This movies is great, don't believe bad ratings
watch it now. rating is 7 at least
shareWatch the Theatrical version on Blu Ray in MHO.
share
MovieChat Forums > Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979) Discussion > This movies is great, don't believe bad ...
I've always thought TMP is third best of the movies. 4 and 5 are the worst.
sharei like 4 - just purecomedy
sharei like 4 - just pure comedy
shareI've always thought TMP is third best of the movies. 4 and 5 are the worst.
That's curious. Usually don't see 4 listed among the worst. Nothing wrong with it, as it is of course an opinion. I loved The Voyage Home. Star Trek is, more than anything, great because of its great characters. Star Trek IV had some of the best, and most enduring character interactions in the franchise's history. I think Leonard Nimoy especially gave his best performance (directing himself) in that one. Plus the whole cast got a shot at a more light-hearted, comedic setting and story. Every one of them nailed it.
I agree with the OP in that TMP is a fine film, with many strengths and merits. It's critical flaw is in pacing. It simply takes too long to tell its story. It starts off slow, and doesn't really feel like the Star Trek I know. But the final act is fantastic, and it ends incredibly well. The ending makes the whole thing worthwhile, and it sets up the TOS crew film series beautifully. share
Watching it again now. It gets better every time. I hated it when I was 5. By the time I rated it on imdb I gave it a 7. I'm changing it to an 8 now.
shareTheatrical: 5
Directors Cut: 8
That's how i will rate them, because that Directors Cut version from Robert Wise, is a whole lot better than the theatrical version.
Shortened scenes, added scenes, re-edited scenes and improved special effects, that improved the movie.
They just need to figure out turning Directors in to HD, with out degrading the CGI, which only was done in SD, because some idiot at Paramount did not consider it necessary to create them in HD for an eventual Blu-ray release.
I don't think I've even seen the "Director's Cut". Just the theatrical cut and the VHS version.
I never had a problem with the editing aside from the insanely long exterior shots of the the new Enterprise when it was revealed. Whose idea was that!?
Whose idea was that!?
Gene Roddenberry's and Doug Trumbull's, most likely. The reveal was a huge deal because of the vessel refit and was a fitting introduction to the shiny, cinematic U.S.S. Enterprise. For anyone at that time who was a Trek fan, the refit and re-introduction represented a new beginning for the franchise and for the characters. Also, that whole sequence was about Scotty bemusedly feeding Kirk's ego. He knew what Enterprise meant to Kirk and he drew the shuttle ride out as much as he could.
Not a jab or anything but what I find curious is that, having seen the other cuts of the film, you find the initial Enterprise reveal sequence to be "insanely long," yet the prolonged V'ger interior sequence(s) and reaction shots are OK? In the Director's Cut, the V'Ger reaction shots and that entire trip through the cloud have been pared down a good bit. There are noticeable cuts in Jerry Goldsmith's score during this editing which kind of stick out, if you're familiar with it.
-Rod share
Unlike some of the later series, The Enterprise in TOS was almost a character herself. I had no problem with the extended introduction.
It is rather amazing that people seem to have all kinds of problems over what amounts to about 12 minutes of film (Enterprise, Cloud, V'Ger). Probably explains why my kid said that about half the kids fell asleep during a viewing of Casablanca in his film class.
20 Fake CJs Ignored (and counting)
My problem is only with the long shots of the Enterprise. Not the cloud or V'Ger.
The Enterprise reveal is simply insane. They drag it out forever and then when they finally reach the front of the ship, they turn around and give you more shots of it as they go back past it again in the opposite direction. There's paced, and there's slow, and then there's glacial. And then there's "Mountain Climbing" from MST3k.
And finally there is this.
And then there's "Mountain Climbing" from MST3k.
Yeah, it is kinda Mountain Climbing-y. LOL
-Rod share
Blu-ray was not around until 2006. Many studios were not worried about the HD home theater market in 2001 (yes, many idiots) - HDTV sets had not taken over yet. Many studios were still releasing major widescreen movies on DVD in 4:3 letterbox (non-anamorphic), even in the Blu-ray era! I'm sure there were more than a few ticked off people that payed a high price for their 16:9 HDTV that found most of their DVD collection looked better on their old TV (myself included). Luckily, this director's cut was released anamorphic (16:9) on DVD in 2001, so a player with good up conversion will make the movie look pretty decent.
Oh yeah, I prefer the theatrical version. I don't have any problems with the pacing or effects...I'm just not a big fan of taking a 20+ year old film and making changes, then call it better - it never is, it can't be IMO. Of course having both versions available on Blu-ray would be ideal.
It is a good film, but you have to have the temperament to enjoy it. A lot of folks can't deal with the pacing. But if you can sit down and enjoy older films, then this will do well for you.
On top of the pacing, I think the color palate has hurt it a bit. Most of the film is set on the Enterprise, and the sets were pretty bland. The whole of the Enterprise sets got a paint job before Wrath of Khan, and it was an improvement. Add in the really bland pale colored pajama uniforms, and the whole thing has a bland feel, and very dated looking as well.
So it's a slower movie, and it just looks physically bland. I can see why many don't care for it.
I saw it opening week and didn't think it was that great. In fact I thought it was lacking in a few departments. It's an "okay" film for what it is, but it could have been so much more, and better too.
share