Star Trek

[Doctor Strange]

Gotta say, I was pretty blind to the flaws of Star Trek: The Motionless Picture when it originally opened. I saw it twice the first week, and while it was pretty obvious that it wasn't exactly the best possible film that could be spun off Trek, it was downright amazing that it existed at all. And look at that gorgeous new Enterprise model!

Sure, it was a little too different from the series, and surprisingly badly paced and acted coming from an ace director like Robert Wise, but for a primordial fan like me, who'd watched from the first broadcast and went on to memorize the show in reruns, it was an absolutely unbelievable dream come true. There had been no canceled TV shows turned into big budget films in 1979. (Some golden age of TV dramas like Marty and Requiem For A Heavyweight had been remade as features, but no sequel to a series, much less a "failed" science fiction series.) It was an unexpected delight.

It even made me feel better about Star Wars, since it was obvious that it was its huge success and subsequent rewiring of the film industry that was responsible for a big budget, effects extravaganza Trek movie being greenlit. (Before The Empire Strikes Back really blew my mind with what Star Wars could be, I'd spent a few years explaining how Star Wars [it wasn't yet A New Hope then] - though wonderfully entertaining fun - was really a fantasy film set in the past, and wasn't "real" science fiction like Star Trek and 2001, which extrapolated our technology and society into the future.)

And yes, after Wrath of Khan demonstrated how much more exciting and satisfying a Trek film could be, there was a rapid re-evaluation of all the things TMP got wrong. But to assume that it was hated by all the Trek faithful immediately when it first opened isn't accurate.

 

[LizzieMaine]

I saw TMP in the theatre when it came out in 1979, and had deeply mixed feelings about it. I actually liked the basic story, but I thought the execution left a lot to be desired, and for exactly those reasons: it seemed like different characters on a different show. It wasn't until The Next Generation came out several years later that I realized that was exactly what I had seen: TMP was less a continuation of TOS than, in many ways, a big-screen pilot for TNG. Decker was Riker, Ilia was Troi, the relentless beigeness of the refitted Enterprise was the Enterprise-D, and so on and on. Even the music was the same.

I think Roddenberry's greatest weakness as a writer was that he had the mindset of a typical writer schooled in 1950s television: he constantly recycled his own work. I think he had a good eye for interesting plot ideas, but as a character writer he was the inferior of Coon, Black, and especially Fontana.

 

[HanauMan]

I saw the Star Trek film in 1979 and I, as a fan of the TV show, didn't like it then, nor on repeat viewings. I thought that the plot was secondary to the special effects even back then. It was the time of films like Alien, Close Encounters, Star Wars, The Black Hole and TV shows like Buck Rogers and Battlestar Galactica. Every film trying to outdo the others in special effects. I came out of the movie theater with a huge headache due to all the light effects. I recall I felt cheated and that I had wasted my pocket money.

On the other hand, I always enjoy the original series. I saw, for example, the episode Errand of Mercy again the other day. It ranks as one of my favorite Star Trek shows. Even as a kid I could see the respect and admiration Kor has for Kirk, both before and after Kirk is unmasked. "Well, have we a ram among the sheep?", what a classic line. I enjoyed the hostility both showed towards the peaceful Organians. For a Cold War series it accurately showed the hate, but also the kindred spirits of the opposing sides. In this case the Federation and the Klingon empire. Even as kid I guessed that the Klingons were supposed to be like the Soviets. Even so I actually had, and still have, a greater liking for the character of Kor than I had for Kirk or, shock horror!! Spock in this episode.

 

[Trenchfriend]

One thing, that came to my mind again, days ago:

When I think about the early TNG-episodes and the early acting of Cpt. Picard, especially, when he is in his bridge-office, the character, that Patrick Stewart is playing, is the absolute prototype of an old-fashioned, undercooled and arrogant german doctor! The whole scenery in the bridge-office, in the early, cheaper-looking time of TNG, is so astonishing the image of an german 80s/90s-doctors office! There are only the white walls and the doctor's-couch lacking!!

Surely, later, Picard acts much warmer and less arrogant.

But, in the early episodes, there is a great scene, when Dr. Crusher sat in the bridge-office and Cpt. Picard acts so great arrogant like doctor behind his table and said something, that Dr. Crusher really looked like a classic pissed woman.

 

[HanauMan]

I always thought that all the different Star Trek crews were prim and prissy. I always thought it was because they were a type of Air Force! I mean, Wes Crusher was pure air force brat!
Always liked the army better, always thought of the Klingons as army. LOL

 

[scottyrocks]

I saw TMP when it was released in '79.

Initially, I was thrilled to even see the characters on screen, but I was almost instantly struck by how slowly the plot moved. I remember that I disliked the uniforms. And Kirk's hair.

I was able to accept the altered relationships between the principals, as I chalked it up to their obviously advanced age - not that they were ancient, but obviously older than the in the original series from 11-13 years prior.

 

[Doctor Strange]

It took most Hollywood "experts" a few years to realize that the success of Star Wars wasn't mainly about the special effects. The explosion of effects-heavy movies that followed in the wake of Star Wars (don't forget other embarrassments like Moonraker!) were a very mixed batch.

A lot of what Lizzie says above is accurate, especially about how TMP pointed the way to TNG. I'm sure the more well-read Trek fans here know that TMP was originally a proposed sequel TV series Roddenberry was pushing in the wake of Trek's unprecedented success in syndicated reruns, not a feature film. It wasn't until after the mega-success of Star Wars that its pilot script was quickly - and poorly - rewritten to feature the original cast, and the film rushed into production by Paramount, who wanted Trek as their own response to Wars. (And there's still some evidence of the planned series in the film, like the poor guy who was supposed to be the new Vulcan science officer costarring with Decker in the TV series being quickly killed off in a transporter accident!)

Anyway, all I was saying was that while I wasn't blind to its flaws (I mean, I was a 24-year-old with a creative writing degree, not an impressionable kid), the sheer amazement of there even being a Star Trek movie trumped those flaws... at first. For me.

 

[LizzieMaine]

On the other hand, I always enjoy the original series. I saw, for example, the episode Errand of Mercy again the other day. It ranks as one of my favorite Star Trek shows. Even as a kid I could see the respect and admiration Kor has for Kirk, both before and after Kirk is unmasked. "Well, have we a ram among the sheep?", what a classic line. I enjoyed the hostility both showed towards the peaceful Organians. For a Cold War series it accurately showed the hate, but also the kindred spirits of the opposing sides. In this case the Federation and the Klingon empire. Even as kid I guessed that the Klingons were supposed to be like the Soviets. Even so I actually had, and still have, a greater liking for the character of Kor than I had for Kirk or, shock horror!! Spock in this episode.

John Colicos was absolutely wonderful in that episode -- for my money his was the best and most textured "villian" performance in the entire series. He's equally good when he reprises the role twenty years later in Deep Space Nine as an elderly Kor feeling that Klingon society has passed him by and desperate for a chance to prove his worth once more.

The other two great TOS Klingons reappear in DS9 as well -- William Campbell as Koloth and Michael Ansara as the magnificent Kang. They join the aged Kor along with DS9's Dax on a galaxy-spanning revenge quest, and meet their fates in an appropriately Klingon manner.

 

[Fading Fast]

I saw TMP when it was released in '79.

Initially, I was thrilled to even see the characters on screen, but I was almost instantly struck by how slowly the plot moved. I remember that I disliked the uniforms. And Kirk's hair.

I was able to accept the altered relationships between the principals, as I chalked it up to their obviously advanced age - not that they were ancient, but obviously older than the in the original series from 11-13 years prior.

I, too, saw it in '79 as a super-excited 15 year old who had "discovered" the original series in reruns and fell in love with it. Everything you said reflects how I felt: thrilled to see it, thought it boring, uniforms off-putting, Kirk's hair unbearable (it was thicker and curlier than it was ten years ago - made no sense and bugged the heck out of me), but subsequent ones got better (if unevenly).

As to TNG, I'll just say it, despite fully respecting that there are good things in it (Q and Worf and some other stuff), I can't stand it and have stopped even trying to find a way to like it in reruns. Deanna Troi is nails on a chalkboard to me - literally - I can't stand a single moment she's on screen and I fast forward through them. The entire show is just too touchy feely for me. Star Trek has some grit to / some "yeah we have all these ideals and 'The Prime Directive,'" but Kirk knew that a lot of times you just have to do what you have to do like Lincoln suspending Habeas Corpus.

TNG is too idealistic, too cerebral, too into everyone's "feelings" for me. Plus, they killed off one of the characters I liked early on - the "not at all touchy feeling, but I can kick some butt" Tasha Yar (the entire show would have been meaningfully better if Yar - tired of listening to her - had killed Troi early on when Troi went into one of her "deep" soliloquies).

I enjoy "Voyager" and "Enterprise" and know (owing to Lizzie) I have to watch "Deep Space Nine," but TNG is dead to me.

 

[LizzieMaine]

I watched TNG regularly thruout its run, missing very few episodes, but it was sort of like the Chinese meal of Trek -- you watched it and an hour later you were hungry again. I did enjoy Worf's storyline thru the series, and enjoyed its payoff even more in DS9, and I thought most of the Data episodes were entertaining in that innoccuous Trek-does-comedy kind of way. And I admit that I always looked forward to the Barclay episodes because they demonstrated that even in an ideal society there'll be bumbling knuckleheads who'll manage to screw things up.

But I didn't care for Riker at all -- he always struck me as somebody whose underpants were on too tight. Troi I could take or leave, Crusher made no impression at all, and I always had the sense that they didn't quite know what to do with Geordi. As for Picard, I think his best moments were when some other character came along to show up his pomposity -- Q justified his entire existence in those moments, such as when he threw the Enterprise into the heart of Borg space just to show the cocky humans what they were really up against.

All these swaggering Q moments, of course, had their own payoff when he zapped onto DS9 and Sisko just went and punched him in the face.

I think what TNG really missed was a character who could seriously critique Picard's point of view, the way Spock and McCoy could challenge Kirk, or Kira could challenge Sisko. Riker was a toady, Worf would roar something about "I suggest maximum fire!" and Picard would ignore him, and nobody else would even bother to try. Except, once again, Q.

I watched Voyager regularly as well, and it suffered for me in comparison to DS9. But lately when I do catch a rerun of it, in general it seems better than I remember it being, even though Chakotay could give Riker a run for his money in the underpants-on-too-tight department. And the idea of him getting romantically involved with Seven of Nine is ridiculous on every level.

 

[Fading Fast]

⇧ Agree on Riker as well - thought his character could have lifted right out and the series would have improved.

 

[Trenchfriend]

Early Picard = arrogant (german) doctor
Early Riker = arrogant (german) secondary-school teacher
Tasha Yar = arrogant (german) police-woman/teacher

Perfect.

 

[Trenchfriend]

When I think about the early Lt. Barclay, I don't think, they wanted to show Asperger-Syndrome. To me, it looks like "social phobia (ICD10) in first, together with high-functioning-autism. If he would have Asperger, he would have acted another way. With Asperger, he would have been more efficient in his job with all this science- and tec-stuff.

 

[Benzadmiral]

Naturally I saw ST:TMP when it came out. It was longer than it needed to be, including that too-loving flyby of the Enterprise. But as someone pointed out above, that it was being revived at all was exciting in itself.

I haven't rewatched it in too many years. Wrath of Khan and Search for Spock I'll sit down with anytime, but I'd have to be in the right mood for TMP.

 

[scottyrocks]

Okay, slight shift in topic.

I watched Star Trek: Into Darkness (again) the other day.

Specifically, what do you all think about the Nimoy Spock making appearances in the current reboot film series with Zachary Quinto as Spock?

I have mixed feelings. a) It's gratuitous, and b) I'm always glad to see Nimoy as Spock, which I suspect is the feeling of most ST fans.

 

[Zombie_61]

Okay, slight shift in topic.

I watched Star Trek: Into Darkness (again) the other day.

Specifically, what do you all think about the Nimoy Spock making appearances in the current reboot film series with Zachary Quinto as Spock?

I have mixed feelings. a) It's gratuitous, and b) I'm always glad to see Nimoy as Spock, which I suspect is the feeling of most ST fans.

In the 2009 movie I thought it felt a little forced, but it still worked for the story they wanted to tell. In Into Darkness it was completely gratuitous and unnecessary, and given his past feelings on the matter I was a little surprised that Nimoy would agree to appear in what was essentially a cameo role. That being said, Nimoy's Spock has been my favorite Star Trek character from day one so I did enjoy seeing him in Into Darkness despite my previous comment.

 

[Trenchfriend]

Interesting thought! What would have happen to the Star Trek-movies, when they wouldn't have mix the T. J. Hooker-thing with the Starfleet-scenery??

I think, they were clever, to comprehend, that the Star Wars-franchise was just cheesy kids-stuff and "Alien" set the adult SF-mark. So, they grabbed the teenage middle betweens the two excesses, brought new catchy starfleet-uniforms and it worked, with the evil Khan, additional.

Just a misfortune for them, that "Alien" came up.

 

[LizzieMaine]

I only saw the first of the "reboot" films, and I had mixed feelings about Nimoy's part in it -- while it worked from a story point of view, I got the sense that it was intended as a deliberate and positive end to the "prime universe" that I'd been following since I was seven years old, and that bothered me. In a very real sense, Nimoy was, to me, the only "real Trek" element in the film, and it was hard to watch him knowing that the storyline that he represented was over.

As far as fitting in with other science-fiction movie franchises of the day goes, I've always preferred Trek to the other big hitters because even when the movies were at their most ridiculous, they were always about *people* instead of explosions, gadgetry, or monsters. "Wrath of Khan" was the best of the TOS films because it never for a moment lost sight of that: Khan wasn't some insane cosmic villian with a universe-spanning scheme, everythng he did grew out of his hatred of one man, James T. Kirk. Every moment of that film was an intensely personal story. It's the same reason "First Contact" is, by a very wide margin, the only good TNG film -- because it's the story of Picard's failure to truly come terms with what the Borg had done to him and the consequences resulting from that. When Trek is about *people* it excels. When it tries to ape other franchises in bombast and spectacle, it falls far short of what it should be.

 

[Benzadmiral]

⇧ Agree on Riker as well - thought his character could have lifted right out and the series would have improved.

Well, the ship needed an exec, and Frakes's Riker made a strong contrast, in age and height and style, with Stewart's Picard.

I have to give Jonathan Frakes full credit where it's due. At least 3 times in the show's run, he managed to convey to the audience, by facial expression and body language alone, what was going through Riker's mind. Of course that's the job of any actor worth his Equity card, but I say it to point out that Frakes was not just a tall galoot.

1 and 2) In "Measure of a Man," when he has been tapped to act as the prosecutor in Data's hearing (to determine if he has the right not to be disassembled against his will): First, when Riker is studying Data's schematics, he smiles ("This is just what I need for my case!"), and then the smile vanishes as he clearly thinks: "And if I win, my friend may cease to exist." Later, during the hearing, he switches Data off to prove he is a machine. ("Pinocchio is broken. Its strings have been cut.") But as he sits, he wipes a hand across his face with a look that says, "What have I done?"

2) In "The Outcast": The ship is visiting a planet of people who have totally eschewed gender, at least on the surface. One, played by Melinda Culea, is attracted to Riker and vice versa, and they begin an affair. But then she is brought up on charges and sentenced to being "treated," "brainwashed" to Riker (and to us, the viewers). Watching Riker as she gives an impassioned speech in her defense, we know he is thinking, "God, I'm proud of you!"

 

[Fading Fast]

...As far as fitting in with other science-fiction movie franchises of the day goes, I've always preferred Trek to the other big hitters because even when the movies were at their most ridiculous, they were always about *people* instead of explosions, gadgetry, or monsters. "Wrath of Khan" was the best of the TOS films because it never for a moment lost sight of that: Khan wasn't some insane cosmic villian with a universe-spanning scheme, everythng he did grew out of his hatred of one man, James T. Kirk. Every moment of that film was an intensely personal story. It's the same reason "First Contact" is, by a very wide margin, the only good TNG film -- because it's the story of Picard's failure to truly come terms with what the Borg had done to him and the consequences resulting from that. When Trek is about *people* it excels. When it tries to ape other franchises in bombast and spectacle, it falls far short of what it should be.

That is a really smart observation which is also why the best parts are quite often the "small" personal interactions that happen before or after the oh-so-important battle or flight from danger or what-have-you MacGuffin.