Star Trek: The Motion Picture Movie
| Resolution | Size | Download | ||
|
1280x544 | 4422.37 MiB | 720p | |
|
720x304 | 1403.24 MiB | hidivx | |
|
480x202 | 629.07 MiB | ipod | |
Storyline
TAGLINES
The human adventure is just beginning
There is no comparison
Not owning it would be illogical (DVD release)
A strange cloud descends upon Klingon vessels and eradicates them with an energy bolt. The Epsilon IX space station alerts the Federation, but they too are wiped out by the entity. The starship assigned to the case is, what else, the NCC-1701. That would be the registration number for the U.S.S. Enterprise, which has been rebuilt. Thus, the entire original crew you knew from the TV show returns. Although they are prepared to face the entity, nothing will prepare them for the ride to come. The film asks the question Paul Gauguin asks in a painting bearing this name: "Where do [I] come from? What [am I]? Where [am I] going?" Trekkers, note the appearance of Will Decker, the son of Matt Decker, who killed himself in the TV episode, "The Doomsday Machine". The film can be summed up in a single word: beautiful.
| William Shatner | Admiral James T. Kirk |
| Leonard Nimoy | Mr. Spock |
| DeForest Kelley | Dr. Leonard 'Bones' McCoy |
| James Doohan | Cmdr. Montgomery 'Scotty' Scott |
| George Takei | Lt. Cmdr. Hikaru Sulu |
| Majel Barrett | Dr. Christine Chapel |
| Walter Koenig | Lt. Pavel Chekov |
| Nichelle Nichols | Lt. Cmdr. Uhura |
| Persis Khambatta | Lt. Ilia |
| Stephen Collins | Cmdr. Willard Decker |
| Grace Lee Whitney | CPO Janice Rand |
| Mark Lenard | Klingon Captain |
| Billy Van Zandt | Alien Boy |
| Roger Aaron Brown | Epsilon Technician |
| Gary Faga | Airlock Technician |
| Robert Wise |
6.20 out of 10 (19213 votes)
Visitor Reviews
Fortunately, the box office success of this movie set the stage for much better sequels which followed it!
posted on 12 Aug 2009This movie no doubt came about as the result of a huge following for the original television series which ran for a couple of years in the mid 1960's (1966 and 1967 I believe). The original tv series was oddly fascinating and the main characters on the series, Captain Kirk and Dr. Spock, became household names. Over a decade after the demise of the tv series it was revived as a major motion picture and all of the principal cast was brought back to reprise their roles. The crew is brought back together aboard the U.S.S. Enterprise when it is needed for a mission to save the planet earth from a 'cloud' of 'energy' headed on a direct course for the earth. Time is running out. The U.S.S. Enterprise seems to be earth's only hope. Will the star ship and her crew be able to save the earth? Will the crew and ship perish in the process?
Those are the elements of suspense in this movie.The acting is okay and the special effects are okay and the directing is okay in this film. Unfortunately, the pace of the story is extremely slow.
"Star Trek: The Motion Picture" lacks action, humor, real suspense and even character development. It is stated in the documentary that this movie was made under the pressure of a deadline which was very challenging. Well, it shows! Additional editing and work on making the film more stimulating would have been wise choice.For "Trekkies" and buffs of science fiction movies, "Star Trek" does have some nice touches, and they will no doubt be delighted to see the original cast back together again. All others beware! Fortunately, this box office success of this movie set the foundation for much better sequels which came after it. I give this movie a 7/10.
The only film that was truly like the series.....yet had some flaws.
posted on 03 Aug 2009I've talked before about the edit job on this movie so I won't rehash that. This film needed more action and the straight to video "expanded version" is far superior to the theatrical release. Due to the edit job on the theatrical version, much of the explanation of what V'GER was and where it came from was left on the cutting room floor. I remember coming out of this movie with my dad back in 1979, confused and slightly disappointed.....I was expecting more. Then, I saw the straight to video version and this was much, much, better. I wonder if Paramount has ever considered re-editing this film and re-releasing it on home video with all of the still unseen footage restored...something to consider. (or at the very least restore the lost footage to a DVD release) This film (out of all of them) was the most like the tv series. I like the fact that it wasn't politically correct like THE NEXT GENERATION (something that took me two years to get used to back when int started in 1987). Another thing that helped this film was that it was a "event" movie. It had been ten years since the tv series ended, so there was a large audience out there to see this movie. However, not everyone who saw it was happy with the finished product. Many fans were disappointed with the difference with what they were expecting and what they got....once again refer back to that edit job! This film (in it's video incarnation) is not that bad.
An excellent addition to the Star Trek canon.
posted on 19 Jul 20091979 was a tough year to be a sci-fi film. The recent memory of films like 'Star Wars,' '2001,' and competition from the genre re-defining 'Alien' the same year were all going to raise certain expectations of what 'Star Trek: The Motion Picture' could or should have been. Consider also that there was great emotional baggage where this project was concerned. Fans of the original series had created a huge set of expectations that were going to make this project both eagerly anticipated and highly scrutinized.'ST:TMP' is largely successful. It has two great and highly memorable set pieces. The first is early in the film and involves an incident with the transporter. The second comes near the end of the film when the true identity of V'Ger is learned. These alone would make the film worth watching but the camaraderie of the crew, the philosophical depth of the screen play and the excellent and steady hand of Robert Wise make this film a welcome addition to the Star trek canon.Thematically the film looks at something very basic and innate. It asks: "Is this all that I am?" Where does the quest for knowledge lead? What purpose is there when I answered all the questions I needed to ask? What next? 'ST:TMP' borders precariously between hopeful existence and complete and total nihilism. If there aren't answers to these questions, then what is there?There are flaws. Many criticize the length of the film but I think that the pacing is just right for the most part. It is a meditative and intelligent film and the questions that it asks need a little time to percolate and mix with the grey matter between your ears. Robert Wise was a graduate of the Val Lewton school of film-making: taut direction, tension in steady crescendo and an unseen antagonist with a big payoff. Those early lessons pay off well in this film. It may actually have been to his advantage that he wasn't a passionate fan of the original. He was able to come to the project and approach it with a cool, dispassionate eye. Things unnecessary to the plot were eliminated so that only the core of the story would be addressed. Unfortunately one thing that this eliminates is the heart and the comedy of the original series. If I missed any one thing greatly in this movie, I regret the loss of the comedy that would be restored in later films. My only other minor objection was the style of the costuming -- mercifully aborted for the subsequent films in the series.Great Oscar-worthy score, complex fun, and a welcome return to the series. Essential viewing for fans of the series and a good introduction for those who are new to the Star Trek universe.
Snooze Trek: The Motionless Picture
posted on 04 Jul 2009I love Star Trek. Now, I'm a bigger fan of The Next Generation than I am of The Original Series. But you can't give birth to greatness without a parent to release you from their womb. But this film, oh I have no love for this film. Two reasons, reasons many others have picked up on but bear repeating.1. This film is long and boring. Many times there was no action or dialogue, just people staring at a screen with some poor graphics that would have fit better in a class on fractals with some hippie music playing. The pacing is poorly done. The entire first half of the film is worthless, since the plot is all in the second half. I'm willing to bet you could even edit this down into a 45-minute episode and avoid putting it in the theater altogether.2. It's a bad science fiction film, but an even worse Star Trek film. If this was some other crew, I'd say it's just some movie about people in space looking to stop a machine from reaching Earth. That's a pretty basic plot. A poorly done one in this case, but easy enough to do.It's a worse Star Trek movie because the characters served no purpose. Most of the other movies have some development of the characters, we see them age and learn more about them. Not here. We didn't need Spock, Kirk or Scotty. Yeah, there's some vague reference to a ritual Spock went through, but it's not really important to the plot and is never really explored. I care about the characters but left with nothing gained here. We learned Spcok is smart and Kirk loves the Enterprise. What shockers!! If you're a Trekkie, you've already seen this film. If you're not, don't let this be your introduction to the series or you maybe never give it a second chance.
Pure Star Trek but very cerebral.
posted on 26 May 2009This film has been underrated. It is not a bad movie you just have to understand a few things about it. This movie updated Star Trek into the late 70's. With a refitted Enterprise and new sights such as San Francisco in the 23rd century not to mention the special effects. We had a chance to see our friends again after too long an absence and we had to catch up. I had nothing but pride and astonishment when we got to flyby the refitted Enterprise something we could never do before. She is a beautiful jewel, our ship and she deserved to be shown off. From beginning to end this film was Star Trek. But if you wanted a shootem up this wasnt it. This was much like the tale of Pinochio but on a cosmic scale. We humans are the "creator" that V'ger was searching for. I think Spock and Vger both grow here in their brief contact with each other. A few things to nitpick over. Some of the SFX were problematic but a lot of this will be fixed in the DVD edition coming out next year. The other thing is that the bridge is way too quiet. There is little background chatter. Again this may be fixed in the DVD either way that is minor. Take these simple things into account and you will enjoy this movie. If you want action in a star trek film check out Star Trek II The Wrath of Khan. You wont be disappointed either way.
"Beam me up,Scotty." * * *
posted on 26 May 2009"Star Trek:The Motion Picture-The Director's Edition" is an improvement over the original released back in 1979.It's technical wizardry and effects have been finally completed via CGI and digital effects.This is a pretty good film although not as good as it's sequels.The only sequel it topped was "Star Trek V:The Final Frontier" which had to be in my honest opinion not as well made as the rest.The film came to life on the big screen on December 7,1979 reunting the cast from the "Star Trek" television series from the mid to late 1960s.When the film was released,it would pave the way for television shows being translated to the big screen.William Shatner,Leonard Nimoy,Deforest Kelley and the rest of the crew return to the USS Enterprise to save Earth from a mysterious vessel who wants to find it's creator.The film can be slow at certain times but it's surrounded by visuals and some humor that makes it very easy to sit through.Apart from "Star Wars",you really shouldn't expect loud fast explosive effects and fast speeding spaceships followed by a loud score penetrating the action.This film is more on the quiet more relaxed fantasy type.Director Robert Wise and his crew had to race against time to complete the film's visual effects which was nominated for an Academy Award.("Alien" won the award).I have to say that watching this film wasn't an exciting experience.It was pretty amazing to watch and some of the effects are outdated but at the same time impressive to view.The DVD version is PG rated while the 1979 version is G rated."Star Trek:The Motion Picture-The Director's Edition" is actually the finished version of the film.The film was never finished when released back in 1979.The DVD version is Robert Wise' version.The way he intended it to be shown.
It Has Great Potential, but Gets Too Involved in Showing Off.
posted on 30 Mar 2009Boring: Uninteresting and tiresome; dull. Inducing discontent and mental weariness. Implies dullness that causes listlessness and lack of interest. –paraphrased from The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, circa 1969.Protracted: drawn out or lengthened in time; prolonged. -paraphrased from the same dictionary."Star Trek: The Motion(less) Picture" is directed by four time Oscar winner and directing legend Robert Wise. Wise's credits include "The Sound of Music," "The West Side Story," "The Day the Earth Stood Still," and "Citizen Kane," where he served as editor. I cannot fully appreciate "The Sound of Music" and "The West Side Story" since musicals about gangs or governesses (women employed to train or educate the children of a private household) are not my cup of tea, but "Star Trek" is a different matter. It is pretty surprising that a director of his caliber dropped the ball.The Plot: An enormous energy cloud literally wipes away three Klingon Battle Cruisers and a nearby Starfleet Space Station detects the cloud on a direct course towards Earth. The USS Enterprise is the only Federation vessel available to intercept the cloud. Admiral Kirk (William Shatner), now with a desk job, persuades Starfleet to give him command of the Enterprise, an action that troubles her commander, Captain Decker (Stephen Collins). Uhura (Nichelle Nichols), Checkov (Walter Koenig), Scotty (James Doohan), Dr. McCoy (DeForest Kelley) and the rest of the Enterprise crew depart in the newly refit craft to meet the cloud and discern its purpose. Joining them is Lt. Ilia (Persis Khambatta, one of the most beautiful women who ever lived), a Deltan whom once dated Decker. That is all good, but it should not take 39 minutes to set up that much of the story.I often wish directors would give me a few more seconds to gaze at their beautiful sets, aerial shots, and visual effects; but even I know that there is a point when it goes too far. Consider for example the special effects scene where a shuttle approaches the Enterprise. After a brief conversation, there is no speaking for nearly five minutes of special effects shots. Later, the Enterprise penetrates the cloud and enters the massive ship inside it. Although there is some dialogue, the sequence lasts nearly 17 minutes, including a part where a probe of energy enters the bridge. Yes, I timed it.The being inside the cloud is V'Ger, a purely logical mind. Spock can sense V'Ger from his home on the planet Vulcan, and believes that it holds the answers he desires. As it turns out, Spock's connection with V'Ger's thoughts will actually provide V'Ger with what it is longing for."Star Trek: The Motion Picture" is not "Star Wars." It is not about action or good vs. evil, but rather the questions V'Ger is asking: "Is this all that I am? Is there nothing more?" While those questions are explored in a meaningful way, it takes far, far too long. I typically enjoy exploration of intelligent issues. I would have been more receptive to the philosophical drama if the dead space leading up to it had been trimmed. Without action, the story needs to advance efficiently, and while the best parts are at the end, I am impatient and uncomfortable by the time it finally gets to the point.On the positive end, Spock's sensory abilities work on a level I have only otherwise seen in the TV series episode "The Devil in the Dark." Indeed, without them the story would not be possible. V'Ger is full of questions, but "simple feeling is beyond its comprehension." The best scene comes when Spock acknowledges his human half and weeps for V'Ger, admitting, "Logic and knowledge are not enough." James Berardinelli mentions in his review of the Director's Edition that Paramount planned to release it into theaters in the event of a 2002 Actor's Strike. If the potential strike happens this year, I hope they do. Despite the movie's failure to earn my recommendation, I would go see it. The special effects are far superior to any of the original Star Wars films. I have only seen the Director's Edition, where the visuals are completed. Note that the word used is completed, not updated. Too much time is spent showing them, but they are definitely inventive and spectacular. The dancing colors of the warp engine, the detail of the models, and the beaming graphic, a blue tube containing sparkles and white energy flowers in the shape of a body, are far superior to any of the other movies featuring the original crew. I would never miss an opportunity to see them on the large screen.It is sad that such a good story is buried in protracted and boring narration. While it may not be acceptable to mainstream viewers, there is enough meat to satisfy me were it not drowned in the pomp and circumstance. Its delivery botched, and that is a pity.
Star Trek: The Motionless Picture
posted on 08 Jan 2009People call this movie the Motionless Picture for a reason. It's because it really doesn't GO anywhere. It's long an laborious to watch, and introduces new characters we care NOTHING about. I didn't even think the special effects were all that great. As for the acting, it was just awful. It was just one expensive sci-fi piece of trash.
She Cannah Take nemore, Captain!!
posted on 05 Jan 2009Who hasn't heard of Star Trek? Oi, you at the back! I know you've seen it! Fans of Star Trek have long held this Trek adventure as underrated. Yes the original version might have been rushed and yes, it might not have made any sense whatsoever but the Directors version is SO much better. The plot is still the same: Mysterious cloud heads toward earth. We humans don't know why. Only that it decimates three klingon ships and has a powerfield bigger than Uncle Festers gob! So, Kirk takes over the new Enterprise from a clearly cheesed off Deckard to go greet its new visitor. Now, I've seen the two versions back to back. And I have to say, Robert Wise really redeemed himself on this. While I thought the original version was good, this version is SOOOOOO much better. Its a shame that the commentary seems to have been wrote down and recorded separately instead of together as it seemed informative but was a tad boring. But if you get the chance to watch the new version, don't pass it by thinking "Huh, the original was rubbish". Give it a go. Go on, you know you want to!!!!
IT REALLY IS A GOOD MOVIE
posted on 30 Dec 2008Star Trek the motion picture is a really good movie, if you look beyond the guns and fighting. Its a good movie in its own sense, seeing that that was the only movie of the series that was a "exploration" movie. V'ger was a good alien, but was overshadowed by "the new refitted enterprise". That movie was the most expensive movie of 1979 and it proved it with the special effects. Did you know that the earth orbiting station was re-used as regula 1 in the wrath of khan? One major downfall of that movie was the "new series" that was supposed to launch a new station on tv as well. "We all create god in our own image." Those were Deckers words, which is the linking to the abandoned tv pilot. The T.V pilot was the only thing that really damaged that movie. I mean it still made 100 million................
The Director's Edition is Bob Wise's definitive vision of Star Trek: The Motion Picture. And what a vision!
posted on 03 Dec 2008This DVD version has improved and restored and made Star Trek: TMP a pleasure to watch rather than a chore. You're less inclined to hit fast-forward in those lengthy scenes. This movie will resonate well with mature-age viewers because the story is not what you would expect from today's action packed cinema. I appreciated the movie more as I got older. Bob Wise explains on the DVD that production was extremely rushed and had no time to preview the film with an audience that would now after 20 years, tell him to tighten the opticals and emphasize characters. This is precisely what he has done in the DVD version and its magnificent.Aesthetically, the DVD version shows you the best Star Trek: The Motion Picture can possibly look. Film is sharper; color is dead on however there is still a lot of film grain present unfortunately. My guess is they cleaned the original negative up as much as they could but it had deteriorated so much in storage, or was badly preserved. Certainly looks better than my bad pan/scanned VHS copy.The DVD truly shines with its brand new sound mix. This isn't your standard stereo to 5.1 DVD conversions like they are doing for movies pre 5.1; they have gutted it up and added new stuff. The original release was so rushed that very little in terms of ambient sound and special effects audio elements were done on the sound mix amongst other production elements. For this DVD they went back to the original audiotapes and remixed them digitally.Goldsmith's score sounded fantastic when it originally came out now sounds even better on the DVD version. It's tremendous, you will hear what your suppose to hear now with the added advantage of 5.1 surround sound. Goldsmith score truly has a chance to soar now by stretching into a clean high fidelity 5.1 environment rather than being squeezed onto a mono or stereo track. Bass kicks in often especially on big musical cues. You'll hear nifty panning and those surrounds and subwoofer will definitely get a workout. In instances they isolate different parts of the orchestra through different speakers, mainly the bass and percussion.Most onstage dialog was re-recorded afterwards because of onstage noise due to mechanical devices etc; this is now common practice in the industry. The result is cleaner dialog that comes prominently out of your center speaker. The dialog audio is good, but on occasion it shows a mild muffled and tinny quality probably due to age of material or analog technology of the time, nevertheless I guarantee you, the average viewer will like it, I'm just being picky. In short the movie will sound almost as good as if the movie was made recently.Not only having rebuilt the original audio they have put in more surround elements, like ambient bridge noises and computer voices. Not sure why they changed the `Intruder Alert' voice, I don't mind but I guess it was because they rushed the sound mix in the 70's and chose that voice as a last minute thing. There are other elements that have been changed, for the better I would say.The DVD contents have been remastered with Wise's overseeing. There are too many subtleties to comment on so shall briefly discuss a few. Before opening credits you are treated to Goldsmiths V'ger/Love theme, a nice touch. Then you hear the bombastic Star Trek Theme. Newly done credits over moving starfield.First main new special effect is the Vulcan landscape, tilting from sky to the surface. Then cuts to a new matte painting of the beautiful orange sky. Originally Spock shields his eyes and in the reversal, not only is there no sun there is little sky visible. The new matte painting now fits in nicely.San Francisco sequence has been redone, 3 new matte paintings that better show the futurized city, Golden Gate Bridge and a bigger shuttlebay.When they get into V'Ger they encounter a weapon heading towards them that is suppose to dissipate, in the original it simply disappears instantly, now we see a new visual that shows it dissipating just before it hits the ship.Later we see a probe heading towards the ship on the viewscreen and then through some hokey editing it appears on the bridge. This has been replaced with an improved FX shot showing the approach of the entity on an exterior shot.A new 'Wing Walk' sequence. Breathtaking new CGI's that show the away-team walk from the hull to the V'Ger stage, some using the original live action shots. New FXs for the most part are based on original storyboards. They didn't go overboard with the effects which is good, Bob tells us that they made FX that they could only do in the 1970's, unlike Star Wars whom George Lucas went overkill on new FX when he redid his in the 1990's.There are trims, some rearrangements of shots for the better. E.g. Ilia/Deckers exchange of looks, Kirk's `Oh My God', his second `Viewer Off.' I suspect they had to edit within Jerry's score, or have to also edit Jerry's score to accommodate the new editing, if so they have done it very well, I couldn't notice. Some lengthy scenes remain in its entirety, e.g. flying up to the enterprise, I don't blame them for not trimming them, some are sentimental.The 2 DVD's come with a plethora of information. Audio commentaries by the director, 2 special effect's guys, an actor and the composer guide you through the director's edition. Text commentary by Okuda gives even more scene specific info. Disc 2 gives you most of the trims, deleted scenes from the TV and Theatrical release not used in the DVD version and an outtake of an abandoned visual effect. Plus 3 documentaries about the abandoned TV series ST:Phase II, Directors edition DVD and the movie itself. Plus advertisements/trailers plus storyboards.A MUST BUY FOR FANS! You'll Love It!
T'Was the Best of Star Trek, T'Was the Worst of Star Trek
posted on 24 Nov 2008Star Trek - The Motion Picture will probably be known as the most controversial of all the Star Trek movies that have or will ever be created. There seems to be little middle ground, you either like it or hate it. As a Star Trek fan (and proud of it!) I should have liked it, but did not. It came across as a re-telling of one of the animated episodes from the mid-seventies (it's true! I forget the episode's name, but it involved the same type of plot!). The characters seemed too wooden, too serious, even their uniforms had a "blaaaa" feeling to them. There were instances when the camera seemed to jiggle a little when switching scenes, giving the movie a "rush order" feeling. Of course, other Star Trek fans felt and still feel differently. Some look upon it as THE Star Trek film, the best ever created! All in all, I would have to say it was flawed. Like the first Dune movie (back in 1984-1985), it was aimed at a pre-existing fan base instead on John Q. Public. If you liked Dune, you liked the movie. If you didn't, forget it! LIVE LONG AND PROSER, FELLOW TREKKERS, TREKKIES, AND TREK WHAT-HAVE-YOUS!!!
ST FILM ONE: Epic Trekking of Momentous Proportions
posted on 06 Nov 2008When all's said and done - and many have said it - it was the pacing that made most of the episodes of the original series so watchable. Of course, they had great ideas written into the plots, but it was those moments of tension and action during each act which made them so exciting. For this, the first film follow-up to the sixties original series and the animated show of 1973, the filmmakers focused on an idea - and pacing be damned. I first viewed this film when it played in theaters in '79; I was in my late teens. Afterwards, I told the first person who asked me - how was it, that I nearly fell asleep in my seat. I was young; I'd seen all the episodes in reruns and had been dazzled by their energy. This film was like the anti-Trek to me at this point, a complete reversal of the things which made the original show so great. We are asked to worship the Enterprise when she first appears, waiting to be launched, but the sequence ends up alienating us - forcing us to wait as the story pulls to a dead stop - a major miscalculation to be repeated a few times. It was a somber, even depressing mood throughout the film's storyline, with most of the main characters (especially Kirk & Spock) quite grim, as if they'd just escaped a Romulan prison after 10 years of captivity (wait, Romulans do not take captives). Yes, there was a major threat to be faced, but there was not so much anxiety as just plain dark moods, for some reason.But, there were no Romulans in the film; there were Klingons, however, briefly: new brutish versions who encounter some vast mysterious entity out in space as the film begins. It's this initial sequence which immediately sets the tone and, unfortunately, the slow pace for the rest of the film. The lovingly-detailed warships move slowly towards their fate, as the camera pans over, under and all around. This really tests the patience of most in the audience and it's magnified later when the Enterprise slowly - oh, so slowly - drifts over the surface of the gargantuan vessel which we will soon come to know as V'Ger. The story takes place only two and a half years after the end of the 5-year mission of the original and animated series. Kirk is now an admiral in Starfleet Operations. Spock seeks to purge himself of all emotion on his homeworld of Vulcan. McCoy has grown a beard and gone into private practice. The rest (Scott, Uhura, Chekov, Sulu, now Dr.Chapel and even Rand) are working on the tail-end of the Enterprise's 2-year refit. The interior of the ship had changed quite a bit. So had the uniforms - an abrupt shift to an almost monochrome palette; it looked like everyone was caught in their leisure suits. All this is, by necessity, covered very briefly; after all, we need the time for that wormhole problem they encounter soon, when everything goes into slow motion. The scripted dialogue seems unrefined, uninspired: the grand reunions we wait for are anti-climactic, with Kirk constrained to comments of how he needs McCoy, then Spock. No, really? The new characters are Decker (son of "The Doomsday Machine" Decker), the young new captain of the ship who must stand down for Kirk in the one hint of melodrama, and the Deltan female who has taken a vow of celibacy. Hubba-hubba. So off they go, to save the Earth, which we finally see for the first time here in the 23rd century, specifically San Francisco (no real change in the skyline after 300 years? come now!). It's at about this point, watching the film a 2nd and 3rd time, that I realized this was a film made for 2nd and 3rd viewings. All the hubris attached to viewing it the 1st time is now almost gone. I could kind of let go of my nostalgic inclinations of worshiping a legendary sixties series and try to savor the elegance striven for by director Wise and the screenwriters. Our beloved characters have been transposed to a thoughtful awe-inspiring quest, seeking answers to hazy, almost mystical questions. They're surrounded by $40 million dollars of budget (in seventies dollars!), a grand expense which will probably never be matched in the Trek film series. On my 2nd viewing, I had the luxury of settling back and studying these characters, as they steadily but surely get closer to some metaphysical answers. Was this copying "2001:A Space Odyssey"? Perhaps, to some extent, but if one had to pick a science fiction film to copy...Overall, they had trouble getting into a certain groove again, perhaps reflected by the characters' years of separation, but I could even relax now as Scotty takes Kirk on that lengthy exterior tour of the starship - it can be cool, sure. Now, if I was coarse and flippant, I might point out that Kirk and his crew probably should have guessed half of those answers sooner, based on their experiences from an earlier adventure, titled "The Changeling." But, I won't do that. No, let's just leave it where it is, a grand if flawed experiment in magnificent Trekking, which may just gain more appreciation in time. At the conclusion, the Enterprise appeared to embark on its next 5-year mission, but we never saw it, except in comic books. No, we next see the Enterprise crew about a dozen years later(!) in "The Wrath of Khan." That was when Kirk really began to regret...but that's a story for another time.
"It only knows that it wants but like so many of us, does not know what."
posted on 31 Oct 2008A self-important and curiously cold adaptation of the T.V series that succeeds in promoting big-screen spectacle and a touch of the epic but misses the chance of recreate the warmth between the main cast that made them popular and secured the shows longevity post-cancellation.The problem with The Motion Picture is that Robert Wise, he who inflicted The Sound of Music and West Side Story on a generation, isn't sure what kind of movie it's supposed to be. It owes its existence to Star Wars but Wise would rather fashion something that looks more like 2001, so its all beauty shots and existential pontification rather than old fashioned intergalactic fun and games. That said, the pluses are the visual effects, which are occasionally tremendous and the score, Jerry Goldsmith at the top of his game - in either respect it can't be faulted but its an unforgivably boring two hours - humourless, slow and characterless so that Shatner, Nimoy and co. look and sound awkward, like a bunch of workers trying to stay civil following a massive argument. The production design makes the new Enterprise look sterile and pallid while the script is too self-consciously straight faced for its own good - these look like the cast we know but they're lifeless shadows of their former selves. It must have been hard for the fans who waited 10 years but Star Trek 1 is a bit of a $40M clunker - money thrown at the screen with scant regard for that all important screenplay. The sequel cost less than half of this but its about 8 times as good, a meaty character driven adventure laced with wit and good humour - The fine wine that follows the overpriced, microscopic main course that didn't taste of anything but had a beautifully dressed side salad.
A Great beginning for the Star Trek movie franchise!
posted on 19 Oct 2008I enjoyed this film in both the original form and in the director's cut. I saw absolutely nothing wrong with it. I don't understand why some Trekkies & Trekkers were so disappointed. Robert Wise did a terrific job of keeping the film on track (or Trek). It had terrific special effects, a terrific cast including newcomers to Trek, Persis Khambatta and Stephen Collins, great sets, new costumes, (replacing the cheesy velour shirts and tights with sharp looking uniforms was a great move), excellent props and a magnificent new music score by Jerry Goldsmith which is still in use on the franchise today as well as Alexander Courage's original theme. I thought the storyline was most involving with its surprise ending and the scope of the film on a large screen deftly illustrated the immensity of the Trek universe. The story begins with a couple of Klingon 'Bird of Prey' ships encountering an enormous, cloud-like anomaly moving through space. When it ignores their attempt at communication, they fire upon it and are annihilated. Meanwhile Spock, who is retired from Starfleet, senses its existence while on his home planet of Vulcan. The UFC (United Federation of Planets) also tracks it and learns it's heading straight on a path to Earth. The UFC decides to send its best crew to investigate. Naturally that would be the USS Enterprise crew, some of whom have retired, others who still tend to the ship. Eventually the whole cast is reunited and sets out on this desperate mission to save the Earth. The Genesis-like story has an interesting premise and some neat surprises. I am not a Trekkie or Trekker; I'm just a guy who likes Star Trek. I found this the perfect way to initiate the new Star Trek Movie franchise. I think many people had expectations that could not be fulfilled without disappointment. The film is a fine entry into a hopefully unending series.
A film that boldly goes where no man has gone before....thank god!
posted on 07 Oct 2008I will start by saying i am a massive star trek fan , not so much of the original series but a fan never the less. Star Trek the motion picture will test the patience of the any harden trekker. This film really is awful and i hate to say that. I remember seeing this film at the cinema when it came out in 1980 and thinking that it wasn't that good, 21 years later and after a second veiwing i wonder how this film never put me off Star Trek for life. Considering Star Wars was made three years earlier it is amazing how that film still looks great and this looks so dated. The so called special affects in this film are so poor it is amazing how they ever got the permission to make any more Star Trek movies (and i'm glad they did). It looked like the director got a new kalidascope lens for christmas for his camera and decided to use it fot most of the shots ,thinking it looked good! it does not , all it does is iritate the viewer. I wont go into the storyline , all i will say is that it as poor a story as you will ever have seen in any Star Trek film or episode and the acting is as just as bad.i will put that down to being rusty as i know they have done a lot better in the latter films. All in all this a section of Star Treks history everyone would rather forget. 3 out of 10
From a Non-trekkie's retrospective...
posted on 07 Oct 2008OK, let me fill you in, I saw this a little after this came out in the movie theater. Star Wars mania had not yet resided in my head, and even though I wasn't a big fan of the series, decided to give this one a try. I was rather bored and confused at the goings-on, I'm afraid, and I really didn't care for it.Flash-forward about 25 years later (eek!) and I saw the title at my library (that rocks!) and I decided to give it the old college try again.After watching it again, I can clearly see why I didn't like it the first time. Star Trek is a movie you need to have patience with. I mean, it STARTS with an Overture, not the most wisest thing you can have in a sci-fi film. Well, OK, 2001 had one, and it doesn't take a rocket scientist (Sorry Scotty!) to compare a lot of the goings on in this movie to 2001, problem is, Robert Wise, the director of this, is almost 10 years too late. Story and loopy psychedelic imagery aside, it was almost a guilty pleasure to see William Shatner play Kirk again after a long absence. He clearly, CLEARLY relishes the role (or maybe the camera), and chews it with a LOT of intensity. For the opposite of that, Is there any better example of awesome underplaying as Leonard Nimoy as Spock? What a champ
Warning - may induce narcolepsy!
posted on 01 Oct 2008First let me say I'm a big Trek fan, so I'm certainly not slamming Star Trek. But this film...should be prescribed for insomniacs. I've tried about 10 times to watch it in one sitting -- including buying the souped up DVD -- but WOW not a chance. I've either fallen asleep or simply could not focus on the film. The plot has all the vibrancy of watching paint dry.
The characters could have been substituted with cardboard cut-outs with no noticable change in dramatic effect. The special effects are simply silly.
This film manages to overlook everything that was special and magical about the original Star Trek series. This is a Star Travesty, giving space exploration all the excitement of a long dull bus ride. A film challenging only in its unwatchability.
So-so.
posted on 16 Sep 2008I have found that this movie baffles a great number of people. They dive-in, expecting to be entertained but by the end they are just puzzled. Don't get me wrong, I love Star Trek (in all its various forms) but sadly, this film just did not do it for me. Some people say that this film was not meant to be about action but rather an adventure into logic - I'm afraid that this may be why this movie is just a tad on the boring side. Out of all nine Star Trek movies this would be a hot contender for worst of the pick - at least the other 8 were better. Its O.K but not something you would want to see more than once in one year. I think it deserves about 5 out of 10.
Episode 0
posted on 18 Aug 2009Strange film... Star Trek the Motion picture is like an experiment around the Star Trek Mythology.I mean, this film is a sort of remake of an episode from TOS titled "korrigan" in French, about a mysterious robot called Nomad which thought Kirk was his creator.The movie is really strange cause the feeling that it inspires you is : exaggeration ! The Characters are really exaggerated : Kirk is selfish,authoritarian and almost nervous like a mix of his worst sides, Spock is OVER cold and scientific minded without any consideration for Kirk for example, McCoy is like an old Grand pa without any constructing critics...Even the uniforms look like pajamas, more than in the TV show!!! (an exploit!) The scene where the crew sees the Enterprise is really beautiful but...very long and hyperbolic too! despite these critics, the optical based special effects are really good, a big tribute to Kubrick's 2001 odyssey, not a copy of Star Wars, that could happened according to the success of this film and finally,the story brings the audience in a world really imaginative that the trademark of Star Trek! I tell to my friends that Star Trek The motion Picture is like an "Episode 0" or a bonus in the Star Trek Saga.For Many reasons, Star Trek 2, The Wrath of Kahn could be consider as Star Trek 1 in a sense. See Ya! P.S : Sorry for my poor English!!!