Trek IV single worst thing to happen to Trek movies.

[Lord Garth]

Let me preface this by saying I became a fan with TVH and I agree that the franchise owes its longevity to that movie.

Now onto the movies that followed it.

A good popular movie could never do Trek or TOS an iota of harm. A couple of unpopular misfires like 5 and 6 were all it took to sink it.

Neither movie did as well as TVH but TFF and TUC are not comparable in box office or reception:

Star Trek V

Gross:
$52,210,049 (USA)
$70,210,000 (Worldwide)

Budget:
$27,800,000 (estimated)

User Rating: 4.8

Star Trek VI
Gross:
$74,888,996 (USA)
$94,000,000 (Worldwide)

Budget:
$30,000,000 (estimated)

User Rating: 7.2

And if they did "sink" TOS, let's keep things honest by looking at the first TNG movie:

Star Trek: Generations
Gross:
$75,668,868 (USA)
$120,000,000 (Worldwide)

Budget:
$35,000,000 (estimated)

Generations made some more money internationally but it made essentially the same money as Star Trek VI domestically and TUC has better critical reception.

FC was the only TNG movie to come anywhere near breaking $100 million domestically.

Was Star Trek VI as successful or considered as good as Star Trek IV? No, it wasn't, but I still think you're selling the movie short.

If the first round of TOS movies ended with TFF then I would've agreed with you, they sank, but the series had run its course and TUC was a chance to save face and go out on a better note. Given the advancing ages of the actors, it was inevitable movies with them would have to stop some time, Star Trek VI was intended as a chance to end the TOS movies with something better than TFF, celebrate the 25th Anniversarry, and then pass the torch. It ended for positive reasons instead of negative.

 

[Warped9]

It may owe its longevity, but it also owes much of its decline into mediocrity and banality.

 

[ancient]

I don't think it's fair to say that TVH can be blamed for the percieved failings of some later Trek that was made by a completely different team.

That's like blaming the huge success of LOTR for all those crappy fantasy movies that followed. Yes, maybe the crappy movies exist because of LOTR, but oh fucking well. It's no reason to complain about LOTR itself.

 

[Cyke101]

It may owe its longevity, but it also owes much of its decline into mediocrity and banality.

Exactly. The aimless violence and overabundance of technobabble, plus the focus on formulaic stories rather than character development, things that plagued later Trek, all came from Star Trek IV.

 

[rocketscientist]

Nah, "Star Trek III" was a poorly-written, underbudgeted and underthought vehicle that featured some good performances and creative direction - but it cost more and made less in first release than did the previous film, TWOK. The future of "Star Trek" in the autumn of 1984 was anything but assured.

Actually, from box-office mojo (which adjusts for inflation), TSFS made $76,471,046 domestically, compared to TWOK's $78,912,963. On RT, it's critical rating is 74%, lower than TWOK (96%), FC (94%), TVH (89%), and TUC (79%), and higher than INS (61%), TMP (55%), GEN (48%), NEM (38%), and TFF (23%). I believe it had a slightly higher budget than Khan. Despite that, it almost made as much and, at the time, garnered better reviews. At the time, I don't recall reading anything in Starlog or any other fan magazine questioning whether there would be a sequel to TSFS. As I recall, it was regarded as being nearly as successful as Khan.



"

 

[rocketscientist]

With regard to this thread, I disagree that the humor introduced in TVH hurt any of the subsequent Trek films except for TFF. With TFF, the studio stupidly insisted that Shatner and Bennett include more humor in their script. The humor in GEN with Data was generally in keeping with his character. I didn't care for it that much, but I don't see it as inspired by TVH.

With INS, though, they did want to do a lighter movie, like Nimoy did after TWOK and TSFS. Stewart wanted to shift gears, so Pillar's script was rewritten. I don't know if this was supported or inspired by Nimoy's decision to do TVH though.

 

[Haggis and tatties]

I love the TVH because its fun, it has all my fave character in out of water situations and is a great character piece.

And the biggest plus is that its all just up beat and positive.....just like the TV show could be.

Plus i needed this type of trek movie then, TMP although fantastic seems cold, TWOK killed off a old friend, TSFS brought a old friend back but cost another old friends and kirks just found son.....so i needed TVH and its up beat positive adventure.

 

[Mr. Fergy]

ST:IV in 1986 led the way to TNG in 1987.

I'm a native San Franciscan myself (Before I moved to KS in late 1987) I was stoked by ST:IV. It is one of the top 4 Trek films, IMHO.

 

[Kieran]

If you want to see the WORST of Trekdom, I suggest you rent "Star Trek:Nemsamess".

 

[freak]

You know as of right now I'm watching TVH on HBO Family and I have to say it was one of the better Star Trek movies, despite some issues posters have about it. I've really forgotten how funny and great this movie really was!!! And everyone is entitled to their own opinions about how some trek movies didn't deserve the credit they were given. It sounds like every Trek fan, including myself, has issues about a certain movie/series whether it be comedy or not. I really enjoyed the comedy in TVH. And Spock swearing really made me laugh so hard at times. He called them "colorful metaphors" !!!! But I really loved this movie even though some people said that the comedy was just added into it to make it better. But that's just my thoughts.

 

[TremblingBluStar]

I had no problem with TVH, other than a few minor quibbles:

- With the exception of the main cast, the acting was horrid.
- The music was far too whimsy and cartoonish.
- The Federation council was tiny, and had some the cheapest looking aliens since TOS season 3.
- The "trial' was wrapped up far too neatly, and the issues with the Klingons completely forgotten.

 

[RAMA]

Despite being a financial sucess Trek IV was the movie the completly derailed the franchise.

Trek II and III were solid dramatic movies with a few humourous touches but thanks to the fourth movie the element of comedy was addeded and from that moment on it paved the way for every subsequent Trek movie cramming in alleged humor because "hey it worked for Trek IV it should work for our film...leaving us with some really "gems"

Scotty knocking himself out on a beam

Uhura not knowing Klingon rifling through old books not unlike a panel from an old Gold Key Trek comic book where Spock is researching witchcraft.

Data Cussing

Zephrame Cochran retconned into an annoying drunk

Boob and floatation jokes.

Worf and Data as resident clowns. (Though I will give you that "Assimilate This" is actually pretty funny.

and many many more.

STIV was an Oscar nominee for its script...meaning it WAS comedy executed well. The only thing that it derailed was SHATNER, who proceeded to ruin STV with his own brand of stupidity. No other ST movie suffered as much.

RAMA

 

[cardinal biggles]

No, it wasn't. The film was nominated for Oscars for Cinematography, Music (Original Score), Sound, and Sound Effects Editing.

 

[rocketscientist]

Y'know, what I think was the single worst thing to happen to ST movies? Rick Berman taking the helm. The only great TNG movie that can stand with TWOK, TSFS, TVH, and TUC was the great FC. The other 3 films, GEN, INS, and NEM, all had story/script problems, imo, because Berman was never ever a writer and has no sense of story and no creativity. He's no Harve Bennett, Nick Meyer, or Leonard Nimoy, all of which knew what constituted a good story and good ST. IMO, INS and NEM were what killed ST in the movies while VOY and ENT did it on TV by just being TNG v2 and v3.

 

[Zeppster]

ST IV didn't really have bad acting by any of the cast. If anything the secondary cast was at it's best in this one. I didn't see them as weak. To me the most enjoyable Trek movie is probably IV.

 

[archeryguy1701]

I don't think TVH killed the Trek movies. TVH home was done well and the comedy worked for that group, and the only real misfire afterwards was TFF. INS is probably the next worse, but it wasn't really bad, per se. I think the reason that one doesn't sit very well with me is that it tried being a TOS style of fun, and it simply didn't work with that cast. Each cast had its own distinct style and feel, and TOS humor simply doesn't work for the TNG group.

 

[Mirror_Barclay]

I still consider IV to be the best Trek movie (yes, I liked it better than II). And no, it didn't sink the franchise.

V did damage; and some later movies, while not doing damage, became a lost opportunity to keep things alive and vital.

 

[Allyn Gibson]

I thought that the huge success of The Voyage Home lead to The Next Generation getting the green light. If that assumption is correct, then TVH is one of the best things to happen to Star Trek.

No, TNG was already in development when Star Trek IV debuted. Television shows take a lot of time to get off the ground. Paramount started moving forward with it in late '85, and by early '86 Roddenberry was onboard. They had no idea that Star Trek IV was going to cross the 100 million mark domestically when they started work on TNG.

 

[blockaderunner]

I don't know if it was the worst things to happen to Trek movies, but it did set the precedent for two things: First, it introduced the Reset Button (Spock being Spock again, brand new Enterprise, Kirk demoted to Captain again, etc.) which set the crew back to their 1966 incarnation, dispite looking like a bunch of used Samsonite luggage, and said Reset Button has been a fixture in Trek ever since, elimating any genuine peril or, danger or change that was established in the previous TOS films, and that TPTB fiigured that the only way Trek can be a success is that it must fall in line with the mainstream public and make fun of itself. Plus, the fact that they eyed Eddie Murphy in the role of the marine biologist clearly shows they were going to go for laughs and that, at that time, EM was box office gold, so you can't plead ignorance on the part of Paramount or anyone Allyn.

 

[RAMA]

No, it wasn't. The film was nominated for Oscars for Cinematography, Music (Original Score), Sound, and Sound Effects Editing.

I distinctly recall it being nominated for best original script from that time period. I believe the sound awards were one award.

RAMA