is this TREK's first movie?

[RobertScorpio]

If you think about it, in a twisty way, this is STAR TREK's first real movie...here is how I support this..(Okay it is thin)...but here goes..


TMP was really PHASE TWO morphed into a movie...

Khan was really a low budget movie that just HAPPENED to be good with many re-used FX from TMP....shoe string budget approach was hatched here...

Search for Spock-Voyage Home directed by one of the stars, not a very good director (Sorry Leonard)...same for V with a shoe string budget..

TNG movies were either directed by TV stars from the show, or TV directors..all written by TV writers...

Yes, you could argue that JJ is a graduate from TV, but the money and scope of this movie is far more 'hollywood' than any TREK movie before...so this is really the FIRST STAR TREK movie!!!

Rob

 

[Klingon Empire]

No. TMP, TWOK, THSFS, TVH, TFF and TUC are all kinda big budget. This is just another movie.

But it is the first in 28 years. (Continuation of The Original series)

 

[RobertScorpio]

No. TMP, TWOK, THSFS, TVH, TFF and TUC are all kinda big budget. This is just another movie.

But it is the first in 28 years. (Continuation of The Original series)

Well..i don't know..

TWOK was made at a fraction of the cost of TMP...and was filmed on pretty much the same stage, used multiple times...that is a bottle movie if I ever saw one..

SEARCH FOR SPOCK was made again, on cheap sets..that planet set on GENESIS is pretty weak...the only thing that saves that movie is the character stuff..

Voyage Home was a big hit, so I'll give you that one..

V and TUC were shot with low budgets and redressed TNG sets, and it showed....

Generation, my favorite TNG movie, still comes off looking low budget with TNG sets and reused FX shots...

Insurrection/Nemesis were just bad films and low budget flops...

TREK XI is a big budget big time hollywood movie with all the hype...it is, IMO, the first TREK movie since really TMP...

Rob

 

[Kpnuts]

Isn't it just easier to imagine that since this is a semi reboot, it's being counted as a second "first movie" after TMP

 

[JNG]

TMP is a pretty good example of the Hollywood-run-amok kind of thing. Huge budget, lots of rewrites, super high concept, production time stretched out, changing key personnel, et cetera. There was a very clear and conscious attempt to expand the scope, change the look, go big, not just do warmed-over TV for nostalgia. The results had a mixed reception, but it was definitely a real movie.

 

[Franklin]

TMP is a pretty good example of the Hollywood-run-amok kind of thing. Huge budget, lots of rewrites, super high concept, production time stretched out, changing key personnel, et cetera. There was a very clear and conscious attempt to expand the scope, change the look, go big, not just do warmed-over TV for nostalgia. The results had a mixed reception, but it was definitely a real movie.

And Academy Award winner Robert Wise directing it.

In 2008 dollars, it's budget would've been 104 million dollars (based on the 35 million dollar budget as reported on the website The Numbers).

However, it is true that the other movies did seem to suffer budgetary short-shrift. The reported buget for TWOK was only $12 million, or "just" $30 million in 2008. The rest of the movies fall into that range, give or take. Even GEN's $38 million budget in 1994 works out to only $55 million in today's dollars. INS works out the next largest after TMP at $92 million in 2008 dollars.

I'd say this is the second time Trek has been attempted on a grand scale. TMP being the first. Some may say they even added real actors to play the roles this time.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

No. TMP, TWOK, THSFS, TVH, TFF and TUC are all kinda big budget. This is just another movie.

No, the only one of those that was "big budget" for its time was ST:TMP.

In a lot of ways this is the first movie based directly on the original TV series - ST:TMP is a kind of reboot all its own. Aside from that, of course, there was the dead-on contemporary review of the film that read (in its entirety):

Star Trek - The Motion Picture: Frankly, that's giving it the benefit of the doubt.

 

[Falcor5]

While the director for Nemesis was not famous it did have a very famous writer who has been Nominated for Academy Awards in John Logan. It did not help the film much but they must have of least been trying by getting such a famous writer.

 

[RobertScorpio]

While the director for Nemesis was not famous it did have a very famous writer who has been Nominated for Academy Awards in John Logan. It did not help the film much but they must have of least been trying by getting such a famous writer.

The movie may have had Logan, the terrific writer of BATS...but Nemesis still looked cheap had no hype at all....I agree with the post above that TMP and this new movie are the only ones that I would really consider 'movie' efforts because of all the reasons listed before.....but even TMP was had a 'tv' feel to it ,when you take away the FX, because the story comes from a the failed PHASE TWO tv show, with a redressed plot from another GR failed show....

So...even with all of TMP's budget and hype? It, to me, was just a redressed TV show, whose sets would be used by the new crop of movies and new generation of TV show...

Rob

 

[USS Triumphant]

I could see an argument that this is the first TOS movie, if one wanted to say that TMP - the first half of Generations constitute a different "series", like maybe "The BFY Era" (Beyond Five Years).

But aside from an argument like that, I wouldn't want to discount ST II - IV, or VI. Especially not VI.

Budget isn't relevant. Was it a good movie? By budgetary standards, "Battlefield Earth" was far, far better than "Clerks" - and that sure as hell ain't true!

 

[RobertScorpio]

I could see an argument that this is the first TOS movie, if one wanted to say that TMP - the first half of Generations constitute a different "series", like maybe "The BFY Era" (Beyond Five Years).

But aside from an argument like that, I wouldn't want to discount ST II - IV, or VI. Especially not VI.

Budget isn't relevant. Was it a good movie? By budgetary standards, "Battlefield Earth" was far, far better than "Clerks" - and that sure as hell ain't true!

Perhaps...but my point is this.

TMP was really filmed on sets built for PHASE TWO.
KHAN just took those sets and reused them. In fact, if I am correct, Khan's Bridge..kirk's Bridge...Regula-1 set and the genesis cave where David attacks Kirk are all the same set....then you have all the FX shots that were lifted right out of TMP...the only thing that saves the movie is the plot. But to anyone in the know, and we are, the movie was filmed on a TV set with one of the greatest TV bean counters of all time, Bennett, at the top...

Search for Spock was more of the same...

What I am saying is that, in terms of budget and scope, only TMP can even come close to matching the 'movie feel and buzz' that this movie is going to attain eventually....

And I might add, movie reviewers of past Trek movies, even some of our own BBS friends, have lamented about how the TREK movies look like TV episodes due to the overuse of the TV sets (another reason I am VERY against any attempt to make a tv-series using these sets)

TREK XI is going to promoted big time because, to me, Paramount is finally treating TREK as a major motion picture...

Rob

 

[RobertScorpio]

I could see an argument that this is the first TOS movie, if one wanted to say that TMP - the first half of Generations constitute a different "series", like maybe "The BFY Era" (Beyond Five Years).

But aside from an argument like that, I wouldn't want to discount ST II - IV, or VI. Especially not VI.

Budget isn't relevant. Was it a good movie? By budgetary standards, "Battlefield Earth" was far, far better than "Clerks" - and that sure as hell ain't true!

Perhaps...but my point is this.

TMP was really filmed on sets built for PHASE TWO.
KHAN just took those sets and reused them. In fact, if I am correct, Khan's Bridge..kirk's Bridge...Regula-1 set and the genesis cave where David attacks Kirk are all the same set....then you have all the FX shots that were lifted right out of TMP...the only thing that saves the movie is the plot. But to anyone in the know, and we are, the movie was filmed on a TV set with one of the greatest TV bean counters of all time, Bennett, at the top...

Search for Spock was more of the same...

What I am saying is that, in terms of budget and scope, only TMP can even come close to matching the 'movie feel and buzz' that this movie is going to attain eventually....

And I might add, movie reviewers of past Trek movies, even some of our own BBS friends, have lamented about how the TREK movies look like TV episodes due to the overuse of the TV sets (another reason I am VERY against any attempt to make a tv-series using these sets)

TREK XI is going to be promoted big time because, to me, Paramount is finally treating TREK as a major motion picture...

Rob

 

[shapeshifter]

I am going to agree with you RobertScorpio. Despite the obvious evidence to the contrary, (9 prior motion pictures) it does make a twisted sort of sense. We ain't seen this type of treatment before so it could be said this is a first.

 

[MisterPL]

I get it.

This is the first Trek movie made from scratch.

(Do I win a prize?)

 

[USS Triumphant]

I get it.

I do, too, but I think it might be more accurate to say that, aside from maybe TMP, this is the first time they've treated Trek as more than a niche market. The other movies were definitely movies, but they were all aimed (and budgeted) at making what money could be made from people for whom it was a given that they were going to see them - Trek fans, sci-fi fans, and their families. TMP and XI are the biggest pushes they've made to get other people - a mainstream audience - to see them.

 

[Nowhere Man]

in chonological order of the Star Trek universe , this movie can be consider the first.It has been said that this is Star Trek 0.

 

[Kirk1980]

Curious.

I seem to recall that in order to see these 'not movies' as Scorpio called them...you'd have to go to what's called a 'movie theater' wherein they show...'movies'.

I'm sure my definition varies.

It's put on the big screen, it's a movie, this is the eleventh one and to hell with stupid, vaguely insulting wording.

 

[trekkerguy]

Curious.

I seem to recall that in order to see these 'not movies' as Scorpio called them...you'd have to go to what's called a 'movie theater' wherein they show...'movies'.

I'm sure my definition varies.

It's put on the big screen, it's a movie, this is the eleventh one and to hell with stupid, vaguely insulting wording.

I'm going with this. It's simply the XIth film which happens to be a presequel.

 

[A_C_C]

TMP was really filmed on sets built for PHASE TWO.

IIRC, the sets built for PHASE II were scrapped (most of them at least) because they didn't look good enough in the big screen.

 

[RobertScorpio]

Curious.

I seem to recall that in order to see these 'not movies' as Scorpio called them...you'd have to go to what's called a 'movie theater' wherein they show...'movies'.

I'm sure my definition varies.

It's put on the big screen, it's a movie, this is the eleventh one and to hell with stupid, vaguely insulting wording.

"Stupid wording?"..that's the best you can come up with?

There is a perception out there that TREK movies are just two-hour episodes, and in many cases, not even good ones....if you don't believe me, then go read the reviews for some of them.

This is the second movie, only the second of all of them, that is being treated as a big movie event in the hollywood papers. All of the other movies after TMP were low budget events that sometimes rose above their quality and attracted outside (meaning non-fans) to see them...

Incase you haven't noticed, this movie is being aimed at NON-fans which is why many on this site, and who knows maybe even you, don't really seem to be behind 100%...because it isn't being made for the continuity buffs, and that side of the fandome house....

And the poster who said "if its on the screen then its a movie"..well, buddy boy, thats the kind of attitude Paramount has taken with TREK-movies for all this time and look at the 'finished' product we got....

Reality is hard to face....but it can not be denied...

Rob