Thoughts on the TOS Movies.

The six Star Trek movies featuring the original series cast were Star Trek during the 1980's - The only Star Trek for most of that time. The success of the films led directly to the return of the franchise on television, and also gave a chance for viewers to say a proper farewell to the crew that started it all.

In effect, the six movies form one last, multi-year season of the original Star Trek. The films even end up having much the same structure as a television series - right down to an arc that connects the episodes... And right down to a pilot that bears little resemblance to what the series would properly become.


FALSE STARTS AND EARLY STEPS: THE MOTION PICTURE



It's now reasonably well-known that Star Trek almost returned as a television series in the 1970's - the aborted Star Trek: Phase Two. Then Star Wars, and its enormous box office performance, made Paramount rethink its decision to relegate its most famous science fiction property to the small screen.

This probably saved Star Trek as an ongoing franchise. From what I know of Phase II, and from the couple of Phase II scripts that were repurposed into (very poor) TNG episodes, I strongly suspect it would have been a weak series, one that likely would have lasted a single season.

Star Trek: The Motion Picture has many of the failings of early TNG. The atmosphere is too sterile, and the human characters often feel only marginally less emotionless than Mr. Spock. It is also awkwardly paced, particularly in the version that was actually seen in theaters in 1979. Robert Wise's eventual "director's cut" lessens the problems with pacing and characterization - but it doesn't quite eliminate them, and it's a little too evident that the film was put into production before the script was fully ready.

Still, the movie does have a sense of grandeur, aided by some top class visual effects and a sublime Jerry Goldsmith score. There are fantastic sequences and set pieces, and I admit to having had a soft spot for it long before the director's cut was ever released. Most importantly from a studio standpoint, it made money - Which meant that big screen Star Trek was given a second chance to get it right...


TAKE TWO: THE WRATH OF KHAN AND THE TRILOGY



The Wrath of Khan was a much smaller film than The Motion Picture, and in fact remains the lowest-budget Star Trek film of them all. It's also the best of the lot, perfectly capturing the core appeal of the series: The cameraderie and chemistry among the regulars, and most particularly among Kirk, Spock, and Dr. McCoy. The film has some strong action set pieces and a remarkable villain in Ricardo Montalban's vengeance-crazed Khan - but at its heart, it's a character piece, with Kirk having to confront age and death, and having to learn to accept both of these.

The film was so successful, its own sequels simply carried on from it, forming a Star Trek motion picture trilogy. The Search for Spock picks up only a short time after Khan's endpoint. The Voyage Home carries on from Spock's endpoint. All three are very different films, but all were successful both financially and critically. All three movies revolve around the characters. The stories are built around their interactions, and those interactions feel right.


FALLING OFF THE MOUNTAIN: THE COLLAPSE OF STAR TREK V, THE RISE OF TNG, AND THE END OF AN ERA



What goes up must inevitably come down, and the Star Trek film franchise came crashing to Earth with Star Trek V: The Final Frontier. William Shatner took his turn in the director's chair, and also collaborated on the story... Making it hardly a surprise that the movie centers entirely on Kirk, actively at the expense of the other characters. The film is poorly paced and even worse-structured. The seemingly endless first hour is centered on what is revealed to be a subplot, with the actual story not even starting until more than halfway in - which leaves the rest feeling rushed and underdeveloped.

The movie was released into a summer already crowded with blockbusters; and set along side the likes of Lethal Weapon 2 and Tim Burton's Batman, this particularly Trek came up decidedly short. Even worse for Star Trek V, it released just as TNG started to properly find its footing, leading many to grumble that the Star Trek television series was getting to be better than the movies. In the space of one bad film, the big screen future of Star Trek had gone from entirely assured to very much in doubt.


A GRACEFUL EXIT: STAR TREK VI - THE EPILOGUE



Star Trek VI was the final movie for the full 1960's cast, and it did much to recover viewer goodwill. Nicholas Meyer returned as director and co-writer, and the film features multiple callbacks to the core trilogy - most particularly in Kirk's resentment of the Klingons over the death of his son, David, something which helps drive the plot. In plot and also in tone, the movie feels like an epilogue to that trilogy... and with not a single mention of Star Trek V to be found, viewers who are not dedicated to being completists should feel absolutely safe in skipping that unfortunate misfire.

It's a dignified final bow for the crew, only slightly tarnished by Shatner's insistence on having Kirk be the one to outwit the villain at the end after the script had carefully laid the groundwork for Sulu to do so. A minor, if very visible, blemish on an otherwise very fine movie, one that allows the original series crew to go out with a winner.


FINAL THOUGHTS

As the above summaries make clear, the trilogy forms the core of the TOS movies, and those three films and Star Trek VI are what most people mean when they talk about the movies with the original cast. Star Trek: The Motion Picture and Star Trek V are clearly the odd men out, not quite fitting with the other four pictures, and it's likely no coincidence that these two outliers are the least popular TOS movies.

All of the movies (even Star Trek V) are carried by the seemingly effortless chemistry of the cast. There's a magic to this particular cast, and a joy in watching their interactions. I like all the subsequent Trek casts to varying degrees, and some of the later Trek stars would actually be better actors than some of the original stars. But however long Trek has run in however many forms, the magic of that original cast is one that would never be recaptured.


Review Index

To receive new review updates, follow me:

On Twitter:

Follow @RandomMusings09

On Threads:

Follow@randommusings09 on Threads

Star Trek V: The Final Frontier.

The Enterprise approaches The Great Barrier.

THE PLOT

Nimbus III is a planet located in the Neutral Zone. It is called "the planet of galactic peace," a world which the Federation, Klingon, and Romulan governments have agreed to develop in concert. In reality, it's a planet-sized garbage dump, its colonists the dregs of all three empires, its ambassadors washed-up failures at the ends of once-promising careers.  The development of the planet was forgotten almost as quickly as it began, and the entire project has become a largely forgotten backwater.

Which makes it all the more surprising when Sybok (Laurence Luckinbill), a renegade Vulcan, raises an army from among the planet's unwashed and holds the three ambassadors hostage. Kirk and the new Enterprise are dispatched on a rescue mission.  But this new Enterprise is a disaster itself, a ship on which nothing seems to function properly. With Klaa (Todd Bryant), a bored Klingon captain eager to use this situation to test his combat mettle against Kirk, the challenges are already mounting.

And that's before they encounter Sybok, and realize that this entire mission is playing right into his plans!

Shatner braces himself for the first round of reviews.

CHARACTERS

Capt. Kirk: After a near fatal accident at the beginning of the film, Kirk reveals that he knew he wasn't going to die. He tells Spock and McCoy that he has always known that he will die alone. This is echoed at the end of the film, when he tells Spock he was sure he was going to die and Spock replies that this was impossible, because Kirk was "never alone." Kirk fights Sybok for control of the ship until they breach the Galactic Barrier. Then he stops fighting - Having encountered the unknown, Kirk is every bit as eager to explore it as Sybok is.

Spock: His surprise at seeing Sybok on the monitor is too evident for Kirk and McCoy not to catch. It's immediately obvious that while he is telling them the truth about Sybok's background, he is at the same time withholding something. That comes back to haunt all of them, when Spock disobeys the order to shoot Sybok and then reveals that the renegade is his half-brother. Spock refuses Sybok's entreaties to join him, even after he removes Spock's pain. He declares that he has found his place. His loyalty to Kirk is a part of his identity, and Sybok's mental powers can't disguise that fact.

Dr. McCoy: "Human life is far too precious to risk on crazy stunts!" Though the campfire scene is ludicrously overlong, McCoy's declaration of the value of human life is one of (too) few moments of value. The Razzie Awards, in their enthusiasm for damning this picture, nominated DeForest Kelly for Worst Supporting Actor. They couldn't have been further off the mark, in my opinion. Despite the script's focus being Kirk and Spock, it's McCoy who gets the best character moments. I even enjoyed his "group therapy" session with Sybok. Though the euthanasia backstory may be ham-handed, Kelly's knack for making his material seem authentic manages to make it work in a way that most of the surrounding material doesn't.

The Enterprise Crew: The script has little use for the supporting cast and doesn't know what to do with them.  The results are dismal. Scotty at least gets a few decent bits, and is the only supporting crew member to not instantly turn on Kirk when cured of his "pain." But even he bashes his head  into a bulkhead for the sake of a cartoon pratfall.  Meanwhile, Uhura spends the film coming onto Scotty after no previous film or television episode indicated the slightest hint of romantic feeling; and Sulu and Chekov mimic a blizzard, apparently forgetting that starships have sensors. The entire crew turns on Kirk the instant Sybok works his magic on them ... which, once it's revealed that Sybok isn't actually brainwashing anyone, makes no sense given that these same people were willing to throw away their careers for Kirk just two films earlier!

Sybok leads Kirk and his crew into the unknown.

THOUGHTS

After two movies directed by Leonard Nimoy, it was agreed that William Shatner should get a chance to sit in the director's chair. The results were... noticeably less successful. Star Trek V became the first film in the series to be considered a failure, and the critics were even less kind to it than the box office was. Nor has time granted it much respectability. This is very much the black sheep of the TOS films, widely regarded as the worst Trek movie with the original cast.

It should be said that Shatner's directing is competent on a technical level. Despite some weak effects, the film isn't really any worse visually than Star Trek III. Unfortunately, Shatner lacks Nimoy's ability to work with actors.  Laurence Luckinbill gives a surprisingly commanding performance as Sybok, but I suspect that was all Luckinbill rising to the role he was given.  With the exception of DeForest Kelly, the regulars give their weakest performances of any of the feature films.  And even a veteran character actor like David Warner seems basically uninterested in his (very weak) role.

The movie's most significant problem, as with most failed films, is the script.  The story often grinds to a halt in the first half for the sake of material that is either irrelevant, repetitive, or ill-advised. Some of this was studio-imposed.  The success of Star Trek IV was credited in large part to the film's humor. It was therefore decided that whatever else it was going to be, Star Trek V needed to Be Funny.

This creates several problems.  Star Trek V's narrative is heavily centered around a literal quest to find God and unlock the secret questions of creation.  This does not naturally lead to comedy situations, which means that the content and tone are at odds from the get-go.  Beyond that, the way in which comedy is applied is strained.  The previous movie never forgot that the situation was deadly serious to the characters.  Kirk and his crew weren't running around 20th century San Francisco cracking jokes; they were trying to get on with the mission as efficiently as possible.  The laughs came from how incompatible the characters were with the time and place in which they were stuck.

In this movie, the comedy arises not from situation and character, but from an externally-imposed need for "funny bits." The results are largely bad: The infamous Uhura "fan dance" scene; the Sulu/Chekov "blizzard" bit, which may be a series low for both characters; or Scotty's Clouseau-like head bash.

A little after the halfway mark, the movie finally stops grabbing for laughs and lets the story and characters take themselves seriously. I doubt it's a coincidence that this is where it finally gets better. A lot better. Once the jokes drop away, the last 45 minutes is able to establish a reasonable dramatic rhythm. There's some good character interplay, such as Spock's declaration to Sybok of having found his place or Kirk's statement that Spock and McCoy are his family. And if the climax falls a bit flat, it's still adequate on its own terms.

Looking into the face of God(?)

OVERALL

Once it became obvious that the comedy didn't work and made a mess of the pacing, Paramount should have authorized a ruthless re-edit to tighten things up. Without the misfired gags slowing the pace and annoying the audience, this could have been reduced to a lean and passably absorbing 90 minutes. It would still be noticeably weaker than the preceding trilogy, with a misjudged structure that keeps the story from even starting until after the halfway mark... But with the bad comedy removed and the pace tightened, I doubt it would be even half as badly-regarded as ended up being the case.

As it stands, the first hour lives down to the movie's dismal reputation, turning the viewing experience into a grim slog.  Things do eventually get better, though, and viewers who make it through will be rewarded with some decent character scenes that allow it to close on a pleasant note.

If that doesn't sound like a ringing endorsement... Well, it isn't. The Final Frontier is by far the weakest TOS film, and even a ruthless edit would only downplay its flaws. I have no hate for the film - but with the best will in the world, it's a long way from being a good movie.


Overall Rating: 2/10.

Previous Movie: Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home
Next Movie: Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country

Search Amazon.com for Star Trek

Review Index

To receive new review updates, follow me:

On Twitter:

Follow @RandomMusings09

On Threads:

Follow@randommusings09 on Threads

Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home.

Kirk and Spock, trying - and failing - to blend in on 1980's Earth.

THE PLOT

Three months have passed since Spock's unlikely resurrection. Scotty has completed repairs and modifications to the Klingon ship, and the crew of the former USS Enterprise has decided to return home to face their inevitable court martial. Spock has elected to return with them, to offer testimony on their behalf.

The trip is interrupted by the arrival of a mysterious probe broadcasting an unrecognizable signal, one which leaves every vessel and Starbase in its wake with only emergency power. Spock identifies the signal as the song of the humpback whale - a species which, by the 23rd century, is extinct. There is only one way to answer. They must use the slingshot maneuver to travel back in time to 20th century Earth.

They find what they're looking for in the San Francisco bay, where an oceanic institute is keeping two humpbacks under the supervision of Dr. Gillian Taylor (Catherine Hicks). But Kirk learns that he has only a day to complete the mission - a single day to win Gillian's confidence, recover the whales, and save all life on his future Earth!

A look at a humpback whale.

CHARACTERS

Admiral Kirk: He explains his (very mildly) profanity-laced mode of speech to Spock by acting as an authority on 20th century culture: "No one pays any attention to you unless you swear every other word." His authorities? Trashy 20th century novels, from the likes of Jacqueline Susann and Harold Robbins, doubtless a part of his antiques collection. Kirk in the 20th century looks at first glance like an eccentric "kook," but he retains the absolute confidence of someone used to command. That makes it impossible for Gillian to fully dismiss him or his offer of help.

Spock: Spock's intellectual capacity is fully intact, but he is struggling to fully rediscover himself. He is a bit "off" for most of the movie, overly literal at several points. Interacting with Kirk seems to reawaken something that his more formal retraining on Vulcan did not, and as the film goes on, he becomes more and more like the Spock we remember. By the movie's end he is fully himself again, but we see through his struggles to interact with others that this is not an effortless process.

Dr. McCoy: Reacts to 20th century medicine much as a modern doctor would likely react to early 18th century medicine: with outrage at the primitive ignorance of our medical techniques. He can't stop being a doctor just because he's in the past. When confronted with a patient he can easily cure, he does so, purity of timelines be damned. His argument with the doctor assigned to Chekov sees DeForest Kelly really throwing himself into it as he pleads with the man: "Put away your butcher knives and let me save this patient!" Oh, and a nice background bit during the chase that follows: When a man in a cast is knocked over, McCoy pauses to help him.

Scotty: Though definitely in a supporting role, and a smaller one than in The Search for Spock, James Doohan remains one of the steadiest of the regulars. He has a way of infusing small scenes and lines with a freshness and enthusiasm that makes them stand out. Unfortunately, he is also aging the most noticeably of the main cast.  His frame betrays more than any of the others that it's been far more than a few months since The Wrath of Khan. But that's an easy enough bit for suspension of disbelief to excuse - particularly when his performance is so good.

Sarek: Mark Lenard returns as Sarek, and again makes an indelible impression in just a few scenes. His interruption of the Klingon ambassador (John Schuck)'s rant is wonderfully done, his rock-like calm causing the Klingon's violent tempers to dash away to nothing. As the crisis with the probe comes to a head, Sarek is a voice of reason. He convinces the Federation president to issue the planet-wide distress call that alerts Kirk to the situation. At the end, he fully renounces his judgment against Spock having joined Starfleet, issuing the highest praise it's likely possible for him to give when he labels Kirk and his crew people of "good character."

Hot 20th Century Earth Babe of the Week: Dr. Gillian Taylor (Catherine Hicks) has bonded with the whales dubbed George and Gracie, and her attachment to them is conveniently the only relationship she appears to have. Hicks is very pretty and an adequate actress, and she manages a decent screen rapport with William Shatner that stops just short of being a romance. I don't for an instant buy that, upon being transported 300 years in the future, she would be assigned to a science vessel. At best, she'd be given a job working with the whales she's helped transport, not being assigned to a ship going offworld when she hasn't even the most rudimentary knowledge of the time period she is now part of.

Kirk and his loyal crew.

THOUGHTS

The Voyage Home finishes up the trilogy begun in The Wrath of Khan.  This film brings Kirk, Spock, and their shipmates home - but by the long route, allowing them a last adventure together on their way to their court martial. It's much lighter fare than the previous Trek films, with the meat of the picture amounting to a fish out of water comedy as the characters try to navigate their way around 20th century San Francisco.  Kirk and his crew retain their focus on the mission throughout - but the ways in which they clash with this strange old world create opportunities for humor, and the film happily indulges as many of these as it can.

The tone is far lighter than its predecessors - but that seems to me an appropriate way to end the trilogy. The Wrath of Khan was about dealing with death. The Search for Spock heavily involved sacrifice, with Kirk giving up everything important to him to save his friend. But after this journey through darkness, it was time for the film series to emerge into the light.  It was time for a Trek film that celebrated life, and a good romp was a fine way to do that.

Besides, a lot of it is quite funny. There are some cute and clever visual gags, such as the moment in which Scotty, Sulu, and McCoy wonder where to find a research lab while standing in front of a wall-length "Yellow Pages" ad. Other comedy bits are more overt, such as Chekov and Uhura trying to get directions to the "nuclear wessels." I could quibble that most of the Chekov scenes make him look like an idiot, to the point that I can't completely fault one boorish naval officer's crude assessment of him.  But even he gets a moment of dignity, sending Uhura to beam out of danger while he stays behind.

Leonard Nimoy's direction is better here than it was in the previous film, particularly in visual terms.  There are more wide shots and fewer scenes that just intercut closeups, making it feel less like something that belongs on a TV screen. The Klingon Bird of Prey is more visually interesting than many of the series' Starfleet ships have been, and the darker lighting lends the potentially dry shipbound scenes some atmosphere. I also love the visual of the Klingon ship decloaking directly above the whaler near the end, looking as hungry and threatening as a true, living Bird of Prey.

Some would-be whalers get a very big surprise.

The plot that justifies the trip through time is not the strongest. The "save the whales" story feels a bit cloying, and the narrative frame feels cribbed from, of all things, the very solemn first Trek film: A probe, threatening the existence of Earth when it can't get a reply to its mysterious signal. Fortunately, these scenes are brushed aside within the first half hour, but it's a bit odd that the movie is at its worst when dealing with its actual "plot."


OVERALL

I'm torn between a "7" and an "8," but I'm going to go with the slightly lower score. That first half hour really isn't very engaging, creating a feeling of having to "get through" the setup before the real movie begins. But a "7" is still a good score, and this is the most purely "fun" Star Trek movie. That element - the fun - remains intact even when many of the trappings have dated, making it easy to see why this movie hit big with mainstream audiences, extending the franchise's appeal far beyond just the series faithful.

Until the next movie, in any case.  But that's another story for another day...


Overall Rating: 7/10.

Previous Movie: Star Trek III - The Search for Spock
Next Movie: Star Trek V - The Final Frontier

Search Amazon.com for Star Trek

Star Trek: The Motion Picture.

Kirk's first full look at the new Enterprise.

THE PLOT

A Federation monitoring station detects a mysterious blue cloud of extraordinary size and power, under attack by three Klingon battle cruisers. The Klingons fight with their signature aggressiveness, but are easily destroyed. The station computes the cloud's trajectory, and determines that it is on a heading straight for Earth.

There is only one starship within range to intercept the cloud: The Enterprise, of course. But the legendary starship has just undergone a complete refit, and has several technical glitches to be worked out. Its young captain, Decker (Stephen Collins), is untried in first contact situation - something which Admiral Kirk (William Shatner) seizes upon to regain command of his old ship.

Now back in the captain's chair and reunited with his old crew, Kirk prepares for one more mission against impossible odds, this time to save his home planet. But is this Kirk, who has commanded nothing but a desk for more than two years and who is completely unfamiliar with the new Enterprise, going to be up to the challenge?

Kirk, Spock, and Decker prepare to enter the cloud!

CHARACTERS

Capt. Kirk: For the first half, behaves more like one of the Pompous Space Bureaucrats from the original series than like that series' captain. He uses the crisis to seize command, then bristles when an upset Decker points out what he did. Kirk shares Decker's doubts about his ability to command, which leads him to be defensive when Decker corrects what might have been a catastrophic error in dealing with a warp-generated wormhole.

Once he's dealing directly with the crisis, the Kirk we know comes back to life. The more by-the-book Decker would either have gotten the Enterprise destroyed by insisting on raising shields and performing scans the entity would have read as hostile.  Had he survived that, he would likely have waited too long to undertake the "unwarranted risk" of entering the cloud.  Kirk trusts his instincts and takes the risks needed to get into communication with the alien, identified as "V'Ger." William Shatner's performance is not among his best, the cold style of the film not best suited to his acting strengths. Still, he relishes some terrific Kirk scenes late in the film, particularly when the captain goes along with Spock's suggestion to treat V'Ger as a child.

Mr. Spock: When he arrives at the Enterprise (surprisingly late in the film), he is at his coldest and most remote. Leonard Nimoy erects a very stiff posture for this version of Spock, and lowers and slows his voice so that no warmth or emotion at all is reflected. Nimoy carefully eases off this stiffness as the film progresses, and as Spock begins to fall into the familiar interaction with Kirk. But it's only after Spock's epiphany following a mind-meld with V'Ger that Nimoy returns to his "normal" Spock performance, with that familiar hint of warmth beneath the reserve.

Dr. McCoy: Gets the least to do of the three leads, but he does have some good scenes opposite Kirk. As he observes the conflict between Kirk and Decker, he doesn't take his old friend's side. Instead, he bluntly lays out that Decker "is not the one competing here," and that Kirk has allowed his obsession with commanding the Enterprise to cloud his own judgment.  When Kirk starts becoming defensive again, as Decker argues alternatives for dealing with the V'Ger cloud, McCoy watches like a hawk. This does not go unnoticed, and Kirk actually pulls back under the force of his friend's glare.

Commander Decker: A ready-made Kirk substitute. Knowing that many elements of this film were leftovers from the abandoned Phase II series, it seems clear that Decker would have been poised to take the lead had Shatner not chosen to stay with the series. With the move to the big screen, Decker receives a demotion within the franchise similar to the character's within the film: Moved from status as a regular and potential lead to that of a one-shot guest character. Stephen Collins does a capable job, reflecting competence and intelligence throughout, but there's no question that Shatner has a screen presence he simply can't match.

Hot Alien Space Babe of the Week: Ilia (Persis Khamabatta) is the ship's new navigator. She is a Deltan, a race required to swear an "oath of celibacy" in order to serve in Starfleet. Reasons for this are more fully explained in the novelization.  Suffice it to say that she is Decker's old flame - a relationship that was copied all but note-for-note for the Riker/Troi backstory in TNG. There's not much noteworthy about Ilia as a character, and Khambatta's performance and the characterization are far more interesting in the second half, when Ilia is replaced with one of V'Ger's probes.

The Enterprise, in the belly of the beast...

THOUGHTS

This film has come in for a lot of flack, and it's fair to say that it's a flawed movie, even in its director's cut. It's overlong, and its tone is too antiseptic to truly capture the spirit of 1960's Trek.  But it has ambition and is gorgeous to look at - and unlike several later Trek movies, it is unmistakably a movie, not an elongated television episode.

Much was made in contemporary reviews of the film's then-enormous $46 million budget. It's worth noting that this budget did include all the costs incurred by the development of the discarded Phase II television project.  It's also worth observing that one reason the sequels cost so much less was that they were able to reuse sets and models created for this film.

Even ignoring that, the money is evident on-screen. The effects are breathtaking, most of them holding up more than three decades after the fact. The elegant model work blends with the optical effects and Jerry Goldsmith's fantastic score to create a genuine spectacle. The redesigned Enterprise is beautiful, both the exterior model and the interior sets - and it would never look better than it does here (including, in my opinion, the variant seen in the 2009 film).

The plot isn't bad, either. It liberally borrows elements from three TOS episodes: The Doomsday Machine, which also featured the Enterprise trying to thwart a planet-destroying machine (with a guest character named Decker, no less!); The Immunity Syndrome, which also featured the Enterprise flying into a void that threatened all in its path; and The Changeling, which also featured a machine that mistook Kirk for its creator. But the tone of the film is distinct, and it never loses its own strong sense of identity. The ending provides a good twist, one contemporary viewers likely didn't expect, and there is plenty in the buildup to that ending that is intriguing. I'll admit to a certain bias - as readers of my reviews might have noticed, I tend to be a bit partial to episodes in which the crew explores something genuinely alien and unknown.  Nevertheless, I will stand up for there being a lot that's good here.

Still, it's a good thing for the franchise that this did not become the template for future films. The tone and atmosphere may be consistent and distinct... but it's all too cold and sterile for a Star Trek movie. The real key to the 1960's series' enduring popularity is the warmth between the characters. There's very little of that here. All emotion is muted. This may serve one of the central themes ("logic and knowledge are not enough"), but it does keep the viewer at a distance.

Another problem is with the interpersonal conflict between Kirk and Decker, which drives the movie's first half.  Decker resents Kirk's usurping of his command, and he doubts (with cause) that Kirk is truly capable of taking command of this new Enterprise. Kirk privately shares these doubts, which results in him reacting defensively. It's an interesting conflict, but it doesn't resolve.  Kirk doesn't do anything to prove himself to Decker (or to himself).  Instead, this thread just vanishes about 80 minutes in, barely even obliquely referenced again.  Structurally, it feels like there's something extra needed, something which never comes.

The Ilia probe takes the Enterprise to V'Ger's heart.

OVERALL RATING

In all cases of multiple editions, I will be using my preferred cut as the basis for my review.  My final score here will be for the 2001 director's edition, which features improved pacing and stronger character interaction.  But this was the third of three major versions, so for the sake of completeness I will briefly discuss all three.

The Theatrical Cut, hastily edited to make a tight December 1979 deadline, suffers from the absence of several character exchanges and from extremely overlong effects scenes. In his director's cut commentary, Robert Wise states that he had no opportunity to preview and fine-tune the film before its premiere, and it shows: Even though this is the shortest version, it "plays" the longest. I'd give it a 5/10.

The Network Television Edition was widely circulated during the VHS era. This cut restores the character scenes... but it also restores a lot of footage that was cut with good reason (such as Sulu and Chekov behaving like horny adolescents around Ilia), and it does nothing about the overlong effects sequences.  It's an improvement, but still only scrapes a 6/10.

For his director's edition, director Robert Wise has done the kind of fine-tuning he would have done in 1979, had he not run out of time.  The effects scenes are cut back so that the visual wonder makes an impression, but doesn't linger so long on the light show that it completely kills the momentum.  The strongest character scenes have been re-inserted, adding a touch of warmth (still not enough), but pointless and/or stupid moments have been allowed to remain on the cutting room floor where they belong. The result runs slightly longer than the theatrical version, but it feels leaner, because most of what's on-screen fuels the story or at least the atmosphere.

 Even in the director's cut, the flaws remain.  The restored character material is good, but it's not enough to fully offset the sterile atmosphere.  The trims to the effects sequences help the pace, but some moments - notably, the Enterprise's flyby of V'Ger about halfway in - still go on longer than is truly ideal. Still, this is as good as I think the movie can be, and in this version I find it engaging enough to genuinely recommend, if only to see a very different type of Star Trek movie than the more action/adventure oriented titles that followed.


Overall Rating: 7/10.

Next Movie: Star Trek II - The Wrath of Khan

Search Amazon.com for Star Trek

Review Index

To receive new review updates, follow me:

On Twitter:

Follow @RandomMusings09

On Threads:

Follow@randommusings09 on Threads