• 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!

Nick Meyer - The Best Trek Director

If we're going to discuss Meyer's merits as a director I think we have to somewhat detach that from the issue of the screenwriting he did. One can hate the story of a film and still find the director did a fine job of getting the story on screen and getting good performances out of the cast. Too many of the arguments above are about Meyer's writing and not his directing.
 
"Relateable" because they're so obvious, trite, cliche, and by now really tired. How many other films, books, plays, whatever have presented these two themes? Hundreds? Thousands? Not big on the originality scale.

Not that it matters though. In both cases, the themes were buried so deep that the basically came off as silly after thoughts only to be resurrected again whenever a character presents said theme to another character (and the audience) in an absolute and matter of fact manner.

So there was space battles and ray guns as well, does that really detract from the movie?
When it has a "dumbing down" effect, absolutely.

All those fist fights Kirk got into in the series, all those women he kissed, those were intellectual were they? Nick Meyer was not some hack that turned Star Trek into a cartoon, Star Trek was already a cartoon by your logic.
I'm not so sure this is a fair comparison. For starters, I think the whole "Kirk the Womanizing King of Fisticuffs" thing has posthumously (In terms of the series.) been over exaggerated over the years. Sure there was a lot of if, but it really wasn't what the series was about. Also, in most cases it was just the proverbial climax spice; it was never the focal of the show.

But, that's neither here nor there. How many episodes were actually about cramming as many fires and explosions and laser light shows, and more fires, and more explosions? And, in terms of "cartoons," as you put it, turn on a Saturday morning cartoon and what do you see? Laser light shows and explosions.

In the end though, the issue isn't just Meyer's job as a director, it's also the precedent he set. Let us examine TWOK for a minute:

You have a villain who, for reasons not actually presented on screen (So we just have to take his word for it.), despises Hero #1 and wishes him dead. The villain then tells us he's uber smart. But again, there's no on screen evidence of this so we have to take his word for it.

Some shit happens and villain and his little motley band are able to seize an entire starship. Of course, this all happens off screen so we simply have to ponder how it was possible. Though to be fair, this does seem a little more plausible once we take into account the competence of the crew of said starship. It is presented on screen that this crew must have a Sarah Palin grasp of interstellar geography as they didn't even know what planet they were on. Nor did they realize the planet they thought they were on had actually blowed-up. This crew was obviously not the best example of "Starfleet's finest." So, while the villain might not really have a "superior intellect," it was probably superior to theirs.

So, more stuff happens and finally villain comes to confront Hero #1. Villain has the advantage of surprise on his side. Not only that, Hero #1 screws the pooch and makes a mistake that even the noob on the ship was quick to point out. Given these circumstance, Villain should have a clear victory. But he doesn't. Yet, for whatever reason, he calls over to gloat anyway. In the meantime, however, Hero #2 pulls some mystical deus ex machina rabbit out of his ass and the Heroes are able to escape.

This whole escapade leave serious doubt over Villain's "superior intellect." Except, thanks to all the big explosions we loose track and seem to forget all about that.

More stuff happens and a new uber Doomsday Wannabe Device appears. Villain must have it! But it's unclear as to what purpose it would serve him in his goal except to be used as a weapon. Except, there's no apparent practical use for it as a weapon so again with the confusion. Of course, it could simply be it's powerful and the desire for powerful things equals Eeevviill, right? In fact, to prove he's so eeevviill, Villain mercilessly tortures a bunch of people. But again, this is done off screen so we just gotta take his word for it.

So, in order to get his hands on this new weapon, Villain dresses up a couple of foxes in sheep's clothing. An oldie but goodie! And it works too despite the sign on their heads that reads, "Working for bad guy." The Heroes fall for it hook line and sinker and lead them strait to the Flock.

Villain is then able to capture Weapon quite easily. This is only exacerbated by more incompetence on Flock's part. Despite previous apprehension by Flock as to someone stealing Weapon, it gives Weapon no lock, no key, no security of any kind and leaves the proverbial cookie jar open for Villain to take and use at his leisure. So, is Villain really that smart, or is everyone else just really effen stupid?

In any case, Villain calls up Hero #1 again to gloat. He even says something about "Burring Hero #1 alive." Ironically, however, Villain is presented with the opportune time to use Weapon and do just that. But, he decides not to. We can only assume he's not big on keeping promises. Then again, he is eeevviill.

So finally we arrive at the big climax. Villain has all the advantages, but still looses out because he forgets to notice space has three dimensions. At this point, we can't help but wonder if the "tactical genius" could even defeat an eight year old in checkers.

It is at this time Villain decides to take Weapon out of his pocket. Again, to use it he just has to turn a few dials and pull a few levers. He isn't even required to provide his ATM PIN number.

It is at this junction that some previously unexplained plot device comes to fruition. It's overtly contrived and not all too clear, but we're forced to accept that, in order to prevent it, Hero #2 must put his hands in a giant fishbowl of light thus sacrificing himself and saving the ship.

The interesting thing here is, it is actually Hero #1 who's the known fighter and man of action--the guy who doesn't take "no" for an answer. Yet, for whatever reason, he just sits around with his finger up his ass waiting for death. He doesn't ask for suggestions or look for solutions. This goes against everything known of his character, and that presented earlier in the film, for that matter. All the while, Hero #2 goes and dies ... But not before he could insert plot device for the inevitable sequel!



Now, I don't know about anyone else, but to me that seems like a complete mess and a total gaff by the director. And, TUC is an even bigger mess!

There's an obvious lack of substance there. Yet, people seem to ignore it on account of all the pretty pictures. This set a trend and it only got worse with each film.

The sad thing is, it ill represents Trek television.

Throw some names out there:

"Tomorrow is Yesterday"
"The City on the Edge of Forever"
"The Doomsday Machine"
"The Measure of a Man"
"The Inner Light"
"Darmok"
"Duet"
"The Visitor"
"In the Pale Moonlight"
"Shuttlepod One"

I could go on. The point is, those are the episodes most consider to be the very best of Star Trek, yet they aren't exactly action romps. Even "Scorpion" and "Best of Both Worlds," when you get right down to are really lite on the actual shoot-em up.

The question is, why can we have films like those? Most, if not all, could easily be made into movie form that would, not only be entertaining, but attract viewers.

The theory here is, it was Nicky and Harvey that made this trap that all Star Trek movies must be high action low substance popcorn flicks that don't fairly represent the source material. And the Paramount TPTB fell right into it.

And it seems this new J.J Abomination thing is only going to continue (Worsen?) this trend. Now, I'll wait till I see it before I pass judgment, I just don't hold a whole lot of hope.

Put much better than I ever could. I always remember a critic's quote when reviewing WOK and comparing it to TMP - he called WOK "Indiana Skywalker meets the Son of Star Trek". He saw the cliches abounding. And that psuedo title always best matched my feelings about the Meyer/Bennet films. As for the upcoming movie, I am kind of bouyed by the fact that Abrams seems not to be overly concerned with sticking with the Trek "script", as it were. Here's hoping he is able to move past cliche, and come up with something interesting and original, like Trek is supposed to be.
 

Firstly, let me say that I grew up with the later series and only recently managed to go back and watch the original. The "Kirk the Womanising King of Fisticuffs" thing is not overly exaggerated. Around a quarter of the episodes contained a fist-fights and the Kirk womanising thing happened at an even greater rate. Admittedly he didn't have sex with many (I counted four occurrences if I'm being generous) but he was constantly kissing women or chasing after them in some fashion. Though I did enjoy TOS, these events happened far too often.

But that was TV in the sixties. They had to attract viewers somehow, what better way than to make the lead character some form of male fantasy. The heart was always about exploring humanity, but they added these extra bits on the side to make the show interesting to the viewers back in the sixties.

Nick Meyer did exactly the same thing, only he had a budget to do space battles that they couldn't afford on the series. You say that that was all there was to it, all flash and no substance, but that is just not true. I watched TWOK last night and the climax of the film is not Khan's destruction, it is Spock's death and funeral which happen several minutes after Khan has been dealt with. The climax of TUC was not the destruction of Chang's BoP, it was Kirk giving a speech about how he overcame his prejudices at the Khitomer conference. That is very much in line with the series.

Now of course I don't think that every episode of Star Trek needs to be action, my favourite episode is In the Pale Moonlight which has only one new SFX shot, and Sisko punches Garak twice. I like the episode because it is a morality play. But I am not opposed to action when it is justified in the story. Here is some episodes that some consider to be classics that have action scenes:

Balance of Terror
Journey to Babel
The Enterprise Incident
The Defector
Best of Both Worlds
All Good Things...
Improbable Cause
Call to Arms
What You Leave Behind
Scorpion
Year of Hell
Timeless
The Expanse
Twilight
Cold Station 12

And looking at your selection of great Trek episodes, I too could rip them apart the way you did for Wrath of Khan.

Tomorrow is Yesterday: The Enterprise goes back in time off screen. The City on the Edge of Forever: So an entire civilization falls to pieces, yet an incredibly complictated time machine lasts without breaking down for thousands of years. It knows about Earth and is somehow able to teleport people there. Are you buying this yet?
The Doomsday Machine: Somebody built a machine to eat planets and never bothered to put an off switch on it, and then it flew into our galaxy somehow.
The Measure of a Man: It sure was convient that the JAG officer in the area was Picard's ex. Also, Data enroled in the academy, he wasn't forced to enter it. The very idea that Starfleet would somehow now consider him property is nonsensical.
The Inner Light: So a society somehow managed to build an advanced probe that could implant memories into the mind of any race it came across, yet they couldn't build a ship to send some colonists out to save their society?
Darmok: How did a living creature evolve the ability to cloak? If these Tamarians are advanced enough to kidnap Picard and prevent his rescue from the Federation flagship, how come they haven't learned to communicate like all the other species of the galaxy do?
Duet: Yeah, I've got nothing, this episode was awesome.
The Visitor: Why did they have to go look at the wormhole in the Defiant? The wormhole is right next to the station.
In the Pale Moonlight: I could probably think up of something for this episode, but I just don't want to because it is my favourite. :p
Shuttlepod One: Enterprise rushes off in an emergency and doesn't leave some sort of beacon behind to tell Trip and Reed where they are and that they will be back. Meanwhile, the two guys on the shuttle get drunk and one of them has a wet dream about T'Pol. Riiiiiiight.

Personally I think that Star Trek is better on TV and that is where it should stay. I see no reason why there needs to be Trek movies, but Paramount disagrees, the films are made, Meyer was involved with three of them, those films turned out to be very good.
 
Last edited:
For me where TMP excels and where most sci-fi works as intended and where TWOK fails and other similar attempts fail is that sci-fi tells us something about the human conditioning by exposing someone or some people to an extrordinary event or thing and they react to this complete unknown, fantastic event or circumstance. TWOK dealing with revenge and old age is not anything new. It happens all the time. What was different about it? What made you sit up and go: "I never thought about that or look at things that way."

For me the best judge of a sci-fi story is if you take the sci-fi element out and it fails that it is a good sci-fi story. If it still stands up then I ask why is it in a sci-fi setting?
 
You must think most of Trek was shit, then — even going back to the original series — because there's lots of classic episodes that stand on their own even if you remove the sci-fi elements.
 
I found most of TNG to be pretty bad. There were a few episode of TOS that weren't so good either. But I also can enjoy some of the non-true sci-fi. I do like TWOK but I like TMP better and better as a sci-fi story.
 
If you don't like Wrath of Khan fine, but to argue that TMP is somehow more artistic and pure science fiction..I find that absurd.

Wrath of Khan was a lot deeper than TMP was. Dealing with a heroic character aging. Khan having the ability to leave everything behind and be free in his own Starship, but choosing revenge instead. The moral implications of Genesis. Spock choosing to sacrifice himself...

Meanwhile in TMP V'Ger goes "BAAAAAAAAAAOOOOOOOOOW" a lot and everyone sits around staring at the viewscreen. I like the Motion Picture, but there is a lot more going on in the Wrath of Khan besides explosions and battles. Also at least Khan is a somewhat original story, unlike TMP which is a rip off of a TOS episode. And the TOS ep. was BETTER.
 
^^^That's a totally unfair comparison because you rattle off all the themes from TWOK and don't list those of TMP, namely, "man versus himself". Kirk has to stop being selfish and think about the mission. Spock seeks out the ultimate manifestation of what he's always sought to be, and irony of ironies, realizes that the thing he's always wanted is empty and meaningless. The themes are about figuring out where you belong.
 
destro said:
If you don't like Wrath of Khan fine, but to argue that TMP is somehow more artistic and pure science fiction..I find that absurd.

Wrath of Khan was a lot deeper than TMP was. Dealing with a heroic character aging. Khan having the ability to leave everything behind and be free in his own Starship, but choosing revenge instead. The moral implications of Genesis. Spock choosing to sacrifice himself...

Meanwhile in TMP V'Ger goes "BAAAAAAAAAAOOOOOOOOOW" a lot and everyone sits around staring at the viewscreen. I like the Motion Picture, but there is a lot more going on in the Wrath of Khan besides explosions and battles. Also at least Khan is a somewhat original story, unlike TMP which is a rip off of a TOS episode. And the TOS ep. was BETTER.

Agreed. Saying that TMP was somehow intellectually superior is a just nonsense.

I'm a smart enough guy, aptitude tests have found me to be in the top percentile in three out of five areas (and I just love bringing that up in unrelated conversations ;)). I don't claim to be an intellectual because I realise that it takes more than intelligence and reasoning and a hatred of reality TV to make you an intellectual, but I am pretty quick at figuring things out. I can process information at a faster rate than most people.

So if TMP is for smart people and TWOK is for dumb people, why is TMP slower? Smart people are able to understand a concept much quicker than dumb people after all, so why linger on the special effects shots so much? There was five minutes of the Enterprise entering the cloud followed by five minutes of the Enterprise flying across V'ger, then there was five minutes of the Enterprise flying into V'ger. At which point in those fifteen minutes did it stop being ostentatious and start being intellectual?

I enjoy TMP very much, but it is not a more intelligent film than TWOK or TUC. It is a case of a director wanting to make a new 2001: A Space Odyssey and not knowing how.
 
^Bob Wise did not know how to make a movie? Is this what you are claiming? That is ludicrious on its face. As pointed out in other posts - the "themes", if you want to call them that, of WOK are obvious and simplistic - and bouyed by explosions and phaser fire. Hell, the 2 main antagonists never meet in person! They talk to each other over a view screen! TMP's problems were caused by beancounters and suits at the studio, and the director still was able to make a successful film in spite of that - thought provoking and profitable. Comparing Meyer to Wise is like comparing Mario Mendoza to Rod Carew - let's get real.
 
I never said he didn't know how to make a movie, I said he didn't know how to make 2001: A Space Odyssey. He wanted to make a big sci-fi epic about humanity and the next phase in our evolution, The Human Adventure is Just Beginning sort of thing. Slow space effects, weird colours and shapes moving past the screen. He wanted to be up there with Kubrick in the sci-fi genre.

Nick Meyer on the other hand wanted to make a good movie that the fans would enjoy.
 
My point is TWOK's themes could be played out in almost any other setting besides sci-fi. TMP's are almost exclusively sci-fi: a machine gaining intelligence and searching for it's creator knowing that it is incomplete without it. A major charecter (Spock) going through a major major change: realizing the very thing he has been fighting against his entire life is the very thing he needs to embrace to complete himself. This very theme is refered back too several times in the following times Spock appears.
 
I think Nick Meyer had the better material to work with, but for me, Jonathan Frakes just edges him out in terms of interesting/creative angles, well paced action, and the like.

There we go, short and sweet ;)
 
My point is TWOK's themes could be played out in almost any other setting besides sci-fi. TMP's are almost exclusively sci-fi: a machine gaining intelligence and searching for it's creator knowing that it is incomplete without it. A major charecter (Spock) going through a major major change: realizing the very thing he has been fighting against his entire life is the very thing he needs to embrace to complete himself. This very theme is refered back too several times in the following times Spock appears.

So? Whitecaps is one of the best episodes of The Sopranos, it is about a marriage breaking apart at the seams. It hardly utilised that show's mobster setting at all. Noel is one of the best episodes of The West Wing, it is about a man suffering from post traumatic stress disorder after a shooting. It hardly utilised that show's political setting at all.

Greatness doesn't come from correctly using your setting, it comes from great writing and great characters. Nice though Spock's connection to V'ger was, his death was far more moving to me.
 
If you don't like Wrath of Khan fine, but to argue that TMP is somehow more artistic and pure science fiction..I find that absurd.

Wrath of Khan was a lot deeper than TMP was. Dealing with a heroic character aging. Khan having the ability to leave everything behind and be free in his own Starship, but choosing revenge instead. The moral implications of Genesis. Spock choosing to sacrifice himself...

Meanwhile in TMP V'Ger goes "BAAAAAAAAAAOOOOOOOOOW" a lot and everyone sits around staring at the viewscreen. I like the Motion Picture, but there is a lot more going on in the Wrath of Khan besides explosions and battles. Also at least Khan is a somewhat original story, unlike TMP which is a rip off of a TOS episode. And the TOS ep. was BETTER.
That's not entirely fair. You overcook TWOK and don't even put TMP in the oven.

In fact, one of TWOK's problems is it just tried to do too much. To extend the analogy, " it had too many spices." With so much going on, it becomes a bland collage where nothing stands out and ultimately all becomes one mediocre mess.

And, as I said in a previous post, it's all so very tired. Meyer borrows from everyone from Dickens, to Melville, to Capra, to Coppola. Not only is it not original, it's just so tired. It's been done over and over and over; and in most cases, a helluva lot better than Meyer did. Because of this, it comes off as puerile and obvious.

On the flip side, TMP's subject matter, while a bit esoteric, is clearly much more mature:

Man creates God. God goes away and returns only to threaten the eradication of Man. So, Man must destroy God. However, in order to do so, Man must shed his biological existance in favor of one of intellect.

There's two distinct points here: "God" is a creation of man; and, given infinite time and infinite potential (That is, any being whose existance is one of intelligence and not biology.), can eventually evolve to omnipotence. In other words, Man has unlimited potential if he gets rid of this whole "God Thing," and learns to think with his head and not his pecker.

Now admittedly, this is a bit of preachy humanism from GR up on his bully pulpit, and in that regard probably not all that original itself. But then, the world isn't exactly oozing with humanistic science-fiction films.

In order to do this, however, Wise had to make V'ger actually seem omnipotent. He did this by presenting it as huge, smart and powerful. After all, God is all powerful and all knowing and infinite in size. Never mind the God emerging from the "clouds" allusion that is common in mythology. That's what the whole middle part of the film was about. It was also, in the less abstract, simply the crew of the intrepid Starship Enterprise exploring space "seeking out new life." Something they didn't do much of in the subsequent films.

The fact there are many who haven't the attention spans to sit through it isn't Robert Wise's fault.

What it all comes down to is: TWOK is conceptual science-fiction for teenagers; TMP is conceptual science-fiction for grown-ups.
 
Nice though Spock's connection to V'ger was, his death was far more moving to me.

What "death"? The selfish, deceitful shithead took the liberty of backing himself up in McCoy and then neglected to give Kirk the restore instructions during his "do not grieve" speech in the starship's disco, thus condemning Bones to insanity and potentially even suicide for no particularly good reason. :rolleyes:

TGT
 
Just watched TUC a few days ago, along with all the special features. And I have to say... Nick Meyer strikes me as a little creepy. Can't really put my finger on why, but just know that he's not somebody I'd want to be stuck in a elevator with for any amount of time.

Anyway, as far as best directors go, here's the list:

7. Baird (Nem)

6. Shatner (TFF)

5. Wise (TMP)

4. Nimoy (TSFS, TVH)

3. Carson (Gen)

2. Meyer (TWOK, TUC)

1. Frakes (FC, Ins)

And as others have stated, aside from Baird and Shatner, none of these directors were really all that bad.
 
And, as I said in a previous post, it's all so very tired. Meyer borrows from everyone from Dickens, to Melville, to Capra, to Coppola. Not only is it not original, it's just so tired. It's been done over and over and over; and in most cases, a helluva lot better than Meyer did. Because of this, it comes off as puerile and obvious.

TMP was done before as well by the very series it was based off of, and as I said earlier it also tried to copy some of the themes and style of 2001. I don't think this is a bad thing, TMP was better than The Changeling, but it is vaguely hypocritical. In your own words, "You overcook TWOK and don't even put TMP in the oven."

What it all comes down to is: TWOK is conceptual science-fiction for teenagers; TMP is conceptual science-fiction for grown-ups.

Yeah, you keep thinking that. That's not a condescending or insulting argument at all. Everyone knows that if somebody doesn't agree with what you like then they must not have the mind of an adult. How silly of us to think otherwise.

The God Thing said:
What "death"? The selfish, deceitful shithead took the liberty of backing himself up in McCoy and then neglected to give Kirk the restore instructions during his "do not grieve" speech in the starship's disco, thus condemning Bones to insanity and potentially even suicide for no particularly good reason.

You mean the one word "Remember" that Nimoy added in there just in case he wanted to come back? The one word that Meyer didn't want in the film but he was convinced by Nimoy and Bennett to leave it in? Are you not in fact referring to the events of TSFS which did not involve Meyer due to the fact that he had no interest in telling the story that you are talking about?
 
You mean the one word "Remember" that Nimoy added in there just in case he wanted to come back? The one word that Meyer didn't want in the film but he was convinced by Nimoy and Bennett to leave it in? Are you not in fact referring to the events of TSFS which did not involve Meyer due to the fact that he had no interest in telling the story that you are talking about?

Yes the "Remember", along with Kirk's VO and the shot of the intact torpedo on the surface of Genesis. Even as a none-too-bright eleven year old I knew that Spock would be back in the next film, although I was still naïve enough at that point to hope for something a little better than a cabalistic resurrection fantasy. As for Meyer not wishing to be involved in ST:TSFS, that is ex post facto bullshit considering that Nimoy made directing the film the primary condition of his return. His letter to the Wall Street Journal complaining about the studio's intransigence on that issue ("Wah! I want to return Spock to the fans but Paramount won't let me! Wah!") sparked a write-in campaign by the fan-trash which ultimately forced Michael Eisner to backtrack on his refusal.

TGT
 
Yes the "Remember", along with Kirk's VO and the shot of the intact torpedo on the surface of Genesis. Even as a none-too-bright eleven year old I knew that Spock would be back in the next film, although I was still naïve enough at that point to hope for something a little better than a cabalistic resurrection fantasy. As for Meyer not wishing to be involved in ST:TSFS, that is ex post facto bullshit considering that Nimoy made directing the film the primary condition of his return. His letter to the Wall Street Journal complaining about the studio's intransigence on that issue ("Wah! I want to return Spock to the fans but Paramount won't let me! Wah!") sparked a write-in campaign by the fan-trash which ultimately forced Michael Eisner to backtrack on his refusal.

TGT

I'm afraid I must disagree again. Nick Meyer's original cut of the film that he used on a test audience made it implicitly clear that Spock was dead. There was no "Remember", there was no shot of the torpedo tube on the planet and there was no Spock voice-over at the end. The test audience left the theatre feeling depressed, so Bennett convinced Meyer to add those to the movie in order to end on a hopeful note.

Meyer's original idea was very much "Spock is dead, the end".
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top