All Star Trek Discussion Thread ("Into Darkness" trailer released)

[MetalJunkie]

Voyage Home is one of my personal favorites.

Are you sure it isn't time for a colorful metaphor?

[The King in Crimson]

Voyage Home is one of my personal favorites.

Are you sure it isn't time for a colorful metaphor?

Double Dumb Ass On You!

[Orbert]

What does it mean... "exact change"?

[El Barto]

I think he did a little too much LDS.

[chknptpie]

I think he did a little too much LDS.

Who's Mormon?

[Adami]

I'm looking for the nuclear wesells.

[Cool Chris]

My new supervisor is from Serbia and pronouces 'V' as a 'W'. It is awesome!

As long as we are talking original crew movies, what are everyone's thoughts on TMP?

[Adami]

My new supervisor is from Serbia and pronouces 'V' as a 'W'. It is awesome!

As long as we are talking original crew movies, what are everyone's thoughts on TMP?

It's not..............the worst movie ever or anything. But that's the best thing I can say about it.

[BlobVanDam]

I was told not to watch it because it's terrible.
With those expectations, it was slightly better than I expected.


But that's the best thing I can say about it.

[Orbert]

TMP was excellent for its time.  Star Trek was barely more than a cult TV show some fifteen years prior, and giving it the big-screen treatment was unheard-of.  Nowadays it's done all the time, often to TV shows that are far less worthy, but in the 70's this was most definitely not the case.

And it was a true big-screen treatment.  People marvelled at those long pans across the Enterprise hull, because we'd never seen it like that before.  Not up close, not with that much detail.  The movie gets slammed today because it takes a while to unfold and spends too much time on those beauty shots and cheesy special effects, but believe me, I was there; people ate it up at the time.  Star Trek fans creamed their pants multiple times, right there in the theater, before it was over.  Then they went out, bought another ticket, and watched it again.

One legitimate gripe is that there isn't much action.  That's why STII: The Wrath of Khan made sure to amp it up.  But TMP kicked off the movie series, and that series would not have continued if TMP had flopped.

[Adami]

I think the main issue with TMP is that it seemed like it was trying really hard to be 2001 and just lacking the substance or Kubrick that 2001 had.

[El Barto]

Once they expanded it so that the plot actually made sense, I thought it was fine.  The original theatrical release left out quite a bit about V'ger and that bald chick, leaving much of the story quite nonsensical.  In fact, the bald chick was probably the biggest problem with the thing, even after the expanded version explained a bit more about her. 

[Adami]

Once they expanded it so that the plot actually made sense, I thought it was fine.  The original theatrical release left out quite a bit about V'ger and that bald chick, leaving much of the story quite nonsensical.  In fact, the bald chick was probably the biggest problem with the thing, even after the expanded version explained a bit more about her.

Why do you hate bald people? And is this why you dislike TNG so much?

[BlobVanDam]

Once they expanded it so that the plot actually made sense, I thought it was fine.  The original theatrical release left out quite a bit about V'ger and that bald chick, leaving much of the story quite nonsensical.  In fact, the bald chick was probably the biggest problem with the thing, even after the expanded version explained a bit more about her. 

Glad I skipped right to the director's cut then. The story made sense to me, it was just slow paced and kind of boring. But I love ST 2,3,4 and 6, so it's not just because of lack of "action".
(I'm not including TNG movies here, but I like those too)

[Adami]

Star Trek has always needed a good mixture of action, humor and drama. However beyond those, it always needs characters that make you invested in the story. In TMP I couldn't find any action, any humor, any real drama or any concern for the characters.

[El Barto]

Once they expanded it so that the plot actually made sense, I thought it was fine.  The original theatrical release left out quite a bit about V'ger and that bald chick, leaving much of the story quite nonsensical.  In fact, the bald chick was probably the biggest problem with the thing, even after the expanded version explained a bit more about her.

Why do you hate bald people? And is this why you dislike TNG so much?

Nothing against bald people in general (slowly joining their ranks, in fact).  I'm not into bald women, though.  Long hair on chicks--FTW. 

And Picard was one of the few characters on TNG I liked.  He was certainly no Kirk, but at least he had some depth.  Still,  my dislike of TNG isn't based on individual characters so much as the collective group.

[Orbert]

Star Trek has always needed a good mixture of action, humor and drama. However beyond those, it always needs characters that make you invested in the story. In TMP I couldn't find any action, any humor, any real drama or any concern for the characters.

They had to spend a certain amount of time re-introducing each character (which I actually liked) and explaining what they'd been doing for 15 years.  I still think that could've worked if they'd stuck with just the original cast.  It was the introduction of two new characters, the importance placed on them, and us having no reason to give a shit about them, that was the problem.

Spock's struggle to find his "humanity" and how it paralleled that of V'ger should have been the focus.  A secondary plot with another main character would've been fine.  But the crap with Decker and Ilia did nothing for me.  The "new" Klingons were cool, but they were gone in the first five minutes.  The action component could've been satisfied by them showing up later and trying to intercept the Enterprise or something.  Sure, it would've been a pointless battle literally to satisfy the action quota, but it could've worked.

[El Barto]

Lack of action didn't trouble me at all.  Spock in the jetpack was pretty dull, though.  As for the new characters,  like I already said,  I didn't care for the bald chick.  The Decker story was a good addition, though.  A foil for Kirk and a source of tension when Spock wasn't there to annoy McCoy.

[Orbert]

Ha ha, okay I can see that.

[Cool Chris]

Star Trek has always needed a good mixture of action, humor and drama. However beyond those, it always needs characters that make you invested in the story. In TMP I couldn't find any action, any humor, any real drama or any concern for the characters.

That's as good of a synopsis as I can think of. The original story was conceived by Roddenberry, who at that time seemed more in to larger abstract issues, like our relationship with God, are search for meaning, and lost track of some of those things Adami mentioned that made Trek great. But he was always an idea man, not a good screenwriter (Hi, George Lucas). Gene Coon and the other TV writers helped flesh out the characters and subtexts that TMP was lacking.

And they were totally under the gun with filming and special effects that the editing suffered.

[yorost]

Wait, what, people hated that episode?

Ever get caught off guard when you find out common opinions of an episode?  A couple from DS9 I didn't realize were apparently hated.

Prodigal Daughter: I thought it was a highlight of season 7, what was wrong with it?  Mild convolution of a connection between O'brien and Ezri Dax, but that doesn't wreck an episode.

The Storyteller:  I don't recall hating this episode when it first aired, I think I originally thought of it as somewhat likable.  The premise was always hard to buy, but that's the unfortunate side effect of doing adaptations of other stories.  Going back, though, it's one of the season 1 episodes I really like to watch.  Seeing O'brien and Bashir early on is hilarious in the context of the entire show.  Big retroactive bump in any rating I would do of it, but I guess others don't agree.

[AndyDT]

Once they expanded it so that the plot actually made sense, I thought it was fine.  The original theatrical release left out quite a bit about V'ger and that bald chick, leaving much of the story quite nonsensical.  In fact, the bald chick was probably the biggest problem with the thing, even after the expanded version explained a bit more about her. 

Glad I skipped right to the director's cut then. The story made sense to me, it was just slow paced and kind of boring. But I love ST 2,3,4 and 6, so it's not just because of lack of "action".
(I'm not including TNG movies here, but I like those too)

The god of Sha-ka-ree would never say that.

[Orbert]

I must be the only one who doesn't hate on Star Trek V: The Search for God, or Someone Claiming to Be Him.

The special effects were bad.  I don't care.  It's the story that matters, and I thought the return to a story which was more like an extended TOS episode was great after all the epic-craziness.  It starts with a Vulcan, a full-blooded Vulcan, laughing his ass off.  We get more Spock family history, and even some other family histories.  We get Kirk being a badass and standing toe-to-toe (kinda) with a being of obviously great power because, dammit, whoever or whatever it is is not what it claims to be!  Don't lie to Kirk and tell him you need his ship.  "Why does God need a spaceship?" was a perfectly logical question, and people thought it was stupid that he asked it.  Why?

STV isn't quite up there with II-III-IV, but I'd watch it before sitting through TMP, VI, or Generations again.

[Cool Chris]

I must be the only one who doesn't hate on Star Trek V: The Search for God, or Someone Claiming to Be Him.

I was going to bring up ST:V. I thought it had some good scenes, but ultimately feel short of the ‘adventure’ that a Trek film should have; makes me feel maybe it would have been a better idea for a TV episode than a big screen film. The scene where Sybok shows McCoy and Spock their pain is a top Trek moment. You can see them feel their pain, and yet they tell Sybok they are standing with their captain. Awesome.   

Otherwise, I recall very little from that film. Probably means there wasn’t much worth remembering. 


Orbert, I am a big fan of VI, I am curious why you'd rank it below V, as that seems to be a minority opinion among fans and critics.

[El Barto]

Orbert, I am a big fan of VI, I am curious why you'd rank it below V, as that seems to be a minority opinion among fans and critics.

Indeed.  This is a position I don't think I've ever heard before.

[Orbert]

Ah, I thought that what I said might be interpreted that way.  And looking at it now, I can see why.  I wouldn't rank V over VI.  It's just that everyone hates V, so they never show it on TV or cable, whereas I've seen VI many, many times.  I'd rather see V again sometime than watch VI for the 20th time.  Or TMP for the 10th time.  That's what I meant.  I don't consider V superior to VI, I just don't rank it as far below VI as everyone else seems to.

As I mentioned, one of the things that you consider a shortcoming is something I consider a nice change of pace.  It doesn't have the broad epic scale that the other films do; it feels more like an extended TV episode.  But after the unofficial II-III-IV trilogy, I liked that it went a different direction and is basically a standalone story. 

And I like the story told in V.  Most of us have something in our past that we will never escape, and it hangs over us.  Maybe we don't think of it every day, but every once in a while, if we had to honestly ask ourselves "Am I happy?  Completely, 100% happy?" the answer would be "No" because of that one thing.  What if someone could take that away?  What would that be worth?  And what if someone told you that God is real, that he's actually met Him and talked with Him, just as the prophets of old did?  And what if he told you that he'd actually take you to see Him?  Now how much would you pay?  You've got a starship?  Even better, let's go!

I guess it's because the story in V resonates with me personally.  I dig it.  And I like that it's more of a thinker than an action movie.  Again, the TV series mixed things up, but the movies all seem to need to be huge and action-packed.  I don't see that as necessarily required.  V is a thinker, maybe in a similar way that TMP is a thinker, and I'm okay with that.

[hefdaddy42]

I agree with everything Orbert said about V.

[The King in Crimson]

Yeah, I like V too.

I will fully agree with anyone that says it's not a good movie, but it has a very neat concept and a sense of fun about it that makes it hard to not like. It's not exactly a B-Movie, but it's campy and it doesn't quite take itself 100% seriously. Plus, it's imminently quotable.

Yeah, I'd definitely rather watch V than TMP again and maybe even III too.

[Mr. Beale]

Guess what's coming to blu-ray next year?

https://www.movieweb.com/news/star-trek-the-next-generation-blu-ray-trailer

Never owned the DVDs so I may consider picking these up

[Orbert]

The big holdup with getting TNG to HD has always been that the special effects (phasers, etc.) were all done post-production at standard def and that's what they have on video tape.  Going back to the original film elements and transferring to HD was not a big deal, but re-rendering all the effects represented a huge undertaking.  Apparently Paramount has decided to dive into it.

My guess is that they'll release this "teaser" to test the waters.  If sales are good enough, they'll go ahead and do the first season, then sales of each season will fund the work on subsequent seasons, or something like that.  If at some point they don't make their money back or pull in enough to keep going, they'll stop.  That would suck.  I'd hate to get a few seasons into it, then they stop producing them (it has happened to some shows), especially since most of the really good stuff came later.

[BlobVanDam]

I don't think they'll stop unless it really tanks. This undertaking is kind of necessary for the continued syndication of the show, so it's a long term investment. But I think you're spot on that this is testing the waters before they get too far into it. I can't wait to see how it turns out.

[Orbert]

As long as they don't add CGI alien creatures wandering around in the background, or have Worf shoot second.

[BlobVanDam]

As long as they don't add CGI alien creatures wandering around in the background, or have Worf shoot second.

Considering the huge undertaking it is just to rescan and composite the entire 7 seasons from scratch, I'm not expecting a lot of extra unnecessary stuff, because it's only going to add to the cost/time factor. TNG did have a few creatures/beings that were already CG, and those will have to be redone, but I don't think we'll see much changed with the live action stuff. I would expect redone planet shots and maybe some spaceships, but I actually wouldn't be surprised if this ends up being more faithful than TOS-R.

[Orbert]

Totally agree.  I was making a bad joke/reference to Lucas.  I expect much more from Paramount.

[BlobVanDam]

Don't worry, I got the reference, I figured it was still a legitimate concern considering that TOS got some fairly big changes. They probably don't have the budget to digitally replace Wesley Crusher with someone else like we'd all hoped anyway.