Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979)

Director: Robert Wise

Starring: William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, DeForest Kelley

Somebody had to do it. All the Trek movies. I’m not gonna do ‘em consecutively; if I tried doing these back-to-back I’d lose what marbles I’ve got left rolling around the old brain box. Trekkies, cover thine eyes, for the day of reckoning hath arrived – heh, heh… nah, I’ll try to be fair, scout’s honour and all that…

“Bones, there’s a thing out there…” Oh aye, there is. It’s what they call a ‘space anomaly’ and it’s on an Earth heading. The only ship in gobbing distance is the newly refurbidated USS Enterprise and a largely rookie crew. That is until Admiral James T. Kirk rides roughshod over poor Captain Decker and gives his old ship an injection of experienced toupee luuurrrrv. The crew encounter a gigantic nebula – over 2 A.U. in diameter, must be bloody big that, innit – destroying all in its path and at its heart is an object, a machine. Their only means of communication – the enigmatic Spock notwithstanding – is via an unfortunate crew member, Ilia, abducted and reconstituted by the object, V’GER. It is then a race against time to discover what exactly V’GER wants – a dose of Nortons? – before everyone gets annihilated…

I watched The Motion Picture (sometimes cruelly referred to as “The Motionless Picture”, but not here… oops) again the other night in preparation for this scribbling. Now, I’ve always viewed the first one to be a plodding bore and I have to admit it’s a view more or less unchanged. However, I did emerge with a little more respect for what I was watching this go around. Fair play to Roddenberry and Wise, there must have been studio expectation to go full Star Wars and instead they went 2001: A Space Odyssey-ish. This decision was either courageous or foolhardy, for the public was still agog with lightsabres and space dogfights, they didn’t want their thoughts provoking thank you very much. Paramount must have been cacking their pants; none of that action/ adventure malarkey for us, nay, how ‘bout a po-faced exploration of loneliness, the search for meaning, the reason for being… You’d think Roddenberry would’ve learned from the series, in that the studio didn’t fancy his first cerebral effort but gave him another go – he threw a punch-up into his next attempt and the rest is history.

Allow me some football parlance – it’s a game of two halves, Brian. The most fun to be had from the first half of The Motion Picture is watching the original crew come back together, particularly the triumvirate of Kirk, Spock and McCoy who were the heartbeat of the original series. Or, it should be fun, but isn’t. The series was full of beans and Robert Wise doesn’t capture any of that magic barring a few flashes of the old Bones. With the other regulars given so little to do (other than sit around in bland uniforms) the focus is on the newbies, Decker (Stephen Collins) and Ilia (Persis Khambatta). I have a better appreciation of the Decker v Kirk stuff now, it’s a good tussle and ‘Dimple-Chin’ Collins (to give him his proper jazz handle) has gone up in my estimation. He looks like he fits this Universe, it’s a pity he gets discombobulated with baldy and didn’t become a regular. It’s an interesting subplot, Kirk’s obsession a threat to Federation Health & Safety, Decker constantly in his ear about it while McCoy play’s Kirk’s conscience until wiggy wakes up and smells the Vapon. Wise does well creating an edge between his main players and he lends them a serious intelligence, well aware that colourful 1960’s corn would derail his vision and is possibly why he dulled down the uniforms too. I also like the way he frames some of the shots, keeping a character in a scene. For example when Kirk relieves Decker of command we can see Scotty over Decker’s shoulder, out of focus in the background, working at his station but glancing in their direction. Little details, I know, but always welcome. Elsewhere, well…

First, let me say that I accept The Motion Picture is a love letter to the loyal and dedicated hardcore nerds – fans, sorry – who kept the dream alive. I get that and it’s very sweet. I’m a great admirer of the commercial towing vehicle Nostromo, but if the camera flew around it for five effing minutes in Ridley Scott’s Alien ‘prequel’ I’d be going – “Yeh, yeh, I know what it looks like.” The Enterprise gets plenty of close-up screen time throughout, surely all that’s required is a big – ta-daaaa! – moment, 30-40 seconds of glorious approach, a huge series main theme cue. And don’t forget, Shatner has already sold it with the look of devotion on his clock. Stunning model work, though. Then of course we get the scene on the bridge as the iconic vessel flies through the ‘stargate’ and the crew are transfixed in various states of slack-jawed amazement for what seems like hours. Takes me back to my childhood, stuck in a traffic jam for Blackpool Illuminations, crawling past one gaudy bauble after another – oooh, look a giant grinning clown face… oooh, look, another giant grinning clown face… No, wait, it’s the same one… There’s only so much watching people gawp in incredulity I can take. And poor Bones, he’s reduced to repeatedly arriving on the bridge, having a look at the view screen, having a look at his crew mates and then wordlessly departing. It’s almost a parody. When we do get treated to an action scene it’s in slo-mo – the wormhole – and is sadly amusing rather than tense, not to mention redundant beyond setting up more Kirk/ Decker loggerheads. The transporter malfunction is fairly chilling but I detest that line, “What we got back didn’t live long… [weighted pause] fortunately.” Anyway, over an hour’s worth of indulgence, fine for the fans but leaving a general audience cold.

Luckily, the second half clicks, specifically from the moment the V’GER probe infiltrates the bridge and abducts Ilia. Persis, striking to look at, is well cast once she turns into an automaton. Sounds catty, I know but I don’t mean it like that. Here, she gets her best moment in the show, the Rec Room, with old flame Decker playing a computer game. We see her expression briefly soften as the ‘Ilia’ memory filters back, then hardens once more as V’GER reasserts control. Nice work. It’s interesting because it’s not Ilia, but V’GER itself, dropping its guard after centuries of isolation, desperate for companionship. Then you’ve got Spock, operating a personal agenda. Now his ‘stargate’ journey into the bowels of the machine is actually intriguing, being shorter than the ship one and there’s a purpose, rather than ooh, look at the pretty lights. I don’t get what’s going on with Spock. It’s just his whole attitude. Yeh, he’s deeply troubled by V’GER, nobbling his own Vulcan knighthood ceremony in the process, but why to the point of blanking his friends and colleagues, people he’s known for years? Seems forced into the story to me.

The core idea is a great one; an Earth probe (VOYAGER/ V’GER – very good, that) returned having travelled to far off cosmic realms is asking the question we’d all like an answer to: Am I alone in the Universe? And what about that ending, eh? Full points for sheer lunacy. I mean, how many films finish with man and machine, erm, coupling? Gives me a chuckle, that – after all the introspective, philosophical blather, V’GER was just dying for a shag. So much for that “oath of celibacy”, Ilia…

There are also some nice character moments, mainly from McCoy – “There are casualties. My wits…” I do like Kirk’s insisting Spock to “sit down” in a way only The Shat can conjure. As well as, “Damn it, Bones, I need you… badly!” Mint. Persis parping “Kirk unit!” is a winner too. Everybody else does what they did on the series, only with less screen time. Have to say though, there seems to be a lot of space (not that space) between the usually close-nit crew, as if the screen’s too big for them – and maybe why subsequent movies scaled back the scope. As you would expect, the SFX are very good. If the journey through the nebula is ultimately tedious, it’s also easy on the eye (and, okay, slightly more interesting than Blackpool Illuminations). I really like the invading probe, that column of energy. I like the harshness of the light, the way it illuminates the crew as it crackles past them. Got to mention the Jerry Goldsmith score as well, apart from the disappointing and mournful iteration of the series theme, a majestic piece of work – it somehow fills in the blanks between the series and the movie. I like the idea of an ‘overture’ before a film starts, proper classy that, puts you in mind of the Golden Age of cinema.

Listen, I don’t mind a sci-fi movie full of space exploration, doesn’t have to be all-action at all. I’m still dreaming of seeing somebody – Fincher, get your fuckin arse in gear – adapt Rendezvous With Rama before I shuffle off this mortal coil. In that context, The Motion Picture does not fail because it’s not like Star Wars. It fails because the story simply does not grip, particularly the slog of the first 60-plus minutes which only gain a forward momentum through the force of its familiar characters.

However, I will say The Motion Picture is without doubt the most cinematic of the Star Trek films, the one that lives and breathes on the big screen. It isn’t a movie; it’s an event. The others shrink a little after this and not necessarily due to budgetary constraints.

Expect the Trekkie Offensive to start shortly…

Cheers, folk.

ThereWolf, February 2011

Advertisements

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

About ThereWolf

I only come out at night... mostly...

65 responses to “Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979)”

  1. Xiphos0311 says :

    Star Trek 1 is the big idea film of the entire series but they couldn’t quite pull off the ideas. I give Roddenberry credit for trying but ultimately the movie didn’t reach the admittedly high bar Roddenberry tried to set. I guess I would chalk it up to a noble failure or maybe it’s a “could have been” or potentially could have been a great film.

    Nice write up Wolf look forward to reading more.

    • Toadkillerdog says :

      Wolfie! Was up babay

      Hey ive been celebrating that bastard pillows burthday all day long i bnoghjt him a case of arrogant basterd ale b ut something happend and i must have forgooten his address and i did nt want that poor beer going to waste on pilows special day so ive been sacrficng myslef to mae sure pillows knows how much he means to al of us anyway i saw star trek the motionlss licture when it came out and i was bored shitless. i was a true star trek lover of the show in syndication, but thatis shit bred me to tears you mailed it rodenberry was paying hoamge to the diehard trekkies trkker whatever the fuck they call thesleves and sticking his thumb up in the air or middle finger to the new fans and the fans fo star wars thatgot his fuckin movie gerennlihted in first place roddenbverry was an arrogant dude who thought he could ingnore what the noviue fans wanted and give the diehards what they wanted and somehow paramount agreed stupid shitys i was so fucking bored, but i do agree that it was the nost beatutifully cinenatic of all the movues it felt big and eipic but it sucked ok maybe not sucked to staring but just bored the shit out of me and me mates at the time and the spock storyline was ful on retard ok grst review wolfie really nailed it and fuck the trekkies and their humoirless asses bununchna dykes and fat ners whacking off to neurseyeoman janet and the ocmputer ok gott go to bed and hope ol rugus is passed put first casue he likes to piss on things on the floor and if imas on the floor he will piss on me

    • ThereWolf says :

      That’s it, Xi – you’ve got to give them credit for having a go and none of the other ST films get close to what Wise & Roddenberry were attempting here. If ‘The Motion Picture’ had followed ‘2001’ instead of ‘Star Wars’ it may – may – have been better received.

      Cheers, mate.

  2. Tom_Bando says :

    I kinda liked this when I first saw it in 8th grade, but did think it too slow. Have only caught some of it since—it just doesn’t interest me enough. Kahn, the Whales and Undiscovered Spock-those I like well enough.

    (Besides V’Ger, I mean)-would Giant Robots have helped this? Somehow I think this series is the anti-Mikey Bay just because.

    The late, lamented Persis Khambatta, by the way.

  3. MORBIUS says :

    Ho Wolf,

    Haven’t watched this in quite a while, do remember
    right after the opening credits, the Klingon Space
    Battle and the Goldsmith score. The rest is a little
    fuzzy, wouldn’t mind giving it another go in the
    forseeable future.

    Would like to see Rendevous with Rama adapted
    to the big screen, good call on that.

    Nice recap, looking forward to the the rest of the
    series. Wassail . . .

  4. DocPazuzu says :

    Strange movie, this. I don’t hate it, perhaps due to the fact that it’s like pure cinematic mind-wipe to me. I can never remember anything except a few details from it and the overall look of the thing (very nice, I might add). I’ve seen it several times but almost nothing sticks. Alas, the horror known as Star Trek Insurrection is seared into my brain for eternity.

    • Tom_Bando says :

      Insurrection is quite poo-poo that I agree w/. Cinematic Mind Wipes–yeah there’s a few movies like that. You begin to forget it as soon’s the credits roll. Don’t ask me what happened in 300 for example-besides a couple of the weirder opponents, I only remember the video game carnage just going on and on and on. Haven’t seen that since and have no reason to.

    • Spud McSpud says :

      Aw, how can ya hate INSURRECTION? It’s the one most like the Next Gen series – all earnest, full of shitty humour, but with a rock-solid premise (would Picard go against his own Federation if he found it behaving unethically and killing settlers? Damn right he would!) and it DID have one of the most graphic deaths in it (a certain face-stretching session for an unfortunate Federation official). The romance between Picard and Donna Murphy is realistic and nicely portrayed, and even the way it unfolds is original Data malfunctioning, then revealing the greater conspiracy.

      And I did find the cheesy stuff with singing Gilbert and Sullivan to distract Data quite fun, too 😀

      But then I’m the guy who enjoyed NEMESIS – mainly because Tom Hardy is awesome as the antagonist, and his scenes with Patrick Stewart are tense and exciting – and there’s some beautiful effects work when two ships collide near the climax. So maybe you should just chalk me down as a hopeless Trekkie and disregard the opinion… 😀

  5. just pillow talk says :

    “most cinematic”…yeah, you hit the head with that Wolfie.

    It certainly tries to be more than what the show was. I’ve never liked this one, but to be honest, I haven’t seen it in so long I’m not sure if I would have a slightly different response now.

    Good write-up once again Wolfie…

    • ThereWolf says :

      Cheers, Pillows.

      I hadn’t seen ‘The Motion Picture’ in years. Oddly, I must’ve seen the Director’s Cut this time around. Seemed different – like when Decker is showing Ilia the computer game. I distinctly recall seeing the game, maybe biplanes or something. But this version I watched didn’t show that.

      It’s improved coz, looking at the games we play today, the biplanes look ridiculous.

      Unless I’m just remembering the whole thing wrong…

  6. Spud McSpud says :

    You’ve been more than fair with that one, ThereWolf. Great review, as always.

    The problem with THE MOTION PICTURE is EXACTLY what you’ve pointed out – it’s for the hardcore Trekkies. I loved the movie, but then when I first saw it – on TV, early 80s – I was reading Aldous Huxley and Philip K Dick, so my mind was being sufficiently expanded with all this heavy literature, man, and so I saw this EXACTLY the way it was meant to be seen – with a mind wide open and full of interesting philosophical conundrums. Essentially, it’s a movie for thinkers – release it these days and it would bomb worse than anything Shyamalan could conjure up in his worst nightmares – and it does the job: it gives you visuals, interesting concepts, space to breathe, and lets you get on with drawing your own conclusions. Now, if you’re like me, on the right day, in the right frame of mind, this movie does help you get to grips with the ethos of what a real-life Star Trek would be about – not just seeing if there’s life out there, but answering (or at least pondering) the Big Questions.

    I liked the alien-ness of Ilia, and the way Decker was essentially young Kirk as we see him in the ABRAMS TREK, sans experience but with added brash, until he FINALLY gets to grips with what being a captain entails – right at the point where his journey ends (or does it begin?). Plus, they give Decker a great last line – “I want this, Admiral. As much as you wanted the Enterprise, I want this.” As long and boring and ponderous as this movie is, it gives me goosebumps at that ending EVERY time – much like CLOSE ENCOUNTERS does – and that can’t be bad.

    So. This movie is for we thinkers who don’t need PYEW-PYEW-PYEW space battles every five seconds. Which is why ABRAMS TREK is the anti-Trek for me – it’s STAR WARS in TREK trappings. It’s Trek for dumbasses who don’t want to think, but do want to see Kirk fucking, fighting and shooting shit. Can you imagine Chris Pine and co pulling off the whole staring-into-space at the V’Ger cloud with the gravitas that the original crew? I can’t which is why although I enjoyed it, ABRAMS TREK isn’t TREK for me. Not by a long, long way. Bando finally got his wish – ABRAMS TREK is Michael Bay Trek with STAR WARS battles.

    Looking forward to the rest of this series, ThereWolf. Nicely done.

    • Tom_Bando says :

      Naw Mikey Bay Trek would have Giant Robots. And Buscemi. You missed those parts.

    • Toadkillerdog says :

      Hola Spud, good to have an opinion from the other side – and I don’t mean of the pond.

      I considered myself a diehard star trek fan, albeit not a trekkie, in the 70’s. I was proudly the first in my middle school (or at least in my grade) to notice star trek in reruns, because my house was one of the few at the time that could get the cable feed that was showing the syndication – I lived in the boonies. Others had to subsist on ghostly images from channels from out of state. I loved the show.

      I recall the year long build up to the movie as well, but even then I felt something might be wrong because they started adding characters and changed the look – the old bigger is better concept which almost never is in movies.

      Still I plunked down my hard earned coinage and sat through it. I was truly disappointed. To me, it seemed that Roddenberry decided that Star Trek was far ‘too cerebral’ for a mere action adventure a’la Star Wars (the movie that paved the was for his movie to be made). Did he think paramount gave him the go ahead just because of rerun popularity alone after all those years?

      Star Trek could be very thought provoking, but it was always at its best when they combined the message with action. Roddenberry forgot that. He really forgot that.

      The motion picture was not 2001. Perhaps he conceived it to be such, but it failed because it was too self reverential and smug, and because he forgot what made Star Trek so great – the characters. He de-boned Bones. He de-eared Spock, and he took the shat out of shatner for most of the movie. And the supporting roles, well that was truly a shame. Therewolf nailed the Persis Khambatta role – she only became interesting after she was possessed.

      The biggest failing of the entire Star Trek universe though, is the Utopianism it seemed to foster. The ultimate expression of communism. When Star Trek wallowed in that muck, it killed the series. When it ignored that – or at least left it in background – it soared.

      Wrath of Khan is deservedly the greatest Star Trek movie of them all because it took the big thought provoking themes and married it with amazing action, and it focused on the main characters.

      Still, I do understand people who say they enjoyed this movie, but it has been over thirty years and I still can not quite enjoy. Tolerate yes, enjoy, sadly, no.

      • Spud McSpud says :

        Hey, Toad. Good to see ya!

        I have to agree with most of your points – I think because I was more interested in the show for its philosophical standpoint and generally optimistic outlook – the idea that the human race could handle ANYTHING in the universe – than for the characters, which were fun and which I enjoyed (obviously the banter between the big three was the main draw) but which weren’t MY main reason for watching. For those who DID value the crew relationships above all else, I can see why THE MOTION PICTURE was a big bag of meh – because it eventually turned into lots of awestruck gawping at state-of-the-art (for 1979) SFX. There wasn’t enough banter, Ilya did indeed only become interesting after she got possessed. I do, however, have to disagree with the utopianism = communism idea you have – why? I always thought of STAR TREK as having this idea that by being open, understanding and initially tolerant and welcoming of all creatures of all planets, we could build a better place for humanity in the universe than by taking what we do so well on Earth – oppressing each other and warring with each other – and transposing that on the universe at large. That doesn’t smack of communism to me – it’s not being imposed on the universe as such, the Federation is actually leading by example, not by a rule of law or anything. The Prime Directive is the ultimate expression of this – by not interfering with any culture that isn’t ready for First Contact with an outside species. Wouldn’t a Communist TREK be trying to force this utopia on the universe, and reacting with force if it is rejected? If anything, I’d sayit’s a cautiously optimistic humanism Roddenberry was getting at, rather than communism. But then I’m not well versed in political ideologies, so maybe I’m just misunderstanding what communism actually stood for.

        Either way – one of the main reasons I’m one of the few Trekkies who LOVED the reviled fifth movie THE FINAL FRONTIER is precisely BECAUSE of the banter between Spock, Kirk and McCoy – especially in the camping sequences at the beginning and end of the movie. And it at least TRIED to tackle another Big Theme – even if God turns out to be far less interesting when revealed in its true form. and the bar on Nimbus III is one of the few sequences that ripped off the Star Wars cantina idea and did it with some originality, some skill and its own sense of tone and production design. I really enjoyed that sequence.

        But the rest of it is just peachy. “Perhaps ‘because it is there’ is not sufficient reason to climb a mountain, Captain.” “I am hardly in a position to disagree!”. Great stuff.

      • Toadkillerdog says :

        Hey Spud, great post. You are going to make me re-think the humanism (secular i assume) vs utopianism.

        I based my utopianism argument on a few scenes I recall from the TV show, such as how there is no money in the 23rd century , and how everyone works for one another -the betterment of one another. I am pretty sure – though not 100%- that those are accurate representations of what Kirk was explaining at one time or another to some disaffected alien.

        I will have to google that. If so, those two things are to my thinking the ultimate expression of communism – working ofr one another, no money etc. which is a utopianism. Not a communism that wants to force its ideology on others, but one nonetheless.

        Communism failed – for many reasons, but to me the biggest was because it stripped man of achievements.

        Stripped man of any goal, outside of the working for others, looking after others before you looked after yourself. An altruism that is not part of the human makeup – at least not on the grand scale. And it failed to account for the pettiness of humans .

        I will do some further research though, should be fun.

      • Toadkillerdog says :

        Hey Spud, ok I found some info on money in the 23rd century. According to the wiki it was first mentioned in Star Trek IV – I swear I recall it was mentioned in TOS but ill keep checking. Anyway that makes em ‘godless kommanists’ -ok, not really, i like saying ‘godless kommanists’. Now lack of money and altruism does not necessarily a communist make, but it does a form of utopianism make. there are multiple varieties though

        here is the wiki

        The first mention of the Federation not using money came in Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home, where Kirk (coming from 2286) seems to be unfamiliar with the concept of using money. However, one of the first actions Kirk takes in the 20th century is to sell a pair of antique glasses to procure spending money (he is not familiar with the value of the dollar, however). Also, while entering the meeting room in Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country, Scott states that he had just purchased a boat. During the film Star Trek Generations, Captain Kirk states that he sold his house some time in the previous nine years, which from Kirk’s perspective would be between 2284 and roughly 2290. By the time of The Next Generation, money was considered abhorrent to many members of Starfleet, although in Encounter at Farpoint, set in 2364, Beverly Crusher buys a bolt of fabric and requests that it be charged to her account on the Enterprise, while later that year in “The Neutral Zone”, Picard tries to explain to cryogenically preserved people from the late 20th century that 24th century economics are quite different and money as they know it is not used or needed in the Federation, much as he would later in 2373 to Lily Sloane in Star Trek: First Contact. Two years later, in 2366, in The Price, the Federation is willing to pay millions of credits for access to a stable wormhole. In the Deep Space Nine episode “Explorers,” Benjamin Sisko says that when he first entered Starfleet Academy, he rapidly spent an entire month’s allotment of transporter credits on transporting back and forth to his home in New Orleans. He also arranges for his wife’s employer to give her a month’s paid vacation (emphasis in episode) in The Changing Face of Evil And in the pilot episode of Star Trek: Voyager, Tom Paris makes a reference to having someone “pay his bar bills.” Additionally, some officers were shown in Tapestry to visit casinos, particularly near starbases. And poker is shown on a number of occasions to be a favorite past time of Enterprise-D crewmembers.

        From this evidence, it is clear that by the late 24th century, money in the modern sense is very seldom used in the Federation, and not needed for the life of a typical Federation citizen. Replicators fill the need for almost all material goods and a pervasive altruistic philosophy of self-improvement and helping others provides most labor. However, a monetary unit called the “credit” still does exist for some purposes, such as dealing with foreign governments, alloting government budgets, and access to limited resources. Money began to fade from everyday use in the 22nd century, although it was still in fairly common use by the mid to late 23rd century.

      • Jarv says :

        It’s a crap joke in the naff Save the Whales.

        Kirk’s at dinner with the whale bird and she says something like “don’t tell me they don’t have money in your time”

    • DocPazuzu says :

      ” Kirk fucking, fighting and shooting shit.”

      You say that like it’s a bad thing.

      • Spud McSpud says :

        Well, when there’s no philosphising to go with it – isn’t it a bad thing? Or not necessarily a bad thing, but just not TREK?? I mean, what’s a Kirk that does nothing BUT fuck, fight and shoot shit? Answer – he’s either Captain Han Solo or Captain Mal Reynolds – two men you wouldn’t necessarily associate with deep and meaningful philosophical discussions. Well, unless they involve gunplay, anyway.

      • Jarv says :

        Sorry Spud, I know you’re a Trekkie, but can you honestly really equate the word “shatner” with philosophy?

        And I say this as someone that drunkenly listened to his cover of Rocket Man the other night.

    • ThereWolf says :

      Thanks very much, Spud.

      It’s not my intention to slaughter Star Trek; I watch ’em like I watch any other film.

      Funnily enough, I nearly put in the “I want this…” line because it does bring the whole Decker v Kirk thing full circle. I do like that line and you’re quite right to highlight it.

      I disagree about JJ’s Trek… but I’ll get to that when I get to it!

      Excellent response, Spud, keep ’em coming.

    • Tom_Bando says :

      The Abrams Trek was fun, fast moving, had all the right character nods for nostalgia and the fans, was a good watch. I donno what the Goathumper was whining about–if I thought it desecrated Trek or whatever I would say so. It didn’t. Abrams did a better job w/ that then he hadda right to seems to me. Spuddy it’s cool though-different strokes.

  7. koutchboom says :

    This doesn’t really relate to the movies, but the cool star trek news agents thing England did back in the mid 90s.

    England used to have awesome magazines compared to the states. And they sometimes do these binder like things, and they did some giant binder for Star Trek information. I mean now a days it would be useless but it was really good back then.

    You’d get roughly something the size of a normal magazine that you was on tear off paper, and you’d orginaize it in your binder creating a mini encyclopedia about Star Trek. It was really cool, just wondering if any of the other blimeys did it.

    • Jarv says :

      I didn’t.

      Mostly because nerd trek is for nerds likely to die from terminal virginity, and there’s nothing dorkier than assembling a binder from cut out dork trek magazines.

      • Spud McSpud says :

        OY!! I had one of those fucking magazines!!

        I bought it wholesale off some other nerdy Trek virgin who’d collected it up into the 80+ issues, and I paid a fraction of what he paid for them, but still… it was an interesting read.

        It lasted three years before I got bored with it taking up half a shelf of space, and some other lucky nerdy Trek virgin got to buy it off me…

    • ThereWolf says :

      I did too!

      Excuse: I thought they might be worth something in the future. I didn’t put the pages in order. They are collecting dust – unread – in the box room.

      Seemed like a good idea at the time…

      • Jarv says :

        Did you buy Spud’s?

      • ThereWolf says :

        Heh!

        No, bought ’em new. Went on for fucking ever as well. I kept asking the newsagent, “That’s the last one, right?” And he’d go, “No, there’s another 20” Then after 20 he’d say, “Publisher’s just announced another 18…”

        Never-fuckin-ending.

  8. koutchboom says :

    There are some fun notes from Jean-Luc to the screen writers about Insurrection. Lemme see if I can find them.

    • DocPazuzu says :

      “…and her clothes fall off… But it’s too late — I’ve seen everything.”

      • Spud McSpud says :

        You’d do Dopnna Murphy. You know you would. She’s top-quality MILF action. I definitely would.

      • DocPazuzu says :

        ´Course I would. That doesn’t change the fact that she and her hippy tribe are the laziest fucking product ever conjured up as an “alien” culture in sci-fi history.

        “Fuck it — l’m tired of trying to invent new pieces of plastic to glue to their foreheads. I know…. HIPPY ALIENS! Of course the trekkies will buy it — they’ll suck anything at our glory hole.”

      • ThereWolf says :

        She’s not too bad. Particularly when she gets wet.

        All right, I would…

  9. koutchboom says :

    Also I’ve been watching a lot about PIXAR lately and did you know that their first real product in a movie was the Earth rebuild in Wrath of Kahn? Sure that was back when they were still under Lucas, but that was the PIXAR branch of Lucas Films.

  10. Droid says :

    Since I’ve only seen two Star Trek movies and never watched the tv show, I think I’ll be a bit lost with this review series. But as always, an entertaining read there, wolf! (see what I did there?) Looking forward to whatever the next one is. Search for Spock or some nonsense?

    • ThereWolf says :

      Cheers, Droid.

      The next one is KHAAAAAAAN!

      Funny feeling I’m going to upset a few folk as well…

      The classic series is a lot of fun. Watch a few & see what you think.

      By the way, Star Trek takes a break – I’m going to Mars next…

  11. Frank Marmöset says :

    It’s a long time since I’ve seen this, and I must admit all I can remember from it is all those external shots of the Enterprise you mentioned. Half the film seemed to consist of very slow Ooooh, look at the space ship, so pretty! moments. Also, the outfits weren’t too flattering, kind of like everyone was wandering about the ship in space pyjamas.

    Can’t say I’m a big Star Trek fan, but I have liked a few of the films, especially 2 and 4 and that one with the Borg. This one didn’t do much for me, though.

    Good review, ThereWolf. I’m looking forward to reading the rest of the series.

    • ThereWolf says :

      Thanks, Frank.

      See, that’s all I could remember too but this time around I did start to notice a few other things as well. Not a total waste of time after all…

      Where did the umlaut come from? Or have I just been spectacularly unobservant?

      • Toadkillerdog says :

        Wolf, very good job, this should be a great series – but you better not trash Khan or there will be hell to pay! HELL TO PAYYYYYYYYY!
        Ok, you can rag on the shat winding up for the legendary KHANNNNNNNNN! But thats it, otherwise there will be HELL TO PAYYYYYYYYYYYYY!

  12. Jarv says :

    This is a very nice review of a film I don’t really have an opinion on.

    It’s not hateful or anything, like Nemisis, but nah, not for me

    • ThereWolf says :

      Cheers, Jarv.

      I’m sure you described it as “shit” a bit back. That’s an opinion!

      ‘Nemesis’ could turn into a bloodbath.

      • Jarv says :

        I very likely did.

        I also said that there are only three of the series that aren’t shit and this isn’t one

        However on reflection it is one of the better ones- in comparison to the evil trifecta already mentioned

  13. Tom_Bando says :

    I’d pay to see Mikey Bay direct one of these. No really.

  14. DocPazuzu says :

    Wanna see something really funny? Universal has/had something called Star Trek Adventure where sex-free humans can don starfleet uniforms and interact with a prerecorded film with some of the original cast. Some of these losers have actually uploaded these clips, much to the merriment of the rest of humanity.

    A sample:

  15. ThereWolf says :

    Some cracking input from Toadkillerdog & Spud here…

    Well done.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: