most disappointing Trek movie?

[fireproof78]

I felt TMP was closer than Wrath, as how would you imagine Kirk dealing with getting older and being of higher rank? He'd constantly be trying to get back in the saddle, using his authority to make it happen (while still snubbing those ahead of him) only to find out in his older age that he is out of touch with current technologies and operations, which is why Decker had to constantly put him back in his place. Kirk was forced to acknowledge that he must now rely upon others, which is an important lesson for Kirk to have, I feel.
Wrath however,... it seemed like the lesson Kirk learned was "I need to be young again"

I have always had issues with TMP largely because Kirk is chomping at the bit and treating people like enemies when there is no need for it, acting like he can never command a starship again. He is irrationally coarse towards Decker, and comes across as the typical admiral that Kirk would be fighting against in TOS. And, perhaps that is by design, as you note, since the less of relying upon his crewmembers is an important one. But, I don't feel it carried much weight.

 

[K1productions]

I have always had issues with TMP largely because Kirk is chomping at the bit and treating people like enemies when there is no need for it, acting like he can never command a starship again. He is irrationally coarse towards Decker, and comes across as the typical admiral that Kirk would be fighting against in TOS. And, perhaps that is by design, as you note, since the less of relying upon his crewmembers is an important one. But, I don't feel it carried much weight.

It would have been an important moment of self discovery that they could have capitalized on, but instead they chose to focus primarily on the visuals and trying to make it "Close Encounters meets 2001 meets Star Wars" and relying too hard on the outsiders (Decker and Ilia). I mean, imagine that moment when Kirk is forced to realize he has become exactly what he had thumbed his nose at for so many years before. The clueless Commissioner in "The Deadly Years", the obsessed Commodore in "The Doomsday Machine", among many others. But alas, we never got that. Even so, still much closer to Kirk than finding any excuse he could to not sit back in that chair until both McCoy AND Spock had to talk him back into it.

 

[ChallengerHK]

Here's an interesting (I hope) question. To what extent does your rating of the most disappointing film depend on the contrast effect, the difference between your expectations of what the film would be and what ended up on the screen? As a side question, what were those expectations? I have in the past had high expectations of every Trek film, but for different reasons for each film.

 

[Vger23]

Here's an interesting (I hope) question. To what extent does your rating of the most disappointing film depend on the contrast effect, the difference between your expectations of what the film would be and what ended up on the screen? As a side question, what were those expectations? I have in the past had high expectations of every Trek film, but for different reasons for each film.

To me, this is the only thing that makes this thread’s question any different from the standard "what is your least favorite Star Trek movie?"

For that reason, I'd have to say that films like FC and TUC were most disappointing because the trailers, hype, and marketing had my expectations ramped so high, that when the scope of those two films ended up being pretty meager by comparison, I was let down.

I still enjoyed the films on relative terms, and they are certainly not my "least favorite," but they both strike me as films that could/should have had an epic scope and quality..and therefore are huge missed opportunities.

 

[Warped9]

Anything after TUC made me hurl. Between TMP-TUC it’s TVH that bugs me most.

 

[Smellmet]

To me, this is the only thing that makes this thread’s question any different from the standard "what is your least favorite Star Trek movie?"

For that reason, I'd have to say that films like FC and TUC were most disappointing because the trailers, hype, and marketing had my expectations ramped so high, that when the scope of those two films ended up being pretty meager by comparison, I was let down.

I still enjoyed the films on relative terms, and they are certainly not my "least favorite," but they both strike me as films that could/should have had an epic scope and quality..and therefore are huge missed opportunities.

Totally agree with this. And you've picked the two films I had in mind too. I was disappointed with the ship battle at the end TUC, and I found parts of FC to be cheap looking and these things didn't meet my expectations and I came away with a bit of disappointment, yet they are both solid upper mid table films and I like them both quite a lot still. Insurrection gets my vote ultimately though.

 

[K1productions]

Anything after TUC made me hurl. Between TMP-TUC it’s TVH that bugs me most.

I'm curious what it is about TVH that bugs you. To me, it is the most "Star Trek" of any of the films, without having to adhere to the standard Hollywood formula

 

[TommyR01D]

Into Darkness was the only Star Trek film for which I had any anticipation, as I wasn't yet into the franchise in 2009 and I wasn't really paying attention in 2016.

I remember a lot of my friends obsessing over Cumberbatch's role and a lot of trailers being posted. When I finally got around to watching the film I found it... mildly underwhelming

 

[Vger23]

I'm curious what it is about TVH that bugs you. To me, it is the most "Star Trek" of any of the films, without having to adhere to the standard Hollywood formula

I can't speak for the poster you're addressing, but I also find TVH to be extraordinarily unremarkable. Easily my least-favorite of the TOS films.

 

[K1productions]

I can't speak for the poster you're addressing, but I also find TVH to be extraordinarily unremarkable. Easily my least-favorite of the TOS films.

Again I ask, unremarkable in what way? What was expected of it that it did not deliver on?

 

[Vger23]

Again I ask, unremarkable in what way? What was expected of it that it did not deliver on?

I like Star Trek movies like TSFS and TWOK, where there is an antagonist and a mission in outer space. The "let's go to the past and have a fun fish out of water adventure" simply doesn't appeal to me as much. This movie was ok, but was a massive let-down after two high-stakes, highly emotional action/adventure outings.

Sorry.

 

[Warped9]

After watching the TOS dealing with high stakes in the past in a dramatic fashion seeing them go back in time for yucks was a total letdown. TFF, for all its flaws, was more what I was hoping for.

 

[K1productions]

I like Star Trek movies like TSFS and TWOK, where there is an antagonist and a mission in outer space. The "let's go to the past and have a fun fish out of water adventure" simply doesn't appeal to me as much. This movie was ok, but was a massive let-down after two high-stakes, highly emotional action/adventure outings.

After watching the TOS dealing with high stakes in the past in a dramatic fashion seeing them go back in time for yucks was a total letdown. TFF, for all its flaws, was more what I was hoping for.

Hmm, "Tomorrow is Yesterday" and "Assignment Earth" would like a few words, with regards to what stakes were needed in a time travel adventure. One was just "oops, we ended up in the past, we gotta get home", and the other was "we're on a historical study mission,... who's this strange Gary Seven guy? And oh look, its Apollo 8 on the launchpad"

Voyage Home had higher stakes than either Wrath of Khan or Search for Spock. In Wrath, the stakes were basically just "stop Khan from killing Kirk"... ironically, Kirk didn't seem to give a damn about the rest of the people on his ship (other than Spock) who died along the way. Meanwhile in TOS, he was broken up over even the nameless red-shirts MANY times.
In Search for Spock, the stakes were.... finding Spock, and not dying along the way.

In Voyage Home, the stakes were THE ENTIRE PLANET EARTH. If we don't stop this probe thing that has already completely neutralized every single vessel and starbase it passed, the Earth will be DEAD. Meanwhile, it didn't insult our intelligence by making some cookie-cutter revenge plot, or shoving a "bad guy" in for the sake of having a "bad guy".... it didn't NEED a bad guy. It made us THINK instead of letting us turn our brain off. It made us go "Hmm, maybe, just maybe, this thing that we might otherwise think as an enemy to be fought is instead misunderstood, and we should find a way to COMMUNICATE rather than fight it. The yucks were just a side effect,.... and yucks were one of the best things about TOS. Ever see "Trouble with Tribbles" or "City on the Edge of Forever"? My gods, what were the high stakes in Tribbles? ... were there ANY stakes?

Star Trek doesn't always need a "bad guy"
This need of a bad guy is exactly why every movie since First Contact has had revenge as a prominent plot point, and new bad guys trying to be the next Khan, all while succumbing to the standard Hollywood formula of "just sit back, turn your brain off, and enjoy the film" THAT is what makes a disappointing Star Trek film for me. "ugh... okay... here's another bad guy. I bet he's got a vendetta against Earth and is gonna use that Thaleron thing we saw at the beginning to try and destroy it. Yup... there he goes. Oh look, here's ANOTHER bad guy,... who's he swearing revenge on this time? Spock? I bet he's gonna scream Spock's name at some point as he tries to destroy Earth too,... yup, there he goes. Who's this grumpy Admiral guy? I bet he's obsessed with war, so he's gonna try an assassination in order to keep war going, just like last time.... yup, there he goes"

This obsessive need for having a "bad guy" is what is disappointing with Star Trek. Star Trek DOESN'T need "bad guys" to fight. What it needs are mysteries to be solved and questions to be answered, it needs adventure and fun, and it needs opportunity for every cast member to shine rather than just being background "course laid in, Captain" or "Hailing frequencies open"... and thus far Voyage Home is the only one to check all those boxes.

 

[Warped9]

The overall tone of TVH bugged me. There was humour in previous TOS time travel stories, but it wasn’t a prevailing element like in TVH.

Boiled down the whole TWOK-TUC films just doesn’t click for me. They each had high points and good moments, but there are a lot of things I don’t like and overall it’s not the Star Trek I had hoped to see. And I was never onboard with Nicholas Meyer’s take on Trek which carried through TWOK-TUC.

TMP even with its missteps looked like Star Trek albeit evolved. And it ended on a note of promise that new adventures were ahead that echoed what we had seen in TOS albeit writ large on the big screen. Then TWOK threw all that away to delve into the past and give us a submarine in space with spacey versions of 19th century military wear. The films TWOK-TUC looked like it was all about tearing down Star Trek rather than going forward which left me disappointed.

I’m not out to convince anyone. It’s just how I feel and what I think. Those films haven’t aged well. That said they are still better than the TNG and JJverse films that came after.

 

[ChallengerHK]

Voyage Home had higher stakes than either Wrath of Khan or Search for Spock. In Wrath, the stakes were basically just "stop Khan from killing Kirk"... ironically, Kirk didn't seem to give a damn about the rest of the people on his ship (other than Spock) who died along the way. Meanwhile in TOS, he was broken up over even the nameless red-shirts MANY times. In Search for Spock, the stakes were.... finding Spock, and not dying along the way.

The higher level stakes in TWOK were to keep Khan from being able to study, replicate and use the Genesis device as a terroristic weapon. For TSFS, replace Khan with Kruge.

The overall tone of TVH bugged me. There was humour in previous TOS time travel stories, but it wasn’t a prevailing element like in TVH.

This has always been my thing as well. Some of my least favorite episodes are the flippant episodes like "A Piece of the Action." I remember being in the theater for TVH, and when Scott says "How do we know he didn't invent it?" I groaned very loudly.

TMP even with its missteps looked like Star Trek albeit evolved.

I have many issues with TMP, but my biggest is characterization. Kirk and Spock in particular are not who we have seen them to be. The biggest reason that I much prefer TWOK is that they both learned and grew, but in believable ways based on who they were.

Oddly enough, Chekov appears to be largely the same as when we last saw him, however.

 

[Warped9]

At the beginning of TMP both Kirk and Spock are incomplete with where their lives are at. Kirk wants the life he had and he is not himself where he is. Spock thinks he knows what will complete him, but he is wrong and begins learning he was actually complete before only he didn’t recognize it.

What the film doesn’t answer is the why Kirk and Spock took the paths they chose—thats never been addressed onscreen although it’s touched on in GR’s novelization.

But as the film progresses we see both of them getting back into their grooves.

 

[Vger23]

Hmm, "Tomorrow is Yesterday" and "Assignment Earth" would like a few words, with regards to what stakes were needed in a time travel adventure. One was just "oops, we ended up in the past, we gotta get home", and the other was "we're on a historical study mission,... who's this strange Gary Seven guy? And oh look, its Apollo 8 on the launchpad"

Voyage Home had higher stakes than either Wrath of Khan or Search for Spock. In Wrath, the stakes were basically just "stop Khan from killing Kirk"... ironically, Kirk didn't seem to give a damn about the rest of the people on his ship (other than Spock) who died along the way. Meanwhile in TOS, he was broken up over even the nameless red-shirts MANY times.
In Search for Spock, the stakes were.... finding Spock, and not dying along the way.

In Voyage Home, the stakes were THE ENTIRE PLANET EARTH. If we don't stop this probe thing that has already completely neutralized every single vessel and starbase it passed, the Earth will be DEAD. Meanwhile, it didn't insult our intelligence by making some cookie-cutter revenge plot, or shoving a "bad guy" in for the sake of having a "bad guy".... it didn't NEED a bad guy. It made us THINK instead of letting us turn our brain off. It made us go "Hmm, maybe, just maybe, this thing that we might otherwise think as an enemy to be fought is instead misunderstood, and we should find a way to COMMUNICATE rather than fight it. The yucks were just a side effect,.... and yucks were one of the best things about TOS. Ever see "Trouble with Tribbles" or "City on the Edge of Forever"? My gods, what were the high stakes in Tribbles? ... were there ANY stakes?

Star Trek doesn't always need a "bad guy"
This need of a bad guy is exactly why every movie since First Contact has had revenge as a prominent plot point, and new bad guys trying to be the next Khan, all while succumbing to the standard Hollywood formula of "just sit back, turn your brain off, and enjoy the film" THAT is what makes a disappointing Star Trek film for me. "ugh... okay... here's another bad guy. I bet he's got a vendetta against Earth and is gonna use that Thaleron thing we saw at the beginning to try and destroy it. Yup... there he goes. Oh look, here's ANOTHER bad guy,... who's he swearing revenge on this time? Spock? I bet he's gonna scream Spock's name at some point as he tries to destroy Earth too,... yup, there he goes. Who's this grumpy Admiral guy? I bet he's obsessed with war, so he's gonna try an assassination in order to keep war going, just like last time.... yup, there he goes"

This obsessive need for having a "bad guy" is what is disappointing with Star Trek. Star Trek DOESN'T need "bad guys" to fight. What it needs are mysteries to be solved and questions to be answered, it needs adventure and fun, and it needs opportunity for every cast member to shine rather than just being background "course laid in, Captain" or "Hailing frequencies open"... and thus far Voyage Home is the only one to check all those boxes.

I'm not really sure I'm up for debating it. I simply don't like it as much as the other films. There's really not much that's going to change that at this point, as the movie has been out for 35 years and my opinion on it hasn't deviated. You could name 20 other TOS episodes that all followed a very similar formula, and I'd hypocritically like all of them better most likely. I don't really know what to say.

It's a fine movie by all accounts and measures, and I certainly don't begrudge those who feel it's a strong entry in the film series. It was critically acclaimed and loved by general audiences. It's simply a matter of taste. I don't like it that much.

 

[fireproof78]

I'm not really sure I'm up for debating it. I simply don't like it as much as the other films. There's really not much that's going to change that at this point, as the movie has been out for 35 years and my opinion on it hasn't deviated. You could name 20 other TOS episodes that all followed a very similar formula, and I'd hypocritically like all of them better most likely. I don't really know what to say.

It's a fine movie by all accounts and measures, and I certainly don't begrudge those who feel it's a strong entry in the film series. It was critically acclaimed and loved by general audiences. It's simply a matter of taste. I don't like it that much.

I use to like TVH a whole more than I do now. The mystery box in TVH isn't really unpacked. It's just resolved and kicked down the road, never to be addressed again.

 

[Warped9]

The look of TMP, predominantly the uniforms, is something of a contentious point. I have seen them firsthand on display and they look great, but they don’t really come off that way on the screen. They do fit Star Trek’s idea of comfortable everyday service wear, but they look like they belong in a different film rather than Star Trek. The look, and particularly the tones used, look like a reaction to the colourful richness of TOS and the idea that couldn’t be translated to the big screen. While I strongly dislike the JJtrek films they do show that TOS’ colourfulness could indeed work on the big screen.

As others have said before TMP’s overall colour palette looked like they were trying to build off the look used back in “The Cage.” But they went too muted and along with the design of the new uniforms they disappointed a lot of fans.

TWOK reacted in the other direction and went too far as well. Meyer wanted Star Trek and Starfleet and the Enterprise to look more militaristic. Instead of a palette of colours he went with one and had it look somewhat futuristic retro and again giving us something that looked like it belonged somewhere else other than Star Trek. It was all to bolster the 19th century naval feel right down to the music to emphasize it further. And the success of TWOK pretty much ensured thats what Star Trek would be throughout the following films. And the ensuing films all showed the familiar crew and the Enterprise as has-beens ready to be decommissioned and consigned to history.

I found all of this disheartening.

 

[fireproof78]

While I do not like the colors of TMP (way too much beige) I do like the design of the Enterprise and the uniforms had potential. I definitely subscribe to the idea that TMP would have benefited from more of the TOS color palette.