This is topic I am thinking of giving the Star Trek films a watch in forum The Afterlife at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=12;t=000952

---

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 03-22-2011, 11:05 PM:
 
I am putting this out to the experts on Film-tech

I am looking to give the Star Trek films a watch. I have never seen them. Anyone have any advice on what I should do.

Laserdisc?
DVD?
Blu-ray?

I looked at a dvd tonight and it was a Dolby Digital EX disc. I prefer Laserdisc sound over dvd but blu-ray is good. I can't stand remixed dvds.

Anyone know which version format is best?

I don't care about special features. I am going to start with Star Trek The Motion Picture
 

---

Posted by Sean Weitzel (Member # 244) on 03-22-2011, 11:13 PM:
 
Skip the Motionless Picture and start with this one. Bonus if you can find a copy in the rare and superior home video format shown here.


 

---

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 03-22-2011, 11:25 PM:
 
Take a few days off, buy a plane ticket, and go here.

AJG
 

---

Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 03-22-2011, 11:30 PM:
 
Beta!

IIRC, Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan was the first sell-through release (and at the then-unheard-of retail price of $39.95). And back then the video release windows were much longer than they are now, yet this one came out only about five months after theatrical release.

Tom...watch II, IV & VI, and leave it at that.
 

---

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 03-22-2011, 11:35 PM:
 
Anyone have any comments on dvd or ld?
 

---

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 03-22-2011, 11:44 PM:
 
The LaserDisc for VI was an unofficial THX disc (like Apocalypse Now) and had a good image for the format and a GREAT Dolby Surround mix of the PCM flavor. Of course, the aspect ratio was not 2.35:1, but opened up a little bit (Super35 was the source) and the image is actually shifted up as opposed to being centered. I love my LaserDisc copy because of the sound mix. Note it is the extended version.

AJG
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 03-23-2011, 12:27 AM:
 
Tom, good tips in this thread. Don't even bother watching the first one.

#3 isn't very good, but once you finish #2 you will want to see it. It isn't awful, but nothing great.

#5 is pretty lame, but again not awful like #1. It doesn't matter if you watch 5 or not, but #1 would be better as a "lost film".

There is no telling how worn the 70mm prints are that the Egyptian will play, but if you can't afford the plane ticket definitely do take the advice here and watch it in the superior home video format that is beta!

BTW am I alone in hating the beta cassette design due to not being able to tell if it is fully rewound or not? I think TDK was the only manufacturer that actually adopted a VHS-type design with 2 windows for beta.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-23-2011, 12:53 AM:
 
Also be aware that Star Trek is an acquired taste. Very few can just jump into it like with Star Wars. Definitely watch 2, 3 and 4. In my opinion 4, while good, is the odd one out here. It has a strange score and is a bit too happy-go-lucky, though this movie alone was responsible for bringing a lot of fans to Trek due to its easy accessibility (not much of a need to understand character backgrounds, etc). #3 is good just to see Doc Brown be evil. 6 is good despite a few stupid quotes and things of that nature. I wish Worf wasn't in it and that whole Klingon-speaking part where they are trying to speak it over the radio was dumb and an insult to the abilities of Uhura. But they added it as comic relief, the same reason a rousing rendition of "Row row row your boat" is in part 5. Why are those things in these movies? Because Star Trek 4 did so well largely due to its humor so they tried to be funny in these movies as well and it didn't work.

Also, don't watch them on DVD. They are the extended editions and they suck. Watch them on Blu-ray if you can. Try to watch the ones that are sold separately as these are the superior theatrical cuts. The ones sold as one big set on Blu-ray I believe are the shitty extended editions. LD might also be good as they are all good cuts of the respective movies. 6 is extended even on LD, but the scenes they added to that one aren't bad and feature ODO from Deep Space Nine as some sort of guy with a mustache.
 

---

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 03-23-2011, 01:12 AM:
 

quote: Joe Redifer

---

Also, don't watch them on DVD. They are the extended editions and they suck. Watch them on Blu-ray if you can. Try to watch the ones that are sold separately as these are the superior theatrical cuts. The ones sold as one big set on Blu-ray I believe are the shitty extended editions. LD might also be good as they are all good cuts of the respective movies.

---

Thanks Joe.

How about the sound? Do the DVDs compare to the LDs?
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-23-2011, 04:26 AM:
 
They're roughly similar. The remixed sound on some of the DVDs is a bit odd but if you haven't seen the movies before they probably won't wreck your enjoyment or anything. The Blu-rays sound more natural. The LDs are, of course, just fine as they are the original mixes (in Pro Logic, mind you).
 

---

Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 03-23-2011, 09:37 AM:
 
Go BluRay. Both the picture and sound blow all the LaserDisc's away.

I have to disagree with the majority here. Watch the first one. Star Trek The Motion Picture is not paced like a normal Star Trek, and should be watched as a SciFi film rather than a Star Trek film. It's fatal flaw is that is assumes you know and care about the characters, and it spends too much time at the beginning reverentially introducing them. That worked for the audience of 1979, who grew up with the original TV show and had waited for 12 years to see them again. Now, it just slows the film down. On the plus side, it is a "big" film, with a large cast, state of the art special effects (for the time), and an awesome analog Dolby stereo track (later remixed for digital on the DVD & BluRay).

There were a number of different versions of this film on LaserDisc. There was the original theatrical version, an extended version that restores a space walk that never had the effects finished and you can see the wooden ceiling of the sound stage above the Enterprise. Then another extended version with the effects finished on the added footage.

Star Trek 2 & 4 are the closest in feel to the original TV show, with 2 being a "serious" episode, and 4 being a "comic" episode. The original show had both. Personally, I think 3 & 5 are terrible, but you need to see 3 for continuity to the later movies.

Star Trek 2 is probably the best of the series. While not necessary, I recommend watching the Star Trek TV episode Space Seed first, as the movie is a sequel to the the TV episode.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-23-2011, 04:36 PM:
 
If 2001 A Space Odyssey had never come out, Star Trek 1 would have been a much different movie. It tries its damndest to be just like 2001 especially with lots of long, boring shots where nothing happens set to music. So if 2001 never existed, the world would be a much better place not only because of a much better Star Trek The Motion Picture, but because of no 2001 as well. But as it is, Star Trek The Motion Picture is the ANTZ to 2001's A Bug's Life. The both suck and one was trying to emulate the other, but only one is the original.
 

---

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 03-23-2011, 06:08 PM:
 
Don't hold back, Joe -- Tell us how you really feel!
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-23-2011, 06:31 PM:
 
OK.
 

---

Posted by Greg Anderson (Member # 235) on 03-23-2011, 06:52 PM:
 
A good friend of mine is a fan of Star Trek: The Motion Picture. (Yes, he's the one.) He was recently very excited about the HD version he saw on the SyFy channel, which blew his "special extended whiz-bang" DVD out of the water... although the SyFy version was the original cut. So, maybe you could still watch it but "for free" if they show it again.

And then be sure to watch the episode of Futurama featuring the Star Trek cast.
 

---

Posted by Robert Harrison (Member # 3202) on 03-24-2011, 07:59 PM:
 
The thing about "Star Trek 1" is they were rewriting the script every day almost. Then, after they spent 40 million bucks, Paramount suits probably insisted on using every frame of special effects footage to say they got their money's worth, boredom be damned. Then, as happens so many times in motion picture history, they were down to the wire to the release date and had no time to fine tune the editing.

Just for shits and giggles, I once made my own edit of the film from a laserdisc to VHS and got the running time down to 100 minutes. This was accomplished mostly by leaving out the entire Enterprise flyover from early in the film and cutting out all the "awe-inspiring" footage of the Enterprise flying through the Space Cloud enveloping V-Ger's ship while everybody on the bridge stared at the viewscreen like they had never seen anything similar in all their years of space exploration.

Here's a deleted scene:



Nomad was the name of a space probe from an episode titled "The Changeling" which, although not gigantic, it was similarly misinformed about mankind and was heading back to Earth to find it's Creator.
 

---

Posted by Lionel Fouillen (Member # 1475) on 03-24-2011, 10:55 PM:
 
By "leaving out the entire Enterprise flyover from early in the film", you destroyed one of the best scenes of the film, a great example of the power of music to underline action in a movie. In this case moreover, a particularly brilliant score.

BARBARIAN !

If I were in L.A. I'd pay a visit to the Egyptian to watch them all again in 70mm. I only saw #1 to #3 at the theater (#2 in 70mm at the now defunct Plaza in London), others only on TV. Never been a trekkie but managed to find some interest in the motion pictures, with a preference for #1 and #6, then #2 and #3. I don't remember well enough about #4 and #5...
 

---

Posted by Sam Graham (Member # 2889) on 03-25-2011, 08:43 AM:
 
I was REALLY impressed with how good the first movie looked on Blu-ray, and I'm one of the few here who really likes that movie. It's quite different from the rest.

The one to avoid is V. Like the plague. One of the worst movies ever made as far as I'm concerned.

The six-pack of the original films, as far as I know, are the exact same transfers as the individual releases. They are the original theatrical releases as I remember them.
 

---

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 03-25-2011, 12:37 PM:
 
****

Star Trek: The Motion Picture

-Nice minute long overture at the beginning
-So many different yet interesting characters
-Great sound from a DVD
-Good ending
-Satisfying beginning to the start of a franchise

I am shocked at how much I liked this movie. I am torn between giving the film 3.5 stars and 4 stars. I am not a fan of the series and I know almost next to nothing about Star Trek. Perhaps that is why I liked it so much more. Also, watching the movie 30 years after it was released might have something to do with it.

I was totally into the story even though it felt like it was a little too PG rated. There are so many different yet interesting characters in this movie. I am not sure who is from the TV series or what not but I don't think that matters. I liked the conclusion and was satisfied. I liked some of the conflict between the main character and seeing a young William Shatner was interesting.

Overall there is an influence from 2001. I was surprised that I didn't think of Star Wars while watching this movie. I liked most of the special effects. The score was perhaps the The Motion Picture's most powerful element. There was no hesitation to use the familiar Star Trek score over and over again thoughout.

Reading about The Motion Picture after watching it, I was surprised to find out that The Motion Picture actually sold the most tickets out of all the Star Trek films. Yes it did have a very large budget that went out of control, but I feel The Motion Picture set the stage for the other films to follow.

I am not to concerned about the whole "theatrical" cut vs. "director's" cut debate. I suspect that if watched The Motion Picture in theatres in 1979, my opinion of the film might of been different.

Picture: *** (Holy dirt on a print: Did I see a scratch?)
Sound: **** (sounded as close to a laserdisc as I can recall)
 

---

Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 03-25-2011, 01:29 PM:
 

quote: Tom Petrov

---

seeing a young William Shatner was interesting.

---

quote: Tom Petrov

---

I was surprised that I didn't think of Star Wars while watching this movie.

---

quote: Tom Petrov

---

The score was perhaps the The Motion Picture's most powerful element.

---

quote: Tom Petrov

---

I was surprised to find out that The Motion Picture actually sold the most tickets out of all the Star Trek films.

---

According to what source? (I believe it was actually 1986's Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home that performed the best of the films...until J.J. Abrams' reboot thing came along.)
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 03-25-2011, 03:00 PM:
 
One of the biggest topics I remember being discussed about Star Trek: The Motion Picture when it was originally released: the bald headed woman.

Sang to the tune of the Bee Gee's hit, More Than A Woman:
"Bald headed woman"
"You look bald headed to me."

With hair, Indian actress Persis Khambatta was really quite beautiful. According to IMDB she was Miss India in 1965 and worked as a fashion model. Too bad she died of a heart attack 1998 at the age of only 49.

I never cared for Star Trek: The Motion Picture. I agree with that it tried too hard to copy the tone of 2001 and count on viewers being familiar with lots of Star Trek lore.

I liked the II, III and IV installments, although IV pushed its luck with the campy stuff. Those three movies were written and paced better. ILM did the visual effects work, which was substantially better than those in the first movie. Not surprisingly Paramount sells a Blu-ray set of those three films packaged together. III was the lesser film out of that trilogy, but it was still pretty damned cool when they blew up the Enterprise.

I absolutely hated Star Trek V. Oh man that movie sucked. And the visual effects were a big downgrade from the previous three films. ILM reportedly was swamped with work for the third Indiana Jones movie and Ghostbusters II. So the work was given to Bran Ferren and Associates. They lacked many of ILM's capabilities and apparently were given a lot less time to produce the work. In trying to be fast and cheap the visuals in the movie often sucked.

Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country was a better movie, but not really great either.

I couldn't really get into the "next generation cast" movies all that well. They had this odor of too many producers being involved so the movies could never do anything actually new and interesting. They just cribbed a few vague things from the TV series and blew it up larger. Star Trek: The Next Generation was much more interesting as a TV series. I think it hit its high point with Captain Pickard being abducted by the Borg and used to annihilate the Federation Fleet.

I didn't like the most recent Star Trek movie from J.J. Abrams. It had very good production values and visuals, but the movie felt like it had little to no connection at all with the previous movies or TV series -particularly with some of the liberties taken with the story line. Like so many recent action movies it seemed designed for people hopped up on speed or something.
 

---

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 03-25-2011, 03:10 PM:
 
Does anyone know if the minute long overture was in the theatrical release?
 

---

Posted by Robert Harrison (Member # 3202) on 03-25-2011, 05:40 PM:
 
Yep, it was.
 

---

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 03-25-2011, 07:18 PM:
 
You and I seem to have parallel tastes, Tom. I really liked STAR TREK: THE MOTION PICTURE for the same reasons you list, and what is interesting is that I saw very few of the orginal series and never really liked it all that much when I saw it years later in syndication.

I started watching Star Trek in earnest with The Next Generation. THE MOTION PICTURE got me interested in the original characters really for the first time. And of course any picture that give homage to 2001 already gets 10 points right off the bat! For me -- it works just fine. Overture is just icing on the cake. I mean, come on, this is Jerry Goldsmith. This is Robert Wise, certainly no slouch and Roddenberry himself producing. Sorry, it has lots going for it IMHO and yes, it takes its time with great cinematography and deliberate pasing. As long as you don't expect explosions every 5 minutes, this is a very rewarding launch of possibly the longest and most profitable franchise launch in film history. I don't feel STAR TREK I needs any apology.
 

---

Posted by Geoff Jones (Member # 3668) on 03-25-2011, 08:10 PM:
 
I'd like to introduce my daughter (7) to Star Trek I-IV, but I'd like to show her a few of the original series episodes first. I don't think the films do a great job of establishing the characters- they expect you to already have a familiarity with the crew.

Can you guys recommend 10 episodes that we should watch first as a primer? I'm not enough of a Trekior to know where to start... other than Space Seed.
 

---

Posted by Robert Harrison (Member # 3202) on 03-25-2011, 08:30 PM:
 
I would say the aforementioned "The Changeling," as well as "Balance of Terror" (sort of a "The Enemy Below" in space), "Charlie X," "The Menagerie, Parts 1 and 2," (a clever melding of footage from the first pilot "The Cage" featuring Jeffrey Hunter as the captain of the Enterprise with new material starring the classic cast), "The Devil in the Dark," "The Ultimate Computer" and "Where No Man Has Gone Before" (the second pilot).
 

---

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 03-25-2011, 10:43 PM:
 
**

Star Trek II The Wrath Of Khan

Here is a movie that could of been great but was at best was just good. You can tell this movie was made in the 80's right off from the opening credits. Whereas the The Motion Picture was release in the late 7o's, The Wrath Of Khan feels updated for the next decade that it was released in.

The whole time I was watching it, it felt like the movie was a very long TV episode. Upon reading about the film afterwards, it appears that the TV crew a Paramount put II together. The new uniforms looked great. I do have to mention Kirstie Alley, I am not a Trekie but it was a nice surprise to have her in the movie.

I thought the first half was very good whereas the second half just bored me to death until the last few minutes which set up part III. Special effects were ok but nothing special. You could tell the sets were real locations and not some special effects shot. I read that Star Trek II was made on a very small budget.

I watched part II on blu-ray. I thought the transfer and sound were horrible. Star Trek II is one of the worst sounding blu-rays I have encountered. You can tell it has to do with the feature part as the trailer for the new Star Trek sounded incredible. I hear that part II was remastered for blu-ray, well to be honest, it felt like a upconverted DVD with terrible sound. I expected so much more from the $19.99 blu-ray...the next three chapters are on DVD

I am not sure how to sum up part II other than it was a very good movie for the first half which fell apart and then came together to set up part III very well. I can't say I liked part II but it did make me want to watch part III "The Search For Spock"

Blu-ray: *
Sound: *
 

---

Posted by Mark Campbell (Member # 4411) on 03-25-2011, 11:53 PM:
 
My 2 cents:

Original Crew:
Watch #1 to set the whole thing up.
Watch "the trilogy" 2, 3, 4
Skip 5 unless you slow down to look at bad traffic accidents.
Watch 6 if you had fun with 1-4

Next Generation Crew:
Watch #7 "Generations"
Watch #8 "First Contact" only if you liked Generations
Skip 9 & 10 at all costs.

Reboot:
Watch "Star Trek" with an open mind and hope that the sequel will be as good.
 

---

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 03-25-2011, 11:59 PM:
 

quote:

---

quote: Tom Petrovseeing a young William Shatner was interesting.

Young? Shatner was 48 when Star Trek: The Motion Picture was released. I guess I can see your point, though, if you know him only as an 80-year-old pitchman.

---

quote: Michael Coate

---

According to what source? (I believe it was actually 1986's Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home that performed the best of the films...until J.J. Abrams' reboot thing came along.)

---

• 1 Star Trek...............................$257,730,019
• 2 Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home...........$109,713,132
• 3 Star Trek: First Contact................$92,027,888
• 4 Star Trek: The Motion Picture...........$82,258,456
• 5 Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan.........$78,912,963
• 6 Star Trek III: The Search for Spock.....$76,471,046
• 7 Star Trek: Generations..................$75,671,125
• 8 Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country..$74,888,996
• 9 Star Trek: Insurrection.................$70,187,658
• 10 Star Trek V: The Final Frontier........$52,210,049
• 11 Star Trek: Nemesis.....................$43,254,409