Should TMP be ignored?

[Smellmet]

I think it's as good as TWOK, but just very different in tone. If you haven't watched it in 25 years then you're missing out on a marvellously crafted film. The scope, production design, score and visual effects are superior to any other film in the franchise up to the reboots. I didn't properly appreciate it until I got into my thirties.

 

[alensatemybuick1]

Is this still even a discussion?

I ask myself that a lot on this site.

 

[Sir Stewart Wallace]

I think it's as good as TWOK, but just very different in tone. If you haven't watched it in 25 years then you're missing out on a marvellously crafted film. The scope, production design, score and visual effects are superior to any other film in the franchise up to the reboots. I didn't properly appreciate it until I got into my thirties.

I just watched it on Amazon Prime. Once the movie gets going it's all right, but the first act has some weird tonal shifts. And I absolutely hate the transporter malfunction scene. Two people die horribly. Kirk looks a little bummed, then gets lost in the corridors like an asshole. Janice Rand almost certainly got PTSD from the incident (not to mention the people at Starfleet who watched them die) and no one really gives a shit. Hate it.

 

[Transzendor]

I need to make time to watch this again, it must be twenty five years since I first/last watched it. I never thought of it as pretentious though, but I suppose I can see it that way. The whole warp engine wormhole thing was mystifying to me, and frankly annoying to watch. What were they thinking?

I wouldn't actively ignore it, but it doesn't seem to warrant my attention.

 

[Vger23]

Quite frankly, I wish more people would ignore stuff they don't like.

It's a helluva lot more tolerable and logical than endlessly complaining and attacking stuff they don't like.

So, hell...ignore TMP all you want. Take a black sharpie marker over any references to it in any Trek book you own. Good times.

It beats the hell out of endlessly bitching about it over and over without any end goal or purpose.

 

[Charles Phipps]

I'd only ignore it because apparently there's a lot of US space probes being turned into gods by aliens.

 

[MAGolding]

IMHO Star Trek happens in a lot of different alternate universes. If a series has a pilot film where the crew get together on the ship or space station, every single episode in that series should be a sequel to the pilot. But most of those episodes should happen in alternate universes of their own, being sequels to only the pilot episode and having no sequels in later episodes. Of course some episodes are sequels to earlier episodes and happen in the same timeline, but most do not.

This explains how the crew survive so many dangers against all the statistical odds. They don't survive all those dangers in a single timeline but usually survive only a single danger in each timeline. And the creators only select to tell in episodes those adventures where the protagonists all survive, ignoring the countless millions of alternate universes in which one or more protagonists are killed.

This theory makes it possible that Star Trek: The Motion Picture and Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, happen in alternate universes and that neither is the sequel to the other.

If Star Trek: The Motion Picture and Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, happen in alternate universes and that neither is the sequel to the other, the Enterprise must be rebuilt from its TOS design to its movie design in both alternate universes.

In TMP Kirk has not commanded the Enterprise - one could say she has been taken away from him - for several years and he regains command of her at the end. When Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan begins, Admiral Kirk is not in command of the Enterprise - one could say she has been taken away from him - and hasn't for some time.

If Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan is a sequel to Star Trek: The Motion Picture Kirk has commanded the Enterprise twice and had her taken away from him twice. If If Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan is not a sequel to Star Trek: The Motion Picture Kirk should have commanded the Enterprise once and had her taken away from him once by the start of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan.

I remember a line from Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan where someone told Kirk "you never should have let them take her away from you again" referring to the Enterprise. If Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan is a sequel to Star Trek: The Motion Picture Kirk the "again" needs no explanation. But if it is not a sequel to Star Trek: The Motion Picture the "again" needs explaining with another situation where Kirk regained and later lost command of the Enterprise.

Curiously, I didn't find that dialog of "you never should have let them take her away from you again" in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan at the Star Trek Transcripts web site. Maybe I imagined it or maybe the transcript omitted it.

About chronology. My optimum chronology would be for Kirk to complete the five year mission and have a second 5 year mission, then become a admiral and the Enterprise rebuilt for a couple of years, then TMP, then another 5-year mission, then Kirk has a desk job for a few years, then movies II through V, then another five year mission, then TUC, then after a year or two Generations. With four 5-year missions and maybe 5 years total between them that makes 25 years. But Generations said Kirk had commanded the Enterprise 30 years earlier thus leaving time for another 5-year mission in the period.

 

[MAGolding]

Yeah, but that's just the interpretation of one tie-in author. From the information that TOS gives us, it's just as possible that they were Peter's older brothers than younger.

And what kind of crappy parents leave their newborn kids behind to go off into space? I liked The Autobiography of James T. Kirk, but that explanation really makes me dislike George and Aurelan Kirk.

My preferred idea is the other boys were older. They were living on Deneva but were on a space camping trip with space boy scouts or something. When they received warnings of the parasite attack they tried to stay alive and away from the parasites.

McCoy either din't now they existed or else assumed they had been killed when he said Peter was the only survivor o the family.

One wonders about the deal with Jimmy Kirk, Riley, Leighton and Tarsus IV, then. "Conscience of King" alone would allow us to think that Kirk's mom and dad were both killed by Kodos, but we now know from Prime Spock's words that at least his dad lived through it all. Where were they when their son was eyewitness to whatever those three kids (and six others of unknown age) uniquely witnessed?

(The senior Kirks apparently weren't among the eyewitnesses, as the computer lists only one Kirk, and then moves up the alphabet. Although it seems there's an "Eames" there at #5 just before Kirk stops the search, or is that "Seamus" or some such?)

In the 24th century, solitary confinement is a popular care method for traumatized kids. Perhaps abandoning of young kids to their own devices has been found beneficial in the 23rd century already?

Timo Saloniemi[

Kevin Riley was with his parents of Tarsus IV.

ILEY: He murdered my father, and my mother.
KIRK: You could be wrong. Don't throw away your life on a mistake.

There is nothing about Leighton's or Kirk's families in the transcript I think. Possibly Jimmy Kirk was visiting relatives on Tarsus IV aged about 13. Certainly my sister and I were no older when our parents put us on the train to visit our grandparents. Maybe the trip to Tarsus IV was like a short train trip today.

What Kirk and Riley etc. witnessed was the executions, led by Kodos. Perhaps they were in the last batch scheduled for death that day and witnessed the previous batches being vaporized and heard Kodos make his speech at least once. The relief force arrived in the nick of time to save them. Thus they would be the only legal witnesses to Kodos's role in the otherwise inexplicable disappearance of 4,000 colonists..

 

[Tenacity]

I always preferred that the older boys lived on Deneva but were ...

If you could accept that George is ten plus years older than James, then two of the sons easily could be grown men, who left home years before to and never moved to Deneva with their parents.

The episode never says how long George - spouse - (younger?) son had been living on Deneva.

 

[MAGolding]

If you could accept that George is ten plus years older than James, then two of the sons easily could be grown men, who left home years before to and never moved to Deneva with their parents.

The episode never says how long George - spouse - (younger?) son had been living on Deneva.

There are some limits to how long that might be. From "What Are little Girls Made of?":

KIRK: What about memory? Tell me about Sam.
KIRK2: George Samuel Kirk, your brother. Only you call him Sam.
KIRK: He saw me off on this mission.
KIRK2: Yes, with his wife and three sons.
KIRK: He said he was being transferred to Earth colony two research station.
KIRK2: No, Captain. He said he was continuing his research and that he wanted to be transferred to Earth colony two.

Since "this mission" is either Kirk's command of the Enterprise, or the 5 year mission [if they didn't begin on the same date], Sam Kirk and family should have been on Earth less than 6 years earlier. Of course the Enterprise might have left from some other main federation planet or Starfleet base.

"Operation, Annihilate!",talking about the colony on planet Deneva:

SPOCK: No Federation contacts for over a year.

Since spaceships have subspace transmitters, Sam Kirk and his family must have reached Deneva during or before the latest previous federation contact.

So Sam Kirk, his wife, and at least one son lived on Deneva for between 6 and 1 years. If Peter's brothers are older than him, they might have lived on Deneva and left for Earth for college education.

 

[Lord Garth]

Given the amount of time that passes between TMP and TWOK -- 12 years! -- that's more than enough time for Kirk to command the Enterprise, to have it taken away from him again for whatever reason (which would've made an interesting movie), have it become a training vessel, have him say "The Hell with it!" and leave, meet Antonia, be with her for two years, then return to Starfleet with the Enterprise still as a training vessel, then have TWOK happen.

You could have a whole trilogy of films set between TMP and TWOK. Could. If they did it, they should have it match the style of the late-'70s and early-'80s like was done with Rogue One.

12 years is a lot time for things to happen. 12 years ago was 2005. Not everyone's life was static from 2005 to today. So I don't see what the issue is.

Aside from that, it would screw up the numbering of the other sequels to ignore TMP. Plus, if it's separate from TOS and separate from II-VI, then having it in there doesn't effect TOS or the rest of the movies one way or the other.

From a real life perspective, ignoring TMP is ignoring 10 years' worth of effort to bring Star Trek back after it was cancelled.

 

[Tenacity]

Since "this mission" is either Kirk's command of the Enterprise, or the 5 year mission [if they didn't begin on the same date], Sam Kirk and family should have been on Earth less than 6 years earlier.

I always took "this mission" to be the mission to locate Doctor Corby, so Kirk last saw his brother and family several days or a few weeks before.

SPOCK: No Federation contacts for over a year

Kind of a odd statement on Spock's part, given that interstellar travel is usually depicted as pretty casual.

Perhaps Deneva isn't a part of the Federation, and Spock is referring to official contact.

 

[Shaka Zulu]

As we know, there are many problems with trying to squeeze TMP into the canon. It works as a follow-up to TOS, but really only if you allow for more than just 2 years between the two. As a "prequel" to TWOK and the remaining movies, however, it introduces even more problems (elapsed time, slow rank progression, complete reboot of uniforms, etc...). If you assume that TMP never occurred and there's about a 12ish year gap between the end of the 5 year mission and TWOK, it smooths over many of the bumps.

Would it not be simpler to just pretend that TMP never occurred, and ex-communicate it from Trekdom? What are the pros and cons? Discuss!

I could ignore it, as it's complete nonsense done by a drug addicted creator who was now clearly past his prime as a writer. It would have been better for Planet of Titans to be made instead of TMP.

Perhaps Deneva isn't a part of the Federation, and Spock is referring to official contact.

Federation Member: Deneva Colony (Flag)

Looks like it's a member of the Federation to me.

 

[Ceridwen]

Wait, if this discussion is based on the fact that the events of The Wrath of Khan don't seem to "allow" for The Motion Picture then shouldn't The Wrath of Khan be the one we ignore?

 

[Tallguy]

Wait, if this discussion is based on the fact that the events of The Wrath of Khan don't seem to "allow" for The Motion Picture then shouldn't The Wrath of Khan be the one we ignore?

Ordinarily I agree with you. In The Wrath of Khan Kirk turned 49. Everything lines up, it's author's intent, all of it. But subsequent films (Generations, I guess) knocked that out of whack, so that's no longer "official". Well the hell with you, TWOK was here first and I celebrated my 49th birthday watching The Wrath of Khan. (My only solace is that Shatner was older than Kirk, so I'm still not THAT old.)

But I think the original question is that since TMP was kind of a cul de sac and that all of the following movies went by a different path how much attention should we pay to it (as a storyline at least).

Obviously at this point I've made many posts in this thread so my views are searchable (if you are so inclined). But TWOK was probably written as a sequel to TOS, not to TMP. It doesn't contradict TMP but it doesn't require it either. Either way is fine. To me they are my two favorite films and among my favorite Star Treks, so I get them both.

 

[Phoenix219]

Wait, if this discussion is based on the fact that the events of The Wrath of Khan don't seem to "allow" for The Motion Picture then shouldn't The Wrath of Khan be the one we ignore?

No, because that would mean ignoring all 4 sequels, which directly spring forth from TWOK, not to mention TNG which uses uniforms and ships from that movie era at times. TMP is the dead end.

I would love to see the extrapolated future of the TMP world and aesthetic though.... with totally different futures and possibilites in store for Captain Kirk and his new crew. Think of it is as a complete fork in the road......On the same note, it would be nice to get the story of what happened between TOS and TWOK in the timeline where Kirk never got his ship back or saved the galaxy from V'Ger.

 

[Valenti]

Up 'till now TOS has been ignored by those who matter and are in power. Gene who?... oh he's dead. Long live frankentrek or whatever it is now.

 

[Phoenix219]

Umm.... Gene is the one who started ignoring and deleting TOS/TAS components from canon when he did TNG.....

 

[Valenti]

well he developed a new canon and reality with TNG but TAS was just a cartoon and can't be compared to live action. Hard to believe he disavowed TOS though. and changing components is not the same as ignoring. It was supposed to be 78 years later.

 

[Tallguy]

well he developed a new canon and reality with TNG but TAS was just a cartoon and can't be compared to live action.

Sure it can. Same cast. Same writers. And I'll take BEM over Miri.