't like?

As far as TMP is concerned, I certainly enjoyed viewing it. I was lucky to see the film on the cinema screen twice. The first time in December of 1979. The second time, over a decade later in 1991, during the original series 25th Anniversary.

It was indeed a cinematic experience that was, and still is, a refreshing joy to watch. Despite its mixed views from fans, it was still one of 1979's big box office smash hits. Most of all, a wonderful way to end a cool year, as well as the decade known as the Seventies.

And, yes, I liked the new look of the uniforms in the first film, too.