Nimoy: TMP Wasn?t Really A Trek Movie
- Thread starter TrekToday
- Start date
Whatever Robert Wise said he would have changed in the 80's is no doubt different from what he felt needed changing in the year 2000.
I've made several projects over the years and thought how I should have done this or that, but given a decade to reflect I changed my mind.
So whatever his 'vision' was when the movie was made doesn't really matter now since he never got a chance to make that version of the movie. The directors edition is a fair enough example of how he wanted the movie to be. Sadly, he's no longer with us so nobody truly knows whether he is truly happy with the directors edition or not. He certainly sounded like he was, but whatever. I loved it.
I've made several projects over the years and thought how I should have done this or that, but given a decade to reflect I changed my mind.
So whatever his 'vision' was when the movie was made doesn't really matter now since he never got a chance to make that version of the movie. The directors edition is a fair enough example of how he wanted the movie to be. Sadly, he's no longer with us so nobody truly knows whether he is truly happy with the directors edition or not. He certainly sounded like he was, but whatever. I loved it.
That’s the domestic total of course. "The Numbers" states $139,000,000 world wide.
http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/series/StarTrek.php
Not sure how accurate they are as they claim a budget of 140 million for the last picture whereas most figures I've heard put it as 150, but 139 million gross for TMP seems about right.
Interestingly one of the contributors to the commentary on my DVD copy said they adjusted for inflation and came up with a gross of 414 million in 2008 dollars! That also seems about right and I think would make TMP the most financially successful Trek Movie to date. Not bad at all.
Edit: Trekmovie.com does point out some alternative ways of looking at these figures and highlights difficulties in working out non US inflation figures, also the impact of DVD sales etc.
Last edited:
The question of whether it is what Wise would have done in 1980 is totally different from the question of whether or not Wise was actively involved in the making of the DE.
Directors, like everyone else, change their opinions over time. Their experiences color their perceptions of the work they did in the past. Some, like George Lucas, think that the material from the past should be changed to match their present viewpoints. Others prefer to leave well enough alone.
A good example is Richard Donner and Superman II. When Warner Bros. decided to put together "the Richard Donner cut," Donner was involved, but he himself said that he couldn't just go in and do it himself because he is a completely different filmmaker now and would never make the movie the same way. Instead, he wanted someone like Michael Thau to supervise it so it could be constructed more in the way it was originally meant to be.
All that being said, I do think those involved in the TMP DE did take too many liberties and did several things because they were "cool," not because they helped the film.
Profitability? That's not the same issue as ticket sales, and the $56 million was rentals, not box office. By all accounts I can find TMP was one of the top earners of the year when it was released. The Los Angeles Times of April 27, 1980 (quoting Variety numbers) puts it at #6 for the preceding year, after Superman, Every Which Way But Loose, Rocky II, The Amityville Horror and Alien. That's box office success by most any measure.
These things are always hard to compare, but FWIW George Lucas's Blockbusting by Alex Block and Lucy Wilson has a pretty thorough methodology for comparing box office, and gives TMP $208.5 million in 2005 dollars. That's domestic, and does not include home video or any other revenue, just theatrical releases. If we go by The National Association of Theater Owners reported average movie ticket prices to adjust ST '09 to 2005 dollars ($7.50 to $6.41 or 1 to .855), ST '09's domestic box office of $257.7 million comes to $220.3 million, and TMP moves to second place among Trek movies. Again, profitability (revenue minus cost) is another matter and is harder to judge because of how studios can report costs and factor in other revenue sources.
Justin
Well I've only recently got into Trek, so I approach the films as an auteurist. TMP is epic and damn near approaches being a masterpiece. It makes all the sequels look incredibly pedestrian.
I can understand people not liking it for not being Trek enough,(even though it's a remake of The Changeling) but to say it's a poor film clearly shows bias.
I could just as easily dismiss 2001 the same way people dismiss TMP...
[sarcasm]2001: A Space Odyssey - A slow boring film about apes that become hairless apes and get killed by a computer. Howw stoopid evry1 no's evulooshunn iz a miff aNd a compooter ccant kil peoplz, Kubrick was a fucking hack.[/sarcasm]
I watched the films before I got into TOS and the grandness of TMP made me nostalgic for a show I had not even seen yet.
I can understand people not liking it for not being Trek enough,(even though it's a remake of The Changeling) but to say it's a poor film clearly shows bias.
I could just as easily dismiss 2001 the same way people dismiss TMP...
[sarcasm]2001: A Space Odyssey - A slow boring film about apes that become hairless apes and get killed by a computer. Howw stoopid evry1 no's evulooshunn iz a miff aNd a compooter ccant kil peoplz, Kubrick was a fucking hack.[/sarcasm]
I watched the films before I got into TOS and the grandness of TMP made me nostalgic for a show I had not even seen yet.
^ I think most of what you say is a fair assessment, and I agree with you that TMP is a good movie in the mold of 2001.
Here's the problem: Trek is not, nor has it ever been, 2001-style science fiction. Even when they have done -- and quite successfully, I might add -- really intelligent, "high concept" sci-fi stories, it's still always been infused with an action adventure element. Never has Trek been pure intellectual sci-fi as 2001 is.
And so, in that respect, I agree with Nimoy. TMP is not a Trek movie based on everything else Trek was before and has been since. And that may leave Trek fans disappointed in it. But I still think it's a good film.
Here's the problem: Trek is not, nor has it ever been, 2001-style science fiction. Even when they have done -- and quite successfully, I might add -- really intelligent, "high concept" sci-fi stories, it's still always been infused with an action adventure element. Never has Trek been pure intellectual sci-fi as 2001 is.
And so, in that respect, I agree with Nimoy. TMP is not a Trek movie based on everything else Trek was before and has been since. And that may leave Trek fans disappointed in it. But I still think it's a good film.
I totally understand people saying it's not Trek enough. I just don't like the fanboyism of knocking an incredibly well made film. I like all the sequels, but as a film buff first, I appreciate what TMP and even TFF try to do. I'm probably weird since most Trekkies hate those two films. TMP's only flaw is being a Star Trek film.
It's a Trek film that didn't have enough of what some fans like to see in a Trek film. On the other hand TFF is a Trek film that doesn't have enough polish to be a good film.
TMP could have used a bit more of William Shatner's vitality and sense of drama while TFF could have used more of Robert Wise's smarts and experience.
TMP could have used a bit more of William Shatner's vitality and sense of drama while TFF could have used more of Robert Wise's smarts and experience.
Maybe people just need to be in the right mood to appreciate TMP.
...
I tend to think of TFF as a noble failure. The heart was in the right place, but something got lost in translation. Seems few people but Shatner had any confidence in this story. Certainly he met enough resistance when he pitched it initially.
I don't consider TMP a failure. I simply feel it could have been better and it wouldn't have taken much either, nothing more than a bit of smart rewriting as well as some time to finish the post-production and edit it properly. A lot of TMP's issues could have been averted if they had had a completed script before they started filming.
I don't consider TMP a failure. I simply feel it could have been better and it wouldn't have taken much either, nothing more than a bit of smart rewriting as well as some time to finish the post-production and edit it properly. A lot of TMP's issues could have been averted if they had had a completed script before they started filming.
None of the Trek films are failures. They all have something fans will love and they all have things fans will hate. That's just the way it is.
People's definitions of failure around here depend more on personal taste than anything. Sometimes actual numbers and facts are questioned or put into doubt because it does or doesn't support the argument on one side or the other. The subject at hand isn't whether or not TMP was a financial success for the studio. It was. What is being discussed is how Nimoy feels that TMP failed as a Star Trek film, and as such I stand by my previous post.. as well as this one.
For me The Motion Picture felt more real than any of the following Trek Movies. The characters felt like real people. I think Wrath of Khan got that right as well, but it was the beginning of the transition from these characters being real people into 'action' heroes...or living legends. Somewhere along the way, the characters stopped feeling quite as real as they once did...at least for me.
What I enjoyed throughout most of the TV series is that they were mostly just regular folks in extraordinary situations.
TMP felt right in that regard. I also find it to be a wonderful love story...on many levels.
What I enjoyed throughout most of the TV series is that they were mostly just regular folks in extraordinary situations.
TMP felt right in that regard. I also find it to be a wonderful love story...on many levels.
Nemesis is the only Trek movie that actually lost money at the box office. However, TFF had the lowest profit of any Trek movie that made a profit and was considered a major box office disappointment by Paramount. Of course, all of the Trek movies have turned a profit when you factor in home video sales, rentals, broadcast and cable rights, etc. But, at least at the time, the studio did not consider such factors in determining the success or failure of a movie.
Good point. Maybe Nimoy's right. Maybe this is an aberration. They do seem real people, in space. They get cartoonier as the movies go on. Even a scooby-doo ending in VI!
Though in Cage and early S1, they seem pretty real -- there are more quiet moments and pauses in dialog. So maybe TMP was a return to earlier ways, and not an aberration. Hmm.
I always see it as Wrath of Khan being The Doomsday Machine to The Motion Picture's Corbomite Maneuver.
I feel very much the same way.
