Which film has aged the worst?

[2takesfrakes]

The film stock used for THE WRATH of KHAN makes it look the most aged. TMP and TSFS look like the film they both used was Top Shelf! Whether their stories were Timeless or not, I'm not going to get into. But the care that went into TWoK is still very evident. The charm is still there. Khan's name's been evoked throughout every STAR TREK spinoff and of course he's been rebooted, as well. It's not that I dismiss TWoK, quite the contrary, in fact ... but the film stock Nick chose, or had imposed, was utter shite and it affects the perceived quality of the movie itself, very much.

 

[Timby]

It's not that I dismiss TWoK, quite the contrary, in fact ... but the film stock Nick chose, or had imposed, was utter shite and it affects the perceived quality of the movie itself, very much.

The choice of stock was almost certainly down to Gayne Rescher, who as I recall chose Fuji 8518, as it was fairly flexible, high speed and had fine grain. I've always suspected, though, that due to budget and schedule, they didn't have time to really properly light the sets so they had to push process the film, hence the graininess of the picture. The scenes on Reliant's bridge (prior to it being blown to hell) are what really make me think this.

 

[Tomalak]

TFF for me, mainly for the fashions. Uhura's Tina Turner hairdo, Shatner's rug and t-shirt, the look of Paradise City, and Caithlin Dar. The Klingons look like Mötley Crüe.

It's also quite an eighties theme with the spiritual con-man/faith healer. It feels very much of its time in a way most Trek films don't.

Perhaps ironically, although TVH is the most eighties of the lot, it doesn't feel "dated" as such. We're shown 1986 from the perspective of Kirk and co, so in effect it was always a wry commentary on the time.

 

[Sybok Was Wrong]

Generations

Because even tho TVH looks 1986, TMP looks 1979, etc. they are still timeless in their characters and stories.

Generations catches TNG writers in their getting too complicated/trying to be clever & cute/convoluted moment that Season 7 was becoming because the writers were running out of straight ahead morality tales.

It catches Braga/Berman/Moore getting too clever for their own good in 1994. It gets my vote for dating the worst.

 

[Sybok Was Wrong]

Perhaps ironically, although TVH is the most eighties of the lot, it doesn't feel "dated" as such. We're shown 1986 from the perspective of Kirk and co, so in effect it was always a wry commentary on the time.

It's more authentic 1986 than if they were to do a time travel story today, that went back to 1986. So it works!

 

[suarezguy]

By the standards of the original post (and bearing in mind that I first saw most of the films long after they were released), I think First Contact followed by The Wrath of Khan have had the biggest declines relative to the first viewing. Both are still very good but you notice the flaws, especially that the somewhat simple stories and episodic elements detract from the intensity. The Search for Spock and the other TNG films felt pretty lacking in ambition but that was clear from the first viewings.

 

[Lance]

Perhaps ironically, although TVH is the most eighties of the lot, it doesn't feel "dated" as such. We're shown 1986 from the perspective of Kirk and co, so in effect it was always a wry commentary on the time.

It's more authentic 1986 than if they were to do a time travel story today, that went back to 1986. So it works!

I was going to say TVH has dated most, because it screams 1986. The tone of the piece feels like about a dozen other movies of the era. Even when TOS had characters go back to the 1960s or whatever, the whole show felt 1960s, so it wasn't as much of a contrast -- whereas for me, TVH feels like the characters are walking around in a movie in which they simply don't belong. It could be any 1980s screwball comedy. (And the original 'Eddie Murphy' draft was even worse in this respect.)
Some might say that's part of TVH's appeal, though.

The rest of the TOS movies feel comparatively timeless.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

TUC. I used to see it through the rose-colored glasses of it not sucking as badly as STV. Now, I can't even manage that. TUC used to vary between enjoyable and tolerable. Now, I can really only stand the very end.

As for the rest of them, I pretty much always saw them for what they were/they haven't changed much in my view. If anything, I love TMP now more than when I first saw it.

 

[Xerxes1979]

Star Trek 3 has the most dated hair styles and clothing.

 

[Trimm]

If I read the original post correctly, "dated" here seems to refer most to the notion of rewatchability. IE, which film has grown less watchable to you since your original viewing of it. By that standard, First Contact has by far aged the worst of all the films for me. I was as excited as anyone seeing it on the big screen, but it is probably the least viewed DVD in my Trek collection, and I haven't even opened the Blu Ray.

Frankly, the biggest problem for First Contact for me is that it is essentially a riff on Die Hard, just set in SPAAAAAAAACE!!!! But FC lacks all of the charm and humor that really sets Die Hard apart among the action film oeuvre. I don't think any of the TNG films ever captured the unforced, natural humor of TWOK/TSFS/TVH. And, to be frank, I don't find many of the action sequences in FC to be all that engrossing upon repeated viewing. Outside of the somewhat narrow exploration of Picard's desire for revenge, FC also really doesn't come to the table with much of substance to say. If having a message behind the madness is the real measure of Trek, than I daresay FC is one of the least Trek like of all the original films, and that hurts it upon repeated viewing as well.

 

[enterprisecvn65]

There's a few vying for the top spot, but I went with Insurrection. For a film made in 1998 it just looks like a relic from another era and the pleasant location shooting doesn't save it. I think First Contact is really starting to age quite badly too. Generations, despite what other people have said, I think has aged very well, the cinematography gives it a very 'classic cinema' look in my opinion, and I find the visuals to be superior to the following two movies too. Nemesis still looks pretty decent to these eyes, but obviously nowhere near the latest standards.

TFF is probably in second place down to the crappy FX and sets. TUC is looking it's age but I still think it looks pretty slick compared to most of the other TOS movies. TVH is dated but a lot of that is down to the 80's earth setting.

Considering that TMP is the oldest, it sure holds up very well in a lot of departments, so deserves a special mention. These days it almost has a timeless quality to it, in the same way that Raiders of the Lost Ark has. There's only the costumes and the odd visual effect that lets the side down for me.

Raiders has a huge advantage in why it will always seem timeless. It was a movie shot with technology from the 1980's about a story in the 1930's so they knew what the time period was like.

Also since CGI wasn't around all the sets, props, locations and so forth had to be done the old fashioned way and they had a big budget to make them look very accurate and realistic.

I don't think very many people are ever going to watch the truck chase scene between vehicles of the 1930's with Nazi soldiers wearing the uniforms of the period and using weapons of the period and go "Man that chase scene that took place in the 30's has aged badly and looks nothing like a chase scene in the 30's would look today."

And, again, because it was all "real" and not CGI there won't come a day when the CGI looks outdated. Real is real and if you do real well it never looks outdated.

Some of the scenes in "The Empire Strikes Back" look dated. The scene in the Hoth hanger, where they built a full sized hangar with full sized rebel ships and the Millenium Falcon....that looks as good as the day it was filmed and when the snowspeeder pilots are jumping into their ships and the mock speeders are being pushed and lifted by off camera forklifts....again that's never going to look outdated because it was all real people and material done very well.

 

[enterprisecvn65]

Followed by Deanna's, "As IF!"

When was that?

Fear not, it was a joke about how Generations felt dated as voiced by Hux and J.Allen, since it was in the 90s, and that phrase is pretty dated now.

Some of the 80's films look like 80's films but there's a charm to them. I voted "Generations" because it feels like it was rushed & put together with wires and scotch tape with little concern for story. Let's just put these two captains together & watch the Trekkers orgasm themselves into a puddle

It hasn't aged well as a piece of art

I think you probably feel it was rushed and put together with wires and scotch tape with little concern for the story because it was rushed and put together with wires and scotch tape with little concern for the story.

The sad thing is Generations, on paper at least, should have been one of the best films. The producers knew at least a few years in advance of TNG ending that they would be transitioning into film. Compared to the other films they had plenty of time to get their ducks in a row with the story and other elements solidly in place.

Instead they looked like the kid who has a month to do a research paper and they waited until the night before it was due and they can't believe they got a D-

Part of it was the misallocation of work. Moore and Braga outright admitted that the reason why All Good Things... was the superior product was because they were working on the finale and Generations simultaneously, and it got to the point where they were confusing story elements together (oddly enough, both involve time travel and chapters set in the past). As they were Trek's two premiere writers at the time, the producers gave them the projects (first the movie, and THEN the finale!) but didn't realize they were overworking the pair, who worked round the clock and barely got any sleep in that time.

Moore also believed that the sizeable headstart that they got on the movie was a double-edged sword. With a TV schedule, you're forced to keep things short and on deadline, and those restrictions and limitations sometimes bring out better works (poets, for example, often need the limits of form to thrive). Not so with a screenplay process, which often goes for years, which gives you time to go back and change and go back and change, almost to the point of self-indulgence, or to the point where executive meddling comes into play (as it did with all the drastic changes in the movie).

If it had been two teams of writers -- one for the finale and one for the movie -- there probably would've been a tighter movie.

That a very informative and well written response.

Unfortunately it doesn't change the fact that "Generations" really came across as a slap dash effort, especially when you compare the amount of lead time it had to other ST films.

Most people know how Roddenberry and Paramount dicked around on what to do with ST in the 1970's and bounced back and forth about making it a show or a film with many ideas floated. Of course while they were doing all of this "Star Wars" came out was sensation the likes of which only "Gone With the Wind" had ever achieved.

Paramount realized they had missed the boat and now were desperate to catch up so they basically told Roddenberry "Here's all the money you need, make whatever film you want." And they had to get it out before the Summer of 1980 because otherwise "The Empire Strikes Back" would also be released and ST would be in an even bigger hole.

TWOK was made on a tight timetable to save money and to also try and capture some of the sci-fi fever before Return of the Jedi came out and the SW films ended. TSFS and TVH had to be made pretty quickly because the films took place immediately after the events of TWOK and they couldn't have the cast age too much. TFF was rushed to try and continue the box office success that TVH had had and TUC was pushed hard to coincide with the 25th anniversary.

OTOH I remember as early as the beginning of season 5 of TNG how people were saying it would probably go 2 more years to have enough episodes for repeats, would also give DS9 a good lead in and then it would transition to films leaving DS9 as the ST TV show.

I mean they REALLY had a good amount of lead time knowing the film franchise was coming and there was no real hurry to get done as soon as TNG ended.

Yet I clearly remember the attitude was that they needed to get it into theaters as soon as they could after TNG or they felt the people would forget about it and noone would go and see the film if it came out a couple of years after the show ended. I think that's nonsense. People weren't going to forget about such a popular show in a couple of years and waiting may have actually created more anticipation and excitement for the film rather than cranking it out ASAP and hardly giving anyone to catch their breath between TNG and the films. It also, of course, would have given more time to everyone writing the film to perhaps think it through a little more and make a much better story.

But as poster hux pointed out the whole MO behind Generations, besides get it out ASAP to capitalize on TNG, was that, as long they could promote it as the meeting between Kirk and Picard and could do things like put up posters with both their images and a tagline like "Two Captains. One Destiny" (which was totally inaccurate BTW) then it really didn't matter what the story was, people would automatically flock like geese and love whatever was on the screen.

It was like "Species" where the hole point of the film was clearly to get Natasha Henstridge to be naked as much as possible and the whole "alien" thing was just some vehicle to make that possible. The whole point of "Generations" was clearly to get Picard and Kirk together and how it happened was just a secondary consideration.

Of course the thought should have been "How do we make a really great film where we can have both Picard and Kirk in it" instead of "As long as the two of them are together the story isn't that important."

I think "Generations" was the biggest blown opportunity of the whole ST franchise. So many of the elements were there for them to make it a potentially great film and they managed to squander every one of them.

 

[Cyke101]

When was that?

Fear not, it was a joke about how Generations felt dated as voiced by Hux and J.Allen, since it was in the 90s, and that phrase is pretty dated now.

I think you probably feel it was rushed and put together with wires and scotch tape with little concern for the story because it was rushed and put together with wires and scotch tape with little concern for the story.

The sad thing is Generations, on paper at least, should have been one of the best films. The producers knew at least a few years in advance of TNG ending that they would be transitioning into film. Compared to the other films they had plenty of time to get their ducks in a row with the story and other elements solidly in place.

Instead they looked like the kid who has a month to do a research paper and they waited until the night before it was due and they can't believe they got a D-

Part of it was the misallocation of work. Moore and Braga outright admitted that the reason why All Good Things... was the superior product was because they were working on the finale and Generations simultaneously, and it got to the point where they were confusing story elements together (oddly enough, both involve time travel and chapters set in the past). As they were Trek's two premiere writers at the time, the producers gave them the projects (first the movie, and THEN the finale!) but didn't realize they were overworking the pair, who worked round the clock and barely got any sleep in that time.

Moore also believed that the sizeable headstart that they got on the movie was a double-edged sword. With a TV schedule, you're forced to keep things short and on deadline, and those restrictions and limitations sometimes bring out better works (poets, for example, often need the limits of form to thrive). Not so with a screenplay process, which often goes for years, which gives you time to go back and change and go back and change, almost to the point of self-indulgence, or to the point where executive meddling comes into play (as it did with all the drastic changes in the movie).

If it had been two teams of writers -- one for the finale and one for the movie -- there probably would've been a tighter movie.

That a very informative and well written response.

Unfortunately it doesn't change the fact that "Generations" really came across as a slap dash effort, especially when you compare the amount of lead time it had to other ST films.

Explanation does not equal excuse. I'm not trying to change or defend the movie; if anything, from interviews, it would seem that Moore and Braga would agree with you, but then they'd explain why the movie was disappointing and felt slapdash in the end despite the leadtime. They accepted a good chunk of the blame (a bit unfairly, imo. That was the producers and the studio execs pressuring them).

Just like your mention of TWOK's limited leadtime, Moore and Braga worked under similar time constraints for AGT, which turned out to be the better story because you don't have time or luxury to make drastic changes. On the other hand, for Generations, Moore and Braga were given a laundry list by the executives -- bringing in and then killing Kirk, the death of the Enterprise, etc. etc.

And while Moore and Braga were concentrating on AGT's story, the executives brought their own ideas for Generations and told Moore and Braga to string them together, so yes, it was very much, "As long as Kirk and Picard are in it, story is secondary." It was a gimmick that wasn't fleshed out by story. More leadtime meant more ideas being added by the execs until it became untenable to adapt to so many changes so quickly. But they were also young and inexperienced, as it was their first movie; so they had less power to push back against many items on the laundry list. The ones that they successfully lobbied against were more mitigated by logistics (i.e. the original story was the TOS crew vs. the TNG crew -- except much of the TOS cast didn't want to return).

With First Contact, Moore and Braga had a bit more leeway to move around, so they didn't have nearly as long a laundry list and they could use their own ideas as the basis for the movie. With less interference and fewer revisions/additions, FC became the sharper, more focused movie.

 

[lurok]

It was like "Species" where the whole point of the film was clearly to get Natasha Henstridge to be naked as much as possible and the whole "alien" thing was just some vehicle to make that possible.

The whole point of "Generations" was clearly to get Picard and Kirk together and how it happened was just a secondary consideration.

I think you nailed it in the first.

 

[Smellmet]

Generations

Because even tho TVH looks 1986, TMP looks 1979, etc. they are still timeless in their characters and stories.

Generations catches TNG writers in their getting too complicated/trying to be clever & cute/convoluted moment that Season 7 was becoming because the writers were running out of straight ahead morality tales.

It catches Braga/Berman/Moore getting too clever for their own good in 1994. It gets my vote for dating the worst.

Objectively, with the story, yes. It ends up being a mess where they should have just had a simpler way of getting Kirk into the 24th century, and. Not. Killing. Him. At least not in the way they did.

Generations, for me though is one of the most visually stunning Trek movies. Better than every one bar TMP, and the JJ movies for me.

There's a few vying for the top spot, but I went with Insurrection. For a film made in 1998 it just looks like a relic from another era and the pleasant location shooting doesn't save it. I think First Contact is really starting to age quite badly too. Generations, despite what other people have said, I think has aged very well, the cinematography gives it a very 'classic cinema' look in my opinion, and I find the visuals to be superior to the following two movies too. Nemesis still looks pretty decent to these eyes, but obviously nowhere near the latest standards.

TFF is probably in second place down to the crappy FX and sets. TUC is looking it's age but I still think it looks pretty slick compared to most of the other TOS movies. TVH is dated but a lot of that is down to the 80's earth setting.

Considering that TMP is the oldest, it sure holds up very well in a lot of departments, so deserves a special mention. These days it almost has a timeless quality to it, in the same way that Raiders of the Lost Ark has. There's only the costumes and the odd visual effect that lets the side down for me.

Raiders has a huge advantage in why it will always seem timeless. It was a movie shot with technology from the 1980's about a story in the 1930's so they knew what the time period was like.

Also since CGI wasn't around all the sets, props, locations and so forth had to be done the old fashioned way and they had a big budget to make them look very accurate and realistic.

I don't think very many people are ever going to watch the truck chase scene between vehicles of the 1930's with Nazi soldiers wearing the uniforms of the period and using weapons of the period and go "Man that chase scene that took place in the 30's has aged badly and looks nothing like a chase scene in the 30's would look today."

And, again, because it was all "real" and not CGI there won't come a day when the CGI looks outdated. Real is real and if you do real well it never looks outdated.

Some of the scenes in "The Empire Strikes Back" look dated. The scene in the Hoth hanger, where they built a full sized hangar with full sized rebel ships and the Millenium Falcon....that looks as good as the day it was filmed and when the snowspeeder pilots are jumping into their ships and the mock speeders are being pushed and lifted by off camera forklifts....again that's never going to look outdated because it was all real people and material done very well.

I totally agree with your assessment of Raiders, it, along with TMP are among my favorite films of all time, I was talking about a more un-quantifiable feeling of the film as a piece of entertainment, maybe Raiders was not the right example I was looking for, TMP felt just more like an old-school classic, epic movie over all the others that followed, including the two new ones. That's more what I'm referring to.

 

[Cyke101]

Generations

Because even tho TVH looks 1986, TMP looks 1979, etc. they are still timeless in their characters and stories.

Generations catches TNG writers in their getting too complicated/trying to be clever & cute/convoluted moment that Season 7 was becoming because the writers were running out of straight ahead morality tales.

It catches Braga/Berman/Moore getting too clever for their own good in 1994. It gets my vote for dating the worst.

Objectively, with the story, yes. It ends up being a mess where they should have just had a simpler way of getting Kirk into the 24th century, and. Not. Killing. Him. At least not in the way they did.

Generations, for me though is one of the most visually stunning Trek movies. Better than every one bar TMP, and the JJ movies for me.

I feel the same way about much of the score, and I like that it *sounds* like TNG the show just pumped to 10, rather than much of what we got for the TOS-movies.

In hindsight, I was surprised to realize that this was the only TNG movie without the Jerry Goldsmith intro, because I think Dennis McCarthy could fit in it seemlessly with the rest of the Generations score.

 

[Smellmet]

The score for Generations was really good - it was quite different to what had come before but it was still very effective, if slightly less memorable in it's main theme to the Goldsmith/Horner stuff. It was nicely subtle in parts - the champagne opener is perfect example where less is more with the score.

 

[Sparkle Fabulosa]

I'm probably not qualified but I'd say TWOK, for the same reasons that others have mentioned.

 

[Smellmet]

I'm probably not qualified but I'd say TWOK, for the same reasons that others have mentioned.

I can see why anyone would pick TWOK, there are parts of it that look seriously cheap, but for me, predictably the film is just so entertaining, even now, that it just gets a pass, and there's little in the film where you seriously roll your eyes at the visuals. For a film made in 1982, it just holds together.

 

[Sparkle Fabulosa]

Yeah. The story makes up for the somewhat cheap look to the film. I've only seen it once so maybe I should watch it again.