Honestly, I feel this is one of the problems with both Trek Wars. The current creators feel compelled to subvert expectations at nearly every turn. Subverting expectations isn't the same as giving us something unexpected.
"Star Trek: The Motion Picture" or _____?
- Thread starter Lord Garth
- Start date
TMP is superior to every Trek film made after TUC, including the Abrams films.
I believe the reason so many take issue with the film, whether consciously or otherwise, is because it's not a conventional adventure in the sense that Star Wars or the later Trek films was. The core narrative is about exploration and discovery, both without (V'ger) and within (V'ger, Kirk, Spock, Decker, and Ilia's journeys) and this is pure science fiction.
We start the film learning that Kirk is incomplete without his friends and command, that Spock is incomplete with his humanity and his friends, and that Decker and Ilia are incomplete without each other. We learn all of this before the Enterprise even leaves dry dock.
We then learn that V'ger is also incomplete; it's searching for its Creator, for a sense of purpose and belonging.
In the course of helping V'ger find the Creator, Kirk, Spock, Decker, and Ilia find what they're missing. The resolution of the film is that these characters are all made whole and, as a byproduct, Earth is saved from destruction. The film ends with Kirk, Spock, and McCoy reunited with the rest of the crew and the Enterprise heading out to continue "the human adventure."
This story requires the audience to think, to feel, and to even look within to fully appreciate the narrative resolution. As a result, TMP was always fighting an uphill battle, as the film that led to its creation as a motion picture required little thinking (I say this as a big fan of the original Star Wars films) and the films that followed in both general science fiction and sci-fi and Trek in particular required less thinking and introspection. They were compelling, engaging, moving, and yes, even thoughtful, but they don't work on the same level that TMP did.
I believe the same holds true to a lesser extent for TSFS and TVH. Consider that TSFS has been considered "proof" of the "Odd number Trek movie rule" despite being a film that requires the audience to face grief and sorrow head on. There is no easy way out for Kirk and his crew, and Kirk loses more than anyone else: his ship, his son, and his future in Starfleet. TVH, meanwhile, asks the audience to consider complex ideas like the value of pain and how humans use it or avoid it and how the drive for knowledge of the divine can be both positive and incredibly destructive.
In contrast, the TNG films don't take any time to plumb any real depths, instead sacrificing narrative logic and established characterization for boring and uninspiring action set pieces and attempts at "humor" that are more embarrassing than funny.
TOS is my favorite Trek series, and that includes the films, but as much as I enjoy them, I feel it's a shame that all of the films after TMP ignore its existence and that TUC ignores the events of TFF. Say what you will about Roddenberry and Shatner, but both wanted stories that put exploration and narrative depth before action. Their films weren't retreads of TOS episodes, they were revisiting the spirit of exploration and human self-discovery present in a series that most moviegoers likely hadn't watched in its entirely before heading to the movie theater.
I believe the reason so many take issue with the film, whether consciously or otherwise, is because it's not a conventional adventure in the sense that Star Wars or the later Trek films was. The core narrative is about exploration and discovery, both without (V'ger) and within (V'ger, Kirk, Spock, Decker, and Ilia's journeys) and this is pure science fiction.
We start the film learning that Kirk is incomplete without his friends and command, that Spock is incomplete with his humanity and his friends, and that Decker and Ilia are incomplete without each other. We learn all of this before the Enterprise even leaves dry dock.
We then learn that V'ger is also incomplete; it's searching for its Creator, for a sense of purpose and belonging.
In the course of helping V'ger find the Creator, Kirk, Spock, Decker, and Ilia find what they're missing. The resolution of the film is that these characters are all made whole and, as a byproduct, Earth is saved from destruction. The film ends with Kirk, Spock, and McCoy reunited with the rest of the crew and the Enterprise heading out to continue "the human adventure."
This story requires the audience to think, to feel, and to even look within to fully appreciate the narrative resolution. As a result, TMP was always fighting an uphill battle, as the film that led to its creation as a motion picture required little thinking (I say this as a big fan of the original Star Wars films) and the films that followed in both general science fiction and sci-fi and Trek in particular required less thinking and introspection. They were compelling, engaging, moving, and yes, even thoughtful, but they don't work on the same level that TMP did.
I believe the same holds true to a lesser extent for TSFS and TVH. Consider that TSFS has been considered "proof" of the "Odd number Trek movie rule" despite being a film that requires the audience to face grief and sorrow head on. There is no easy way out for Kirk and his crew, and Kirk loses more than anyone else: his ship, his son, and his future in Starfleet. TVH, meanwhile, asks the audience to consider complex ideas like the value of pain and how humans use it or avoid it and how the drive for knowledge of the divine can be both positive and incredibly destructive.
In contrast, the TNG films don't take any time to plumb any real depths, instead sacrificing narrative logic and established characterization for boring and uninspiring action set pieces and attempts at "humor" that are more embarrassing than funny.
TOS is my favorite Trek series, and that includes the films, but as much as I enjoy them, I feel it's a shame that all of the films after TMP ignore its existence and that TUC ignores the events of TFF. Say what you will about Roddenberry and Shatner, but both wanted stories that put exploration and narrative depth before action. Their films weren't retreads of TOS episodes, they were revisiting the spirit of exploration and human self-discovery present in a series that most moviegoers likely hadn't watched in its entirely before heading to the movie theater.
4.9M views · 59K reactions | The Physics of Space Battles 🛸👾 | The Physics of Space Battles 🛸👾 | By Be SmartFacebook
The Physics of Space Battles 🛸👾
www.facebook.com
Here is something that elevates TMP as well. Some effort to apply real world physics logic, so thrusters in spacedock and the new effects shot of the ship turning being one of the few accurate depictions of inertia.
what is this 25 minute cut of which you speak?
A pretty fantastic, exquisitely said piece. Reminds me how much I actually love TMP.
you mean Final Frontier, I need my pain, and the search for God, not the hunt for whales, correct?
Yes, thank you for the correction! I love TVH too, but I was referring to TFF.
Eh... The Changeling and TMP are very similar, and TFF reminded me of Magicks of Megas-Tu.
I think the character work in TMP is methodical, but means too heavily on the carpet pull of Kirk being surly and Spock abandoning Starfleet after making peace with his dad in TOS felt out of nowhere.
Yes, the themes of exploration and belonging are wonderful, humanistic, themes. The journey there was painful and slow to see characters put through the ringer.
It's a mixed bag.
Last edited:
OK, going by Lord Garth's original question:
Would I rather watch Nemesis or TMP? TMP.
Would I rather watch Insurrection or TMP? TMP.
Would I rather watch First Contact or TMP? First Contact.
Would I rather watch Generations or TMP? TMP.
Would I rather watch The Undiscovered Country or TMP? The Undiscovered Country.
Would I rather watch The Final Frontier or TMP? Final Frontier.
Would I rather watch The Voyage Home or TMP? The Voyage Home.
Would I rather watch The Search for Spock or TMP? The Search for Spock.
Would I rather watch The Wrath of Khan or TMP? The Wrath of Khan.
So TMP doesn't rank especially high for me in the first ten movies, largely because I find the character arcs lacking. There's tons of spectacle, and at times it captures the feel of TOS in ways the other films don't, but other times it's WAY off the mark. So it's a real mixed bag for me. But sometimes I'll put it on when I'm looking for the vibe it offers.
Would I rather watch Nemesis or TMP? TMP.
Would I rather watch Insurrection or TMP? TMP.
Would I rather watch First Contact or TMP? First Contact.
Would I rather watch Generations or TMP? TMP.
Would I rather watch The Undiscovered Country or TMP? The Undiscovered Country.
Would I rather watch The Final Frontier or TMP? Final Frontier.
Would I rather watch The Voyage Home or TMP? The Voyage Home.
Would I rather watch The Search for Spock or TMP? The Search for Spock.
Would I rather watch The Wrath of Khan or TMP? The Wrath of Khan.
So TMP doesn't rank especially high for me in the first ten movies, largely because I find the character arcs lacking. There's tons of spectacle, and at times it captures the feel of TOS in ways the other films don't, but other times it's WAY off the mark. So it's a real mixed bag for me. But sometimes I'll put it on when I'm looking for the vibe it offers.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
