Great Links: Trek On The Lists, In A Rap, On A Car, and more June 11, 2008
by TrekMovie.com Staff , Filed under: Great Links , trackback
In this week’s Great Links we have Trek showing up on the best and dodging the worst lists. Plus the writer of Fanboys has a Trek confession, Adam Sandler channels Spock, TNG inspires a rap (possibly a decade or two too late), and some guy has pimped his ride Romulan style.
Trek movies make the best list, but not the worst
The fine folks at Rotten Tomatoes have put together their list of "50 Best TV Adaptations of All Time" and as you could expect, Star Trek represented. In fact six Star Trek movies made the list: First Contact (6), Wrath of Khan (7), Voyage Home (12), The Undiscovered Country (14), Search for Spock (23), and Insurrection (42). However, on Entertainment Weekly’s List of "17 Sci-fi misfires" there isn’t a single Trek film. EW’s editors call out film’s like Bicentennial Man and The Island of Dr. Moreau, and even put the smackdown on Jurassic Park and Buckaroo Banzai, but totally overlook Star Trek V: The Final Frontier?
Beaten by the a TNG movie? We demand a recount!
A worst sci-fi list without us? We demand a recount!
Fanboys writer seeks common ground with Trekkies
The upcoming Star Wars fan-focused comedy "Fanboys" will include a scene where their heroes have to face off against a group of lirpa-wielding Trekkies, which is just the latest front in the age old battle of Trek v Wars. But in a new interview with UGO, Fanboys co-writer Ernie Cline admits that he is a Trekkie too. From the interview:
UGO: So – here’s a question – you can only take one franchise with you to a desert island – is it Star Wars or Star Trek? (It has been leaked that the gang from Fanboys run afoul of some hardcore Trekkies.)
Ernie Cline: Okay, wait… Do I just get to take the movies or the movies AND all of TV series? If I can take TV series, too, I’d have to say Trek, just because that would give me a much larger library on the hypothetical desert island. If it’s just the movies – then it would be Star Wars for sure.UGO: In an effort to build harmony, what can Trek fans and Star Wars fans agree on as common ground?
Ernie Cline: Um… That Earth sucks? That outer space is where the real action is?
Spot the faux Trekkies in the Fanboys Trailer
The Zohan Neck Pinch
The Adam Sandler comedy You Don’t Mess with the Zohan , featuring a cameo by Star Trek’s George Takei, opened last week. In a gander at the trailer, one can see Sandler perform Spock’s famous pinch…on a rambunctious child.
Sandler channels Spock
Picture of the week: Ford of Prey
Italian photoblogger Giancarlo Angeloni spotted this "Macchina Romulana" (Romulan Car) at the recent Trek Con in Bellaria, Italy.
Bet this baby really pulls in the ragazze
Video of the week: TNG Rap
The folks at Cracked.com and ThoseArentMusketts.com, in what appears to be a fit of 80s nostalgia, have put together a "Star Trek TNG Rap"…Yo yo yo are you down with the Enterprise D?
[warning very explicit lyrics - NSFW]
QuickLinks
- Manchester Evening News: Star Trek Flats Go To Appeal
- Collegiate Times: Editorial defending wikipedia for having a longer entry for the Klingon language than for Latin
- EW: Star Trek Communicators listed as one of "12 Movie/TV Tech Toys We Want!"
Loading ...
Comments»
I’m frankly more gobsmacked that Insurrection is on the ‘good’ list!
those aren’t muskets
yeah…seriously..why is Insurrection on the good list.
The Rap video is very very fun! A DEFINITE warning though. It’s fully R-rated!
That rap is disturbing
That rap is terrible and definitely not family friendly. >_<
Yow.
WTF?
:::shakes head in disbelief::::
Part of me finds that video funny.
Part of me finds it disturbing.
“Riker is number one”…..lol.
i wonder if that car cloaks.. is the cloaking device a standard equipment? LOL!
greetings from manila, philippines…
Heres a better Star Trek song from you tube,
by far one of the best
Bring Shatner Back
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TsXoUMH13H8
Enjoy
:o )
“Time his nuttz like a digital clock”
“That’s how it rollz under JLP”
“Bounce like Crusher in season 2″
This is classic!
Darth “Rise that ass like a turbo lift” Ballz
You’d think if the writer of Fanboys was a Trekkie, the Trekkies in the trailer wouldn’t be so horribly done. I can see why they wouldn’t have the right uniforms (no licensing agreement with Paramount). But the movie takes place in America and they’re talking about the birthplace of Capt. Picard, who they call British and not French. And the statue looks to be of Kirk and Spock fighting in “Amok Time.”
Not that non-Trekkies would really catch that, but if you’re going to make a movie about nerds, it’ll be even funnier for nerds if even the non Star Wars jokes are at least accurate.
Those guys get 50 points for that rap–creative and hilarious.
The sci-fi misfire list was bs, Jurassic Park and Blade Runner are some of the best sci-fi movies ever, and Buckaroo Banzai was just plain funny. No wonder Family Guy loves making fun of Entertainment Weekly… the people writing for that mag are idiots! :P
EVIL! Pure and simple by way of the eighth dimension!
arrrrrrr…
here’s a great link:
http://deltrame.googlepages.com/episodeone522
Oh my… I’ve been gone awhile… love what Anthony has done wit’ tha’ furniture…
Gotta a year ta’ go fur tha’ movie and money ta’ blow on the toys ta’ come of it wheee! so we can all dream up how that third nacelle on JJ’s Enterprise fits into tha’ plot…
Chris Pine: “I have no comment.”
Arrrrrr….
Rap video: “On the Enterprise-D and the three Films E.” What a perfect line!
You know it’s a messed-up list when “First Contact” beats “Wrath of Khan” and “Insurrection” is even on it.
- ..but totally overlook Star Trek V: The Final Frontier? -
Ha, told ya! :)
Charles:
For all its misfires, Entertainment Weekly has been very good to Trek over the years.
Though, Jurassic Park and Blade Runner? JP was rollicking fun. As for BR, how can you call a film “beautiful” and “influential” and say it sucks?
And where are the Wars prequels? And sequels in general? Robocops II & III? T3? AvP2?, Aliens 3&4? Star Treks 5 & 10? Why do they stop at 17 films?
It sucks when a shoddy filler article like the EW list gets out to loads of subscribers. It’s likely to be flashing all over AOL and CNN.COM soon as well. Let’s write a letter.
Not Safe For Work is a gross understatement, but that is just about the funniest thing I have ever seen in my life!!!! Much appreciated.
Insurrection (42) = NO cred!
Just finished watching First Contact the other day. I haven’t seen the film in nearly ten years. Frankly, it’s not as good as I remember it being. Don’t get me wrong, it is by far the best TNG pic, but it is NOT the best Star Trek movie. I’d tie it with Star Trek III on my list of favorites.
There seemed to be more of a timelessness to the Original Series movies that was not present in the TNG films. (I’m referring to the plots and not the special effects.) Also, I enjoyed the grandeur of the original movies. There seemed to have more of a cinematic quality to them, whereas, the TNG films seemed like extended episodes of the show.
Anyway, I digress…
Worf pulls in p*ssy like a tractor beam… LOL
LOOOOL that rap was funny as hell
with all due respect but Star Trek: First Contact was by far the best Star Trek movie – not only did it have a better story than Khan, it wasn’t as cheesy and well the Borg Queen could kick Khan’s ass round the moons of nebuar and round the antaries maelstrom.
But… Star Trek: First Contact was the first and bar surprisingly Nemesis, only TNG film to have a wider appeal than just the core fanbase.
I love Wrath of Khan a lot more than i do FC but even i can see that FC could wipe the floor with Khan.
OH MY GOD! That rap had me crying it was so funny. Seriously, that was way too good.
The rap is just plain wrong….the rap is crap.
The Final Frontier always seems to be the whipping boy but is really not that bad. I can sit down and watch it every once in a while but Insurrection is completely unwatchable.
Insurrection on the Best List makes me want to yack.
“EW’s editors call out film’s like Bicentennial Man and The Island of Dr. Moreau, and even put the smackdown on Jurassic Park and Buckaroo Banzai, but totally overlook Star Trek V: The Final Frontier?”
Obviously, Shatner tried a different demographic for The Final Frontier than the typical Fanboyz demo of unmarried, teenaged/college boys living in the basement dreaming what life is like “out there”.
In my opinion, as a normal, taxpaying, GenX, family and business man with a liberal arts undergrad degree, it’s the best of them all. I could not care less about the so-called “cheesy” SFX, I love that Kirk (whose name means “Church”) debunks a false God, and that he rejects the whole Jungian Encounter Group Thing in favor of old fashioned CHARACTER. You know, the kind we once tried to build in our men by forcing them the make tough choices whether they liked it or not.
The campfire and El Capitan scenes are simply fun and entertaining and sometimes breathtaking, speaking as a lifelong outdoorsman who’s seen some of our Maker’s majesty with my own eyes.
EW knows what they are doing – that’s why they make the Big Bux.
27: Funny you refer to “our maker” and STV. The Shat was bitterly accused by Christian groups for introducing secularism into the debate about God’s existence. His reference tp God being “in here,” i.e. in our hearts rather than an almighty being, rattled quite a few cages.
STV also does emphasize character, as you say. But none of the main characters are themselves. Kirk gives up his ship and crew too easily (He would have blown it up before allowing it to be hijacked), and Spock falters as Kirk’s First Officer by disobeying orders. Scotty and Uhura, etc. A clunker.
Correction: Shatner did not “introduce secularism into the debate,” but made it an important point in the film.
Holy Spock on a stick, that rap video was funny. NSFW as all get-out, but hilarious.
@10 Agreed
yes i am sure the writers of fanboys, are great “trekkies” ,
i mean there doing a movie about fanatic sci fi fans of star wars,
but there also making a comedy , so you can see there trying to get
the audience to relate to and like the star wars fans, which is understandable . But then they make the trekkies in the movie just one
big lame joke….typical
Insurrection is a good movie.
Classic Trek-style storyline
Excellent effects
Well-directed
Interesting antagonists
Insurrection is superior to TFF, GEN, and NEM
32,
Thank you. Finally, someone who actually likes Insurrection. I like all the TNG movies except Nemesis. Generations is on the borderline.
Why on Earth is Jurassic Park on the worst list? It’s a classic movie!
The inclusion of Jurassic Park and Bicentennial Man on the worst list tends to invalidate the entire list, in my opinion.
IMHO, JP was good, BM was not. And Insurrection was a disappointment if you wanted more of FC type stuff but on its own it’s not a bad movie. Certainly better than Nemesis. Though it’s pretty funny – the problem I have with the way Nemesis ended was Picard freezing at the ultimate moment, Shinzon’s death. I thought, no way would Picard freeze like that. But I caught the episode “Time Squared” the other day, where Picard faces a duplicate of himself, and it flummoxed him quite a bit, leaving him saying at the end that he never wanted to face that again. So maybe he would have froze. But I still don’t like Nemesis, since it’s basically an attempt to clone TWOK.
I really like “Insurrection,” too. Of all the TNG films, it feels the most Roddenberry-inspired. Coming off the more action-oriented “First Contact,” I think it let audiences down with it’s slower pace, but it stands very well on it’s own.
I also have a real soft spot in my heart for STV: TFF. Despite it’s obvious flaws, this movie is more like a big screen episode of TOS than any of the other films.
As for the EW list, were they just pulling film names out of a hat at random? Sometimes I think they write stuff simply to stir up the sci-fi fan base. “This’ll really get ‘em fired up. Put ‘Buckaroo Banzai’ on the list.” In defense of my online namesake, “BB” is the quintessential sci-fi farce, and one of the most under-rated films of all time.
Man, it’s sad how many movies I genuinely like showed up on that list. Classics like Blade Runner and Jurassic Park, yeah– but I also loved Event Horizon and Virtuosity (except for the ending, which was lame, but Russell Crowe had a pretty great villain going there). Then again I also really like Red Planet, and I know for a fact I was in the minority there.
And agreed– Final Frontier and/or Nemesis and/or the Star Wars prequels belonged on there somewhere. Or Mission to Mars, dear lord.
Don’t hurt me please D: *scuttles back into lurkdom*
Obviously when they screened “Buckaroo Banzai”, they were not in the correct state of mind…
…If you watch Buckaroo Banzai expecting a thought-provoking Sci-fi film (or even a “traditional comedy” Sci-fi film), then you will hate it. If you watch Banzai expecting to see some campy goodness, then you’ll probably like it.
It may not be an important film, but it IS exactly what it set out to be.
V is a dog. Sorry US taxpyaer dude.Although I agree with the tough choices argument, and the majestic beauty of Yellowstone. I also liked Kirk ” needing his pain” It was a good idea. The pain was there all right It was painful to watch. The direction was jumbled, the scenes forced. It looked low budget in relation to other Trek movies.
taxpayer. not taxpyaer
God damn if it hasn’t been a slow news kind of last few weeks!!! Time to rock out some movie spoilers guys. Anything a swash of fabric. I am becoming disinterested !!
Ok, best trek-themed music video I’ve seen. Very, very creative and funny.
But why are people so high on Insurrection? It puzzles me. It has so many cheesey moments. Isn’t that the movie Troi makes the comment about kissing Riker with or without a beard? The movie has a classic trek theme maybe, but thats all it’s got. That movie helped ruin the Data character for me, and TNG all together. I knew it was the beginning of the end, and they would never recover. The Enterprise-E deserved way better than two out of three of the movies it got, but did have a cool crash scene in Nemisis. For the average fan to rate that movie noticably higher than Nemisis makes no sence to me at all. They are both crap, and I thought Nemisis may be better. Can someone explain it to me please?
BTW, I’m in the midst of watching every TOS episode, and am convinced it is one of the ten best t.v. shows of all time, and the best sci-fi show of all time. I can not think of any trio better than Kirk, Bones, and my favorite character from the t.v. show, Spock. Nimoy is rediculously good. It’s by far the best of any trek series, because it’s so real, and so human. TNG was emotionless by comparison, DS9 gets, and will get no cred, and most of VOY belongs in the bin. And with that I’ve gone too far. I’m out.
33
I totally agree. Insurection is in my opinion also a good movie:
“I like all the TNG movies except Nemesis. Generations is on the borderline” – that’s it, I see it in the same way.
If there was not Kirks dead in Generations, it might have been much better, without the bitter ending.
Don’t lose faith, Lord Garth! The anticipation will just make it more worth it when the trailers start rolling in!
As far as that ridiculous EW list… What the heck was their criteria? Jurrasic Park, Blade Runner and Signs are ON the list? And not a single
Star Wars prequel makes it?! Those prequels were downright awful!!!
The only comparison in the Star Trek universe to any of the Star Wars prequel disasters are Nemisis and TMP, and I only say that because those are the films that lacked the LIFE and SPARK of all the other films and TV episodes. Even STV, for all of its flaws which Krik Semaj points out nicely, it at least had the reparte of the main characters and some REAL conflict for them to wade thru (albeit at a glacial pace!). Everyone was walking around like zombies in the effects-drowned TMP. And the direction in Nemesis is SO BAD that it actually did what I thought was impossible… brought down the performances of an ensemble who’d been performing together for 15 years!
I hope that Abrams will give us trekkies a chance to pass all-holy Star Wars in the pop culture pantheon when our remake totally smacks down their remake! (We’ve already passed them in the cultural pantheon… way more depth in ST!)
#23—You’ve got to be kidding! FC is light years behind TWOK. It isn’t even close. The only original film series installment that doesn’t top the elementary and by-the-numbers FC is TFF. The other 5 films blow it out of the water.
1. TWOK—far and away the best…it’s not even close
2. TMP—best “sci-fi” story in any Trek film and the only true “epic” to date
3. TVY—pinnacle of box office popularity and probably the most fun
4. TSFS—important “fanboy” film, but little “crossover” value
5. TUC—more than respectable “bounceback” from STV
6. FC—only re-watchable(?) TNG-era movie, but still mediocre at best
7. INS—straight to dvd quality, but worth seeing once I guess
8. GEN—uh, no…
9. TFF—The Great Trek Turd
10.NEM—not sure if I’ve ever even seen the whole thing, wasn’t interested
I’m not a troll, I swear, just the new kid here, but I’m wondering: re #45 and other comments I’ve seen reading back on trekmovie, I’ve seen a lot of people calling TMP epic. How exactly are you defining “epic?”
Me, I’ll grant that the cinematography of TMP was stunning to look at and the overall feel of the movie was big and dramatic, but the word “epic” to me suggests a long, involved, dramatic story. TMP is definitely dramatic– overdramatic even– but its length includes a lot of padding (read: George Takei staring) and I definitely wouldn’t call the story involved.
Here we go with the “my Trek movie is better than your Trek movie” arguments.
Boring.
But V really is a turd.
I vastly prefer Khan to FC, but interestingly, they’re both the best in their respective ‘eras’ and they both have the formula of being a continuation of a TV episode.
TMP is the best ‘hard science fiction’ film, although it did borrow several existing TOS elements (notably from The Changeling). The Director’s Edition solves most of the pacing problems of the original release.
I for one do NOT agree that Insurrection was a good film…at best, I’d call it mediocre. There were many things that irked me about the film, apart from it’s slow pace and cheesy moments:
- Why in 2375, during the Dominion War, would you send the Enterprise-E to do a job that could easily be achieved by a significantly less imortant starship…? I mean, to think that you had old Miranda and Excelsior ships fighting on the frontlines and frequently being destroyed with all hands and a Sovereign-class starship with an experienced crew attending to other duties is beyond belief….
- So the moral of this story is that if you had the choice between saving a small amount of people on some insignificant world and saving billions of lives, especially with the aforementioned war going on and millions of people dying, you should choose the minority simply based on the fact that they didn’t know it was happening…? Does anybody not remember Spock? “The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few”? How that message was so important that Spock sacrificed his own life because of it?
- Overall, this film strikes me more of a (not paticularly brilliant) TNG episode than something intended as a feature film…the TOS films, even in the instances where they did not quite succeed in overall quality like STV, did well in following the formula for how to structure a cinematic piece. Insurrection, for all I do not like it’s plot or message, could easily have been set during the show as a two-parter…it’s just ridiculous.
Overall, I’d say the contenders for ‘worst Trek film’ are Insurrection, Nemesis and Final Frontier…and ironically, for all it’s bad reputation, I’d say Final Frontier had the most redeeming features…it’s a good example of a film with basic ideas that could have worked fairly well, but suffered in the execution. The campfire scenes and general exploration of the characters of Kirk, Spock and Bones were also in my view quite good. It’s just those uneccesary ‘humorous’ scenes (i.e. state of the Enterprise, Uhura’s dance) and dialogue that let down the film. Nemesis had good effects, but suffered greatly from re-treading explored ground in the Trek universe…making peace with old enemy faction, mind-rape, fighting a cloaked starship, fighting in a Nebula, escaping at the last moment from a planet-threatening super-weapon through the sacrifice of a main character, even hinting at a Spock-esque ‘return’ of sorts…as well as certain bits that simply don’t add up…
#49 That’s exactly what I was going to say. Thanks for saving me from writing it.
#46—First of all, welcome.
“…I definitely wouldn’t call the story involved.”
I have to disagree. It’s a timeless cause—the endless search for meaning and purpose to one’s existence. The arcs run parallel among the “Big Three” and V’Ger, the antagonist, who ironically ends up as a somewhat sympathetic character by the time the primary conflict within the story is resolved. While Spock and McCoy find that their purpose is in Starfleet (both are inactive prior to the inciting event in the story), and more specifically, by their Captain’s (the position, not the rank) side, Kirk only temporarily returns to his life’s purpose (he does not completely return to that purpose until the final scenes of TVY, IMO). Spock, of course, begins to make peace, once and for all, with his human blood. The audience is shown in the course of the plot’s unfolding that the heroes’ quest is not much different than that of V’Ger, and that all living things (even a living machine) share the thirst for knowledge, purpose, and the general wondering about the meaning of life and existence.
Within the story is Kirk’s struggle with his own ego and arrogance. At times, he is both humbled and triumphant. It is fitting that Kirk’s flaws are not reigned in until his two closest companions are back by his side. I think that, all in all, it is one of the best stories in all of the Star Trek films.
As for its “overdone” parts, I can’t argue with that, although the Director’s Edition cleans that up well, IMO, and I think the film holds up tremendously well 30 years later.
I use the term “epic” to describe the film’s grand production scale. To this point (presumably until the release of STXI), it is the only Star Trek film to be given that kind of treatment, and the only film to be handed over to an A-list Hollywood name (although Robert Wise was certainly far more well established as a director than is JJ Abrams). I rank TMP as my second favorite Star Trek film thus far, and my appreciation for it has grown as I got older.
I did not always give it the credit it deserves, and as a child, I definitely did not fully appreciate it. It is probably the most “mature” Star Trek feature film, and ironically, the one most in line with the stories told in TOS. Somewhere along the way, it always seemed to me that the filmmakers “forgot” that Starfleet’s primary mission was exploration and scientific discovery, not saving Earth, diplomacy, or fightning supervillains. That’s just my opinion…
With that said, nothing beats “Khaaaaaaaaaaaan!!!!”
I’m with #51. TMP is way under appreciated. The Directors Cut really does clean up alot of the slop that was the original theatrical release. Its also interesting hearing Wise’s comments. He addresses the criticism of the long V’ger sequences and defends their length.
The parallel between Vger and Spock was practically lost in the original theatrical relase. The Directors Edition restored that storyline. The 1979 release did not include the scene of Spocking weeping for V’ger on the bridge as they discussed self destruct (the self destruct sequence was also not included in the original release). Kirk turns to Spock to ask a question and see’s Spock with tears. He asks him “Not for us?”. Spock replies “No Captain, I weep for V’ger as I would weep for a brother. … logic and knowledge are not enough.”
That is one of the greatest raps I’ve ever seen, Trek or otherwise. lol
As for the worst list, there’s a lot worse sci-fi movies (even Trek movies) than The Final Frontier.
#51 & 52. I meant involved more purely in terms of plot than of theme. I can see where you’re coming from on the latter subject, though, and I’m ashamed to say if I’ve ever seen the director’s cut it didn’t stick in my head as well as it should have. (My current copy is the theatrical release; I can’t remember which my old VHS was, though the “I weep for V’Ger as I would weep for a brother” line sounds vaguely familiar.) I still hold that, just as a plotline, the story is relatively simple and straightforward– especially compared to other things commonly called “epics,” like the Odyssey or LotR or even the new Batman movies– but cinematically I’ll grant it was produced and presented on a similar scale. Not to mention that I think movie plots, just in general, have been getting gradually more complicated and dense over the past few decades.
Now I’m wondering what Homer’s work would have been like if he’d written movies instead of poems.
Also, thanks for the welcome :) I realized I was not keeping nearly as close track of movie news as I ought to be, and here seems like the place to hang out for that! So here I am.
#54—It doesn’t get any better than trekmovie.com, and not just for news on the new film, but Trek news in general. I look forward to seeing more of your opinions.
I, er, well, actually liked “Phantom Menace.” Sure, Jar-Jar was annoying, but for my money an otherwise good movie can rise above one annoying supporting player. I thought it tapped nicely into the whole Joseph Campbell groove. I dunno, maybe I was just in hunk heaven with the Liam-Ewan thing, but I have very fond memories of that summer.
I’ll rap for you you if you show me the big E.
“left the holodeck with a hollow d***”– LMFAO :D
The only real solid reason I can think of to leave the SW prequels off the “worst sci-fi movies list” is that I don’t consider them to actually be “science fiction”. IMO, they belong in the category of “fantasy”.
Star Trek=science fiction
Star Wars/LOTR=fantasy
Nothing wrong with fantasy, but it is far different from sci-fi, IMO…
cp, closet and horatio,
Thanks for discussing TMP. I agree with closet’s very well written post in #51. TMP holds up extrordinarily well, and really should only be viewed in the DE. I saw TMP on opening day, and I was 16. I seem to remember Spock’s line about weeping for V’Ger. You sure that wasn’t in the theatrical release? I’m pretty sure it was.
As for any of TNG movies being ranked above any of TOS movies, I strenuously object. Khan is far and away the most entertaining Trek film. Personally, I don’t consider TNG Star Trek, because it doesn’t tell the stories of Kirk, Spock and McCoy. That’s just my purely subjective opinion. I’ve watched them, and enjoy a few of them on their own, but I have no attachment to the characters. Sorry.
#59—Agreed. I like my Star Trek without holodecks, ship’s counselors, in pants, children on the bridge, artificial officers, neanderthal Klingons (cavemen in space), or starship captains who prefer Earl Grey tea.
In other words, I like my Trek in the 23rd Century…
In all fairness, I think TNG’s “Yesterday’s Enterprise” is one of the best Trek stories of any era.
My opinion of TNG is that it was an okay series on tv, but it was never really feature film worthy. It never developed the iconic status for its characters that TOS produced, and the attempts which were made at making Star Trek films set in that era could have easily been straight-to-dvd.
But the great thing about the long history of the franchise is that it appealed (and continues to appeal) to different generations in different ways. We all have our favorites, and it is admittedly subjective.
#58
Don’t kid yourself. Star Trek is squarely in the Sci Fi Fantasy realm also. I love it, but it is not nor never will be considered hard sci fi. The technology that is regularly used is VERY speculatitive, and much of it is not grounded in known physics. Just like Star Wars. The philosophy in the show is great. Thats why we like it. Same for Star Wars. They are both different types of the same genre.
LOTR is pure fantasy. A great story, a great set of movies, but not in the same genre as Star Wars.
#61—I kid not. The biggest difference to me between SW and ST is Star Trek portrays a timeline which is a speculative extension of our own. Our history is also the history of the ST universe, whereas SW takes place in some alternate reality (the long, long ago in a galaxy far away claim notwithstanding) where the entire thing requires an immediate and total suspension of disbelief. Star Trek asks us to suspend disbelief on a few elements of technology ( the transporter device, for instance), but most of the technology is more grounded in physics than you give it credit for. I’m not fool enough to claim that ST is without the element of fantasy in many cases, but I cannot put it into the same category as Star Wars. IMO, they will always be at opposite ends if you are to combine sci-fi/fantasy as one genre. There is nothing sci-fi about Star Wars at all to me, and IMO, it is in exactly the same genre as LOTR. Setting it in space doesn’t make it sci-fi.
As far as the physics of Trek being “speculative”, what difference does that make? After all, it’s still science “fiction”. The physics of “Jurassic Park” is more than speculative, and I would also classify it as sci-fi. IMO, it needs only to be loosely explainable. In the instances where the Enterprise encounters an alien species with abilities or technology which we might even call magical (Organians, Excalbians, Apollo, Metrons) I chalk that up to the notion that other species, far older than our own, may have learned things from the universe than seem impossible even by 23rd Century standards. It may be a fine line at times, but such classification differences make perfect sense to me.
#59 – I’m pretty sure the weeping for V’ger line was not in the Dec 79 theatrical release. I know that when it was aired on television with all the extra footage that it was in that (and subsequently also the VHS release). I was watching the TV premiere of TMP with my girlfriend and I distinctly remember that we were shocked with the Spock crying and weeping for V’ger scene since it made the movie make so much more sense.
Any other oldies out there that can help me remember if this is how it was or am I getting a little foggy????
#63—I was just a pup in Trekland when the film was first released, and I certainly did not appreciate it the way I do now. I don’t remember specifically if I saw that scene in the theater or not. I know I enjoy the Director’s Edition each and every time I see it, and that scene is very powerful and explains alot about Spock’s evolution into the man we know now as being comfortable in his own half-human skin.
63: I’m pretty sure the version I downloaded (shhhh) and rewatched just a few weeks ago didn’t have it, so presumably there’s /some/ version of the movie that doesn’t.
#62
Nope. It is still in the fantasy dept. Look I’m as big a Trek fan as anyone. I’m 48, so I’ve watched it for a good long time, and still do, but It is still in the same camp as Star Wars. – faster than light travel, faster than light communications among the 2 main commonalities. Star Wars has the force, and Trek wallows in time travel. These are all topics you won’t find in hard Sci FI, and I’m not just talking about novels. Movies as well. It’s why Alien is hard Sci Fi and Trek is not. The big difference is that Trek tries to explain their technology, and Star Wars doesn’t (other than the force – and that’s more like an ability that needs nurturing not technology) Trek does not do a good job with things like “warp” speed, and “sub space”. It’s nonsense & technobabble (but it makes for good entertainment). LOTR is strictly fantasy no science – just magic. Trek & Wars add some science to it and have a hybrid. I’ll admit Trek tries to stay closer to real science, but it still has plenty to keep it in the “fantasy” realm of Sci Fi. just at different ends of it. It’s not just me. Some of the great authors of Sci Fi – Clark, Asimov, Bradbury all liked Trek, but also never considered it hard Sci Fi.
#65—You definitely should invest a few dollars in the Director’s Edition. You’ll probably come away with a new appreciation for the film. IMO, it’s not just underrated as a Trek film, but as a science fiction story as well. There are also some good special features, most of which wasn’t anything new, but it is well put together and alot of fun.
#66—Once again, I think Star Wars is a pure fantasy film series. I find Star Trek to have far more sci-fi credibility. I can see where it is easier to define “Alien” as what you refer to as “hard sci-fi”, and I am in complete agreement, but I’ll never view Star Wars as being anything but fantasy. IMO, Star Wars is much more similar to LOTR than it is to Star Trek. Other than some similarity in the title and the fact that they are both set in space, SW has nothing in common with Trek. At least there are scientists on the fringe of credibility who believe that a variance of what Trek does with faster-than-light travel is theorectically possible, as well as those who believe that transporters could work in the future (albeit with simple and purely inanimate objects). As I said, there are elements of fantasy in Trek (like time-travel, although again there are “scientists” who disagree), but no significant elements of sci-fi in SW. Trek may be mostly sci-fi that borders on fantasy, but SW and LOTR are, to me, pretty much the same thing, and neither has anything to do with science fiction. Whether it is “hard” or “soft”, Star Trek is sci-fi, and Star Wars is pure fantasy. It appears we may have to agree to disagree, the opinions of “hard” sci-fi authors notwithstanding.
That rap reminds me a bit of my ex-fiance’s best friend’s vids he has on YT and every other site (I’m sure a lot of you have seen it)
ooops, I guess it can’t show the video, so here’s the link-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PsnxDQvQpw
#67
We will have to agree to disagree. I would rather take up this friendly debate in person. If Star Wars were to reference how their technology worked in conversation in the movies likr Trek does then you might be more inclined to distance the comparison to LOTR. The difference is no electronic technology in Tolkiens world. Star Wars is closer to Trek than Rings – not just because it’s in space. Trek dealt in mystical powers all the time. Look at Vulcans and their “immortal souls” or Katra if you prefer..
Next time you are in New England let me know. We could debate this for a long time.
#70—Haven’t been there in awhile, but New England is a beautiful place. If you ever find yourself in Houston, I would be glad to welcome you as well.
I go to Dallas once or twice a year on business, and I have relatives in New Orleans. Maybe one day I can make it over there and we can resume our discussion..
#72—I’m also in Dallas quite a bit, and New Orleans (I was born 30 miles from there) as well. Ironic…