The "Klingon Battle" piece from the beginning of the movie (with V'Ger on Blaster Beam) is one of my favorite pieces of movie music ever--and doubly so when you consider that one scene basically established what Klingons were like through the Next Generation/DS9 era, and the music was definitely part of it.
This, and TWOK, are my two ex aequo favorite movies of the franchise. Kinda like Alien and Aliens - one is a slow-burner that sucks me in with atmosphere, and the other is a more bombastic, action-driven epic. I love these looooong shots of Enterprise in the space dock or going through V'Ger, it's hypnotizing. I'm always a bit sad when I hear someone describing it as "boring", because there isn't a single frame of this movie that I ever want to skip. I'm so glad it was made, we'll never get movies like this or the original Andromeda Strain today.
I need to see the directors cut. I didn't realize it was that much different from the one I saw.I remember being vaguely disappointed when I first saw it but not knowing exactly why.
That this is tonal shift from the show: The show was never merely jokey. It was mostly overly serious about usually rubber monsters, or about the different things it encounters,-- with a humourous joke at the end or throughout--- such as recreated in next generation. the cast disliked the script throughout and were frustrated that it was humourless. Yet this is what was made. Wise's other science fiction movies tended to be serious, but had sarcastic humour. Like the andromeda strain but ultimately were serious heavy hitters, even a bit on the sterile side, so this is what we got. The visuals though drawn out in this film are instead its strength. they capture the vidual wonder of the first show, but which they didnt have the budget for. However it is a tonal difference from the 60s show, but, that is also because perhaps much time had passed. In fact, it is probably the closest to an episode of the original show I think? of the movies? In some ways perhaps. The original show certainly had mostly a serious tone, alleviated by jokes and funny parts, found throughout but often at the end. Even if episodes featuring Harry Mudd were often comedic throughout.
It's really nice to see this film getting some more credit as it ages. We just released our own look back at it on our channel! We're covering all of the original crew films in a six week stint. I'm sure someone is looking forward to Star Trek V 😉
TH-cam is big enough for all of us, for sure. You guys are fun, so I'll keep watching all the way through. And I AM looking forward to hearing you talk about V. :)
I still enjoy this film, despite it's flaws. Wise's Director's Cut, and the 2022 4K Remaster of that, show it to best advantage. The Refit of NCC-1701 USS *Enterprise* is my very favorite of all SF ships, and Goldsmiths' score is an unqualified success. I recommend reading "Chekov's Enterprise", Walter Koenig's diary of principal photography. It's anecdotal, and he couldn't say everything he wanted to, but it's still a snapshot of Trek history, and quite amusing too.
Excellent video. Thank you. Robert Wise may not have been the ideal choice for a Star Trek film, but his experience and ability were essential to avoiding the film from failing to meet the release date (even in an uncompleted state).
No mention of the "Special Longer Version" which was shown on TV broadcasts of the film, and inserted the missing character moments decades before the Director's Edition. This was the version of The Motion Picture I grew up with, and probably why I enjoyed it far more than most other people. It wouldn't be until I was probably in my 20's that I would finally see the Theatrical version, whereas the SLV I had seen at 7 years old. It also had some alternate takes of certain shots, which would even be missing from the Director's and later Ultimate editions.
One thing to consider when trying to estimate the cost of Star Trek: TMP is that they got a lot of additional value out of the budget by reusing and re-dressing effects shots, sets and costumes from this movie in other Star Trek movies and TV shows all the way up through Star Trek: Voyager (which was still using things like that corridor set). So it helped keep *their* budgets down, and made them look like relative successes in the process.
I'll always treasure my LaserDisc (the format shall rise again!) But the HD transfer of the Director's Cut on Paramount+ is an absolute thing of beauty.
@The Unapologetic Geek - nice job! I wish I had stumbled across your work sooner. I am a fan of this movie, and spent my youth watching it, Star Trek II, and the Star Wars movies in Laser Disc (if that doesn't age me!). We had the longer TV edit of the film, that lacks something the director's cut has, and has something it lacks, which I wish the Director's cut had followed. It lacked the beeps and boops of every button press (especially on the Klingon ship), which I don't think are needed. More crucially, it lacks a scene - McCoy says, "Jim, this thing is saying it's creator is a machine..." And Decker replies, "Of course! We all create God in our own image!" This is true, as since we are told God created us in his image, we in our minds see him as looking like us. This shows Decker making a connection and beginning to understand V'Ger, and makes his ultimate decision one that follows in a way that looks natural, rather than a rash, on the spot action. I always felt that this scene added much needed depth to Decker.
As an old school Trekkie, I always found TMP as the second best, inferior only to First Contact and only because the latter shows something as seminal as the first contact, expanding the lore as I think every movies should have done. But the first one is amazing and a true long episode of great sci fi, even before the vastly superior director's cut that I'm very happy to be able to see. For me, the other movies are too much concerned with the characters, instead that going outside of the Federation or exploring other true big questions... or, if they tried to do so (I'm looking at you, Insurrection), they made a poor job. Thanks for so much insight, Geek!
A good history although you missed the why of Nimoy not signing on immediately because of his lawsuit regarding using his Spock likeness for advertising without compensating him. Eisner cut him a check and he was on board
The only medium you can watch the directors cut is DVD, witch as a physical medium was at its peak in the early 2000s following its development and release in 1996, only to be surpassed in 2006 by blu ray witch edged out hd dvd in a 2 to 3 year format war by late 2009 the same year the HD remastered original series was released on blu ray
I saw this film in the cinema and was, at the time, highly impressed with it. In fact, it's only with this review that I've learned that there is a director's cut, which I'll start looking for (for which I'll start looking?). I recall that there were a few scenes that dragged (especially the Kirk sees the new Enterprise) but overall I thought that the story was a serious upgrade to the TV series-style stories. My wife and I saw most of the following movies (can't remember seeing Star Trek V, but we did see Star Trek VI), but we both lost interest in the later movies, although we saw one or two of them. I, at least, have zero interest in the current reboot series of movies. Altogether though I think this movie was a serious upgrade and perhaps the best of all the movies.
I'm the same as you I think the original crew movie's are really good apart from the 5th one, and I'm not that big a fan of TNG films. First contact is the best one but I think it's overrated when compared to some of the 80s movie trek. I don't like the reboots or discovery. There all crazy camera angles and lens flare that try and rip off idea's and redo character's from the original films and are dummed down which I don't think trek is all about. I wish they would lean more towards TMP then what there currently doing if they green light a new movie. Create a interesting, entertaining adventure with a really good sounded out script and make a film that will stand the test of time which the Abrams trek will not.
I love this film. But if you're just being introduced to Trek and you watch this, you will NEVER visit Trek again. It is a slooooooooooooooooooooooooooooow, dense film that rewards Trek fans but is steeped in the relationships and concepts that Trek fans know and love. It's a wonderful film and I say this as a huge fan but that's the point. It's not for outsiders. Once they love Trek they'll love this film. But it is a slog at first.
this film actually introduced me to star trek back in 2013, unfortunately when i first watched this it bored me and I completely forgot everything in it but in 2018 I decided to watch the original series, I loved it even if my memories of it are a bit foggy, then in 2021 I rewatched it and fell in love, I felt shameful it didn't touch me then as much as it does now
I was wondering where you found the art that appears from 5:11 to 5:18, I just think it’s beautiful but can’t seem to find it by googling. Excellent video as well, looking forward to watching the rest of the series!
As far as taste in Star Trek Films goes, I think that The Motion Picture was an okay, but very flawed start to the Star Trek Franchise. The best things about The Motion Picture were the Jerry Goldsmith music score and the good performances from Leonard Nimoy and Nichelle Nichols, the scene with Spock on Vulcan was great, and DeForest Kelley was also very good as Bones. The problems that I had with this film is that the plot of The Enterprise crew investigating V'Ger was forgettable, the wormhole sequence was pretty bad, and Decker was a terrible supporting character. Overall, The Motion Picture was an alright Star Trek film and the ending scene of the film did a good job setting up for The Wrath of Khan. The Motion Picture is a very flawed sci-fi film, it felt the Star Trek version of 2001: A Space Odyssey, and The Wrath of Khan will always be my absolute favorite Star Trek film that saved the Star Trek Franchise.
Just watched this movie again, the Directors Cut and I must say my opinion has not changed since I originally saw it in the theater. It is slow and plodding...the effects are so redundant it is ridiculous. At the beginning...we get an external view of the Klingon ships being destroyed...a view that continues after the ships are destroyed. They either had relay satellites there or one hell of a telescopic view. It happened again as a Federation listening post was destroyed. Then there were stupid continuity errors like when Admiral Kirk and Scotty were making an outside inspection of the newly refitted USS Enterprise...there was a long shot of them flying over the USS Enterprise which when switched to an interior view of their shuttle showed them below the main body of the ship. As a long time Star Trek fan, I wanted to enjoy this movie (which did well at the box office) but it was a boring heap.
14:22 Nope. It's not. IN fact a number of character related scenes were cut or trimmed from the film. The CGI does not match well with the original effects, the new sound work done for the film is crankly inferior to the original theatrical release. Instead of cutting the quips and reactions of the characters like they did, they should hav rtrimmed the extensive visual effects sequences and helped the story to BREATH. Also, Leonard Nimoy has made it very clear that the shoot was not a happy time. That things were being changed all the time,. They'd come to set expecting to shoot one thing, and end up not shooting it at all. They had to come up with new sequences to replace other ones because the work they had done was working. They had two FX houses working on the damn thing. Don't get me wrong, I love The Motion Picture, but it is the reason that all the future Trek films up to Star Trek V had such low budgets, and had to squeeze every penny out of every single t hing they made.
For me the film completely falls apart when the Ilia Probe shows up. It's so juvenile it becomes unwatchable from that point forward. Like Blade Runner and The Black Hole, I watch the film solely for the visual effects and score.
I know this film has flaws. However, I waited for years for this film to be made having seen Star Trek on TV during its actual run. I am writing this before I have seen your review.
I was at the premier at grauman's Chinese, and was bitterly disappointed, especially as a devoted fan. I could forgive the slow and pompous tour and shatner's extra hammy acting, but the worst sin was recycling the plot of The Changeling.
@@coyoteboy5601 Have you never seen the Director’s Cut edition? No, I didn’t learn anything new here, AND, it’s still not a review, which your comment ignores completely. And apparently, you don’t know what the word “analysis” means, because, again, it’s a “How it was made,” and contains exactly zero analysis. 🤦🏽♂️
@@coyoteboy5601 Actually, that’s total baloney. Words have meanings, and context is king. When you’re talking about movies, “review” means to say what you thought of the film (as well as books, TV, etc.) I can’t stop anyone from having an opinion about the MEANING of a word, so you can think what you want. But my facts, which is what definitions of words are, don’t really care about your feelings or opinions on what “review” means. When talking about films, it’s STILL going to mean “someone’s opinion,” and NOT “how it was made.” Furthermore, I find it interesting that instead of addressing the fact that I didn’t learn anything, as per your original question, you basically changed the subject, AND tried to redefine a common word. 🤦🏽♂️ Good day sir.
My comments are based on the theatrical release. I can't find a way to enjoy "Star Trek: The Motionless Picture". The only consistently good thing about it is the score. The picture is visually dull as could be. I watched the video years after the theatrical release with fresh eyes, in hopes I liked it this time. I still fell asleep watching it, only to be woken by either the transporter deaths or the wormhole. The script as shot and edited for release is a mess. The special effects were poor. The actors performance feels like they were all bored to tears, except for DeForest Kelley. The theatrical release and its production choices (admittedly many due to studio execs who seemed clueless in hindsight) should be a course in film schools on how to not make a movie, ending with the most recent cut and effects on how to do it right. Despite all that's awful about it, it does deserve credit for bringing back the franchise, at least to lead to choices that led us to the wonderful "Wrath of Khan"
![ละลาย (LALALYE) - DAOU PITTAYA ต้าห์อู๋ พิทยา [OFFICIAL MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/wo6r9TgausI/mqdefault.jpg)
The standout in this film is the majestic score by Jerry Goldsmith.
The "Klingon Battle" piece from the beginning of the movie (with V'Ger on Blaster Beam) is one of my favorite pieces of movie music ever--and doubly so when you consider that one scene basically established what Klingons were like through the Next Generation/DS9 era, and the music was definitely part of it.
I always quite liked TMP. I'd argue that it's in the top 5, especially The Director's Cut.
This is BY FAR the best discussion about this film I have read. Really interesting! Thank you!
You have “read?”
This, and TWOK, are my two ex aequo favorite movies of the franchise. Kinda like Alien and Aliens - one is a slow-burner that sucks me in with atmosphere, and the other is a more bombastic, action-driven epic. I love these looooong shots of Enterprise in the space dock or going through V'Ger, it's hypnotizing. I'm always a bit sad when I hear someone describing it as "boring", because there isn't a single frame of this movie that I ever want to skip. I'm so glad it was made, we'll never get movies like this or the original Andromeda Strain today.
I need to see the directors cut. I didn't realize it was that much different from the one I saw.I remember being vaguely disappointed when I first saw it but not knowing exactly why.
That this is tonal shift from the show: The show was never merely jokey. It was mostly overly serious about usually rubber monsters, or about the different things it encounters,-- with a humourous joke at the end or throughout--- such as recreated in next generation. the cast disliked the script throughout and were frustrated that it was humourless. Yet this is what was made. Wise's other science fiction movies tended to be serious, but had sarcastic humour. Like the andromeda strain but ultimately were serious heavy hitters, even a bit on the sterile side, so this is what we got. The visuals though drawn out in this film are instead its strength. they capture the vidual wonder of the first show, but which they didnt have the budget for. However it is a tonal difference from the 60s show, but, that is also because perhaps much time had passed. In fact, it is probably the closest to an episode of the original show I think? of the movies? In some ways perhaps. The original show certainly had mostly a serious tone, alleviated by jokes and funny parts, found throughout but often at the end. Even if episodes featuring Harry Mudd were often comedic throughout.
It's really nice to see this film getting some more credit as it ages. We just released our own look back at it on our channel! We're covering all of the original crew films in a six week stint. I'm sure someone is looking forward to Star Trek V 😉
No Market Media I’ll check it out!
@@TheUnapologeticGeek It's a different kind of style from what you're doing with your breakdown, but thankfully there's a lot of room for both 🖖
TH-cam is big enough for all of us, for sure. You guys are fun, so I'll keep watching all the way through. And I AM looking forward to hearing you talk about V. :)
I still enjoy this film, despite it's flaws. Wise's Director's Cut, and the 2022 4K Remaster of that, show it to best advantage. The Refit of NCC-1701 USS *Enterprise* is my very favorite of all SF ships, and Goldsmiths' score is an unqualified success.
I recommend reading "Chekov's Enterprise", Walter Koenig's diary of principal photography. It's anecdotal, and he couldn't say everything he wanted to, but it's still a snapshot of Trek history, and quite amusing too.
Excellent video. Thank you. Robert Wise may not have been the ideal choice for a Star Trek film, but his experience and ability were essential to avoiding the film from failing to meet the release date (even in an uncompleted state).
if you must watch I recommend the Directors Cut
No mention of the "Special Longer Version" which was shown on TV broadcasts of the film, and inserted the missing character moments decades before the Director's Edition. This was the version of The Motion Picture I grew up with, and probably why I enjoyed it far more than most other people. It wouldn't be until I was probably in my 20's that I would finally see the Theatrical version, whereas the SLV I had seen at 7 years old. It also had some alternate takes of certain shots, which would even be missing from the Director's and later Ultimate editions.
One thing to consider when trying to estimate the cost of Star Trek: TMP is that they got a lot of additional value out of the budget by reusing and re-dressing effects shots, sets and costumes from this movie in other Star Trek movies and TV shows all the way up through Star Trek: Voyager (which was still using things like that corridor set). So it helped keep *their* budgets down, and made them look like relative successes in the process.
I'll always treasure my LaserDisc (the format shall rise again!) But the HD transfer of the Director's Cut on Paramount+ is an absolute thing of beauty.
@The Unapologetic Geek - nice job! I wish I had stumbled across your work sooner.
I am a fan of this movie, and spent my youth watching it, Star Trek II, and the Star Wars movies in Laser Disc (if that doesn't age me!). We had the longer TV edit of the film, that lacks something the director's cut has, and has something it lacks, which I wish the Director's cut had followed. It lacked the beeps and boops of every button press (especially on the Klingon ship), which I don't think are needed. More crucially, it lacks a scene - McCoy says, "Jim, this thing is saying it's creator is a machine..." And Decker replies, "Of course! We all create God in our own image!" This is true, as since we are told God created us in his image, we in our minds see him as looking like us. This shows Decker making a connection and beginning to understand V'Ger, and makes his ultimate decision one that follows in a way that looks natural, rather than a rash, on the spot action. I always felt that this scene added much needed depth to Decker.
As an old school Trekkie, I always found TMP as the second best, inferior only to First Contact and only because the latter shows something as seminal as the first contact, expanding the lore as I think every movies should have done.
But the first one is amazing and a true long episode of great sci fi, even before the vastly superior director's cut that I'm very happy to be able to see. For me, the other movies are too much concerned with the characters, instead that going outside of the Federation or exploring other true big questions... or, if they tried to do so (I'm looking at you, Insurrection), they made a poor job.
Thanks for so much insight, Geek!
La-La Land Records has released the definitive version of Goldsmith's score on a 2CD set.
This is an impressively entertaining and succinct summation of a very complex production story. Well done!
Thank you, good sir!
I will never understand why this masterpiece is so hated
A good history although you missed the why of Nimoy not signing on immediately because of his lawsuit regarding using his Spock likeness for advertising without compensating him. Eisner cut him a check and he was on board
Another great review
The only medium you can watch the directors cut is DVD, witch as a physical medium was at its peak in the early 2000s following its development and release in 1996, only to be surpassed in 2006 by blu ray witch edged out hd dvd in a 2 to 3 year format war by late 2009 the same year the HD remastered original series was released on blu ray
I saw this film in the cinema and was, at the time, highly impressed with it. In fact, it's only with this review that I've learned that there is a director's cut, which I'll start looking for (for which I'll start looking?). I recall that there were a few scenes that dragged (especially the Kirk sees the new Enterprise) but overall I thought that the story was a serious upgrade to the TV series-style stories. My wife and I saw most of the following movies (can't remember seeing Star Trek V, but we did see Star Trek VI), but we both lost interest in the later movies, although we saw one or two of them. I, at least, have zero interest in the current reboot series of movies. Altogether though I think this movie was a serious upgrade and perhaps the best of all the movies.
I'm the same as you I think the original crew movie's are really good apart from the 5th one, and I'm not that big a fan of TNG films. First contact is the best one but I think it's overrated when compared to some of the 80s movie trek. I don't like the reboots or discovery. There all crazy camera angles and lens flare that try and rip off idea's and redo character's from the original films and are dummed down which I don't think trek is all about. I wish they would lean more towards TMP then what there currently doing if they green light a new movie. Create a interesting, entertaining adventure with a really good sounded out script and make a film that will stand the test of time which the Abrams trek will not.
Your reviews rock sir, I've got a channel with about 20k subscribers but I'm gonna recommend it in my community section now ;)
Thank you so much! I shall check out your channel post-haste as a sign of appreciation.
I love this film. But if you're just being introduced to Trek and you watch this, you will NEVER visit Trek again. It is a slooooooooooooooooooooooooooooow, dense film that rewards Trek fans but is steeped in the relationships and concepts that Trek fans know and love. It's a wonderful film and I say this as a huge fan but that's the point. It's not for outsiders. Once they love Trek they'll love this film. But it is a slog at first.
this film actually introduced me to star trek back in 2013, unfortunately when i first watched this it bored me and I completely forgot everything in it but in 2018 I decided to watch the original series, I loved it even if my memories of it are a bit foggy, then in 2021 I rewatched it and fell in love, I felt shameful it didn't touch me then as much as it does now
Great Review! I saw STTMP back when it came out and i loved it then and still do especially Robert Wises directors cut.
I was wondering where you found the art that appears from 5:11 to 5:18, I just think it’s beautiful but can’t seem to find it by googling. Excellent video as well, looking forward to watching the rest of the series!
I don’t remember off the top of my head, but I think it’s from that book about Phase II.
Gotta check out the Director’s as per UR Recommendation Sir G. Thanx man !
*Director’s Cut
As far as taste in Star Trek Films goes, I think that The Motion Picture was an okay, but very flawed start to the Star Trek Franchise. The best things about The Motion Picture were the Jerry Goldsmith music score and the good performances from Leonard Nimoy and Nichelle Nichols, the scene with Spock on Vulcan was great, and DeForest Kelley was also very good as Bones. The problems that I had with this film is that the plot of The Enterprise crew investigating V'Ger was forgettable, the wormhole sequence was pretty bad, and Decker was a terrible supporting character.
Overall, The Motion Picture was an alright Star Trek film and the ending scene of the film did a good job setting up for The Wrath of Khan. The Motion Picture is a very flawed sci-fi film, it felt the Star Trek version of 2001: A Space Odyssey, and The Wrath of Khan will always be my absolute favorite Star Trek film that saved the Star Trek Franchise.
I'm surprised more trekies don't watch this. Where have they gone ??
I'm 19 years old and I love this film
Just watched this movie again, the Directors Cut and I must say my opinion has not changed since I originally saw it in the theater. It is slow and plodding...the effects are so redundant it is ridiculous. At the beginning...we get an external view of the Klingon ships being destroyed...a view that continues after the ships are destroyed. They either had relay satellites there or one hell of a telescopic view. It happened again as a Federation listening post was destroyed. Then there were stupid continuity errors like when Admiral Kirk and Scotty were making an outside inspection of the newly refitted USS Enterprise...there was a long shot of them flying over the USS Enterprise which when switched to an interior view of their shuttle showed them below the main body of the ship. As a long time Star Trek fan, I wanted to enjoy this movie (which did well at the box office) but it was a boring heap.
That is a common opinion on the film, and I respect that. There's no denying its flaws, especially the sluggish pace, even in the Director's Cut.
I love star trek
Great film
14:22 Nope. It's not.
IN fact a number of character related scenes were cut or trimmed from the film. The CGI does not match well with the original effects, the new sound work done for the film is crankly inferior to the original theatrical release.
Instead of cutting the quips and reactions of the characters like they did, they should hav rtrimmed the extensive visual effects sequences and helped the story to BREATH.
Also, Leonard Nimoy has made it very clear that the shoot was not a happy time. That things were being changed all the time,. They'd come to set expecting to shoot one thing, and end up not shooting it at all. They had to come up with new sequences to replace other ones because the work they had done was working. They had two FX houses working on the damn thing.
Don't get me wrong, I love The Motion Picture, but it is the reason that all the future Trek films up to Star Trek V had such low budgets, and had to squeeze every penny out of every single t hing they made.
For me the film completely falls apart when the Ilia Probe shows up. It's so juvenile it becomes unwatchable from that point forward. Like Blade Runner and The Black Hole, I watch the film solely for the visual effects and score.
I know this film has flaws. However, I waited for years for this film to be made having seen Star Trek on TV during its actual run. I am writing this before I have seen your review.
I was at the premier at grauman's Chinese, and was bitterly disappointed, especially as a devoted fan. I could forgive the slow and pompous tour and shatner's extra hammy acting, but the worst sin was recycling the plot of The Changeling.
I DON'T GET IT... this isn't a review, it's a "How it was Made." Like, WTF?
It's an insightful analysis. Tell me you didn't learn stuff.
@@coyoteboy5601 Have you never seen the Director’s Cut edition? No, I didn’t learn anything new here, AND, it’s still not a review, which your comment ignores completely. And apparently, you don’t know what the word “analysis” means, because, again, it’s a “How it was made,” and contains exactly zero analysis. 🤦🏽♂️
@@jakethet3206 G "Review' has a much broader meaning than you allow. Go split your semantic hairs with someone who cares.
@@coyoteboy5601 Actually, that’s total baloney. Words have meanings, and context is king. When you’re talking about movies, “review” means to say what you thought of the film (as well as books, TV, etc.) I can’t stop anyone from having an opinion about the MEANING of a word, so you can think what you want. But my facts, which is what definitions of words are, don’t really care about your feelings or opinions on what “review” means. When talking about films, it’s STILL going to mean “someone’s opinion,” and NOT “how it was made.”
Furthermore, I find it interesting that instead of addressing the fact that I didn’t learn anything, as per your original question, you basically changed the subject, AND tried to redefine a common word. 🤦🏽♂️
Good day sir.
Great video. But Alan Dean Foster is not British. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Dean_Foster
Huh. I stand corrected! Thanks for keeping me honest.
My comments are based on the theatrical release. I can't find a way to enjoy "Star Trek: The Motionless Picture". The only consistently good thing about it is the score. The picture is visually dull as could be. I watched the video years after the theatrical release with fresh eyes, in hopes I liked it this time. I still fell asleep watching it, only to be woken by either the transporter deaths or the wormhole. The script as shot and edited for release is a mess. The special effects were poor. The actors performance feels like they were all bored to tears, except for DeForest Kelley. The theatrical release and its production choices (admittedly many due to studio execs who seemed clueless in hindsight) should be a course in film schools on how to not make a movie, ending with the most recent cut and effects on how to do it right. Despite all that's awful about it, it does deserve credit for bringing back the franchise, at least to lead to choices that led us to the wonderful "Wrath of Khan"
Yeah, but look at what Trek has become - literal Dreck.
Even though Starfleet has thousands of ships at the capitol of the federation there is only one ship that could confront V’ger. 🤣🤣🤣
You should concentrate of REVIEWING the film instead of retelling what happened before this movie's production for the umpteenth time.