Which movie would you use to introduce someone with Star Trek?

[Greg Cox]

Isn't re-introducing the same as introducing for someone who hasn't seen anything of it?

No.

Introducing characters generally requires that you give the audience a reason to give a damn about them. ST:TMP doesn't. It assumes familiarity.

That would be rather a fault of how TMP did it but not a fault of the principle.

Perhaps, but we're talking about TMP and the practical issue of whether those opening scenes would mean anything to newbies. Like Dennis said, the movie assumes that we already know and love these characters.

"Look! It's Bones . . . with a beard. And just as cranky as ever!"

 

[Mudd]

Or, having Scotty begin yammering about his technical problems as soon as Kirk materializes. There's not much charm or comedy in that unless you know it as an old song; it's just whining.

 

[RAMA]

The answer to this is so resoundingly ST09 to me, that it occured to me I'd rather show them trailer #3 from it rather than any other whole Trek movie.

 

[JarodRussell]

No.

Introducing characters generally requires that you give the audience a reason to give a damn about them. ST:TMP doesn't. It assumes familiarity.

That would be rather a fault of how TMP did it but not a fault of the principle.

You didn't elucidate a principle; you asked what you mistakenly assumed to be a rhetorical question.

LOL. It wasn't a rhetorical question.

The principle is that for someone newly initiated, a re-introduction is the same as an introduction. Old fans go "Ah, yeah, we know that guy." but that doesn't turn off others.

Basically, it doesn't matter if we have seen a character's backstory in previous episodes or not. There are so many standalone films that hint at an unfilmed backstory for characters. It works.


Let's look at TWOK. Khan hates Kirk, for being exiled on a planet, where his wife died. No need to see Space Seed to understand that. Chekov isn't aboard the Enterprise at the beginning. Who is Chekov? It's not even necessary to know that he was aboard the Enterprise throughout the show. It's mentioned in the film when it's needed.

Or First Contact. So Picard has history with the Borg. No need to have watched Best of Both Worlds or any other Borg episode to get that. There's a new Enterprise. No need to know that there has been an old one that has been destroyed. Fans go "Oh look at that" when Picard smashes the Enterprise-D model, and it enhances the meaning of that scene for fans, but that's nothing to put new people off.


That said, I don't think there is any scene in TMP that would be not interesting just because you haven't seen the show. I actually know that for a fact for myself, because I have seen TMP first, and TOS only much later.

"Look! It's Bones . . . with a beard. And just as cranky as ever!"

It's sold well enough. It's reported to Kirk that there is a guy resisting transport (the dangers had already been established). Then there's a smirk hinting at Kirk knowing the dude well. Then he gets beamed aboard with a pretty rough looking beard (in a world where everyone else is clean shaven), and he talks about being drafted, and rambles about new things replacing old things. And later he appears shaved anyways. Those things are all things that don't need TOS as background knowledge. So Kirk has a cranky long time friend who left Starfleet prior to the film. That works well standalone.


Again, it's coming down to subjective impression. Some people will like it on first sight, like I did, and some people will yawn. But that applies to every film.

 

[Cyke101]

It's so hard trying to gauge my boyfriend, a non-Trekkie. After we watched the Abrams films, he asked me (to my surprise) if we could watch a couple of the first 10 movies and asked for my recommendations. Like most others here, I suggested TWOK and FC. He was utterly bored by them, claiming FC was too much like the show, and that TWOK moved too slow.

Then, out of curiosity, I put on TMP and, to my surprise, he paid attention to all that. To all that! The movie ran long and it was getting close to bed time, so I stopped the movie halfway. The next night, he (HE) asked if we could continue the movie. Obviously I was shocked with a tinge of disagreement, but who am I to tell a burgeoning Trekkie what he can and can't like?

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, after all. I'd really like to show him TUC, but I'm worried that he might treat it like TWOK. But

 

[ElimGarak.93-99]

Star Trek: The Voyage Home

 

[Galileo7]

WOK
STID

Everything that is old is new again.

 

[publiusr]

Introduced my nieces with Star Trek IV. Khan was too scary!

That's the right answer...until 2009, it was the first movie non-trekkies could love.

 

[Peach Wookiee]

Introduced my nieces with Star Trek IV. Khan was too scary!

That's the right answer...until 2009, it was the first movie non-trekkies could love.

And it's a safe bet for a three-year-old and a six-year-old.

 

[Mage]

Introduced my nieces with Star Trek IV. Khan was too scary!

That's the right answer...until 2009, it was the first movie non-trekkies could love.

And it's a safe bet for a three-year-old and a six-year-old.

Except perhaps the footage of them actually slicing up whales....

 

[Peach Wookiee]

It didn't register with my girls. Then again... they've gone fishing...

 

[F. King Daniel]

If they're coming to Trek from the new movies, the II-IV trilogy would be the best place to start.

 

[patweb]

ST:I is epic, classic Trek. I guess you had to see it when it came out at the drive in. Seeing the Enterprise for the first time on screen so long after the original series.

 

[Ralphis]

If they've only seen the JJ movies, I think TWOK is the best choice. Yes, it's dark and slow as people have pointed out, but both '09 and Into Darkness borrowed quite a bit from TWOK, so it would be more recognizable and easier for the person to digest.

Depending on the person's age, The Voyage Home might not the slam dunk it seems. I think it's a wonderful movie and one of my favorites, but it's also very dated. I'm 29, and I have friends that got interested in Trek through the JJ movies, but couldn't get through TVH just because it felt 'old'. I guess it depends on the age and/or temperament of the person.

If the person has Netflix or Hulu, I wouldn't rule out watching some episodes instead of the movies. Or at least start with some of the episodes.

 

[gottacook]

The Voyage Home might not the slam dunk it seems. I think it's a wonderful movie and one of my favorites, but it's also very dated. I'm 29, and I have friends that got interested in Trek through the JJ movies, but couldn't get through TVH just because it felt 'old'. I guess it depends on the age and/or temperament of the person.

Dated how? Perhaps you mean the latest, most modern computer of 1986 (a first-generation Macintosh) and its use in a comedy scene - which might feel dated in much the same way that a stand-up comedy routine about, for example, Dan Quayle might feel dated. But perhaps your friends meant something else by the movie feeling "old" and I wonder what that would consist of. I don't think it's the scenes of present-day San Francisco per se - although one could argue that the present-day San Francisco of Time After Time feels fresher even though it's 7 years older.

 

[MacLeod]

It's so hard trying to gauge my boyfriend, a non-Trekkie. After we watched the Abrams films, he asked me (to my surprise) if we could watch a couple of the first 10 movies and asked for my recommendations. Like most others here, I suggested TWOK and FC. He was utterly bored by them, claiming FC was too much like the show, and that TWOK moved too slow.

Then, out of curiosity, I put on TMP and, to my surprise, he paid attention to all that. To all that! The movie ran long and it was getting close to bed time, so I stopped the movie halfway. The next night, he (HE) asked if we could continue the movie. Obviously I was shocked with a tinge of disagreement, but who am I to tell a burgeoning Trekkie what he can and can't like?

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, after all. I'd really like to show him TUC, but I'm worried that he might treat it like TWOK. But

Well I suppose by today's standards TWOK might seem a tad slow in parts, but films don't have to have a fast tempo. Though perhaps his view of TWOK was coloured by STID.

 

[Ralphis]

The Voyage Home might not the slam dunk it seems. I think it's a wonderful movie and one of my favorites, but it's also very dated. I'm 29, and I have friends that got interested in Trek through the JJ movies, but couldn't get through TVH just because it felt 'old'. I guess it depends on the age and/or temperament of the person.

Dated how? Perhaps you mean the latest, most modern computer of 1986 (a first-generation Macintosh) and its use in a comedy scene - which might feel dated in much the same way that a stand-up comedy routine about, for example, Dan Quayle might feel dated. But perhaps your friends meant something else by the movie feeling "old" and I wonder what that would consist of. I don't think it's the scenes of present-day San Francisco per se - although one could argue that the present-day San Francisco of Time After Time feels fresher even though it's 7 years older.

I think it actually was the San Francisco scenes to be honest. It's possible my friends are idiots, though. Like I wrote before, I personally love the film.

 

[Shaka Zulu]

Introduced my nieces with Star Trek IV. Khan was too scary!

How old are they, may I ask?

 

[Peach Wookiee]

Introduced my nieces with Star Trek IV. Khan was too scary!

How old are they, may I ask?

At the time, not quite four and six years old.

 

[Memory Alpha]

ST II (TWOK), clearly. It was actually the first one I watched as a kid, and I think it's probably the most accessible to anyone who isn't a fan or who is new. It's really just a great story with a good balance of action and drama. The pacing is also nearly perfect.