www.ditl.org

Figured as much. Though failing that, this guys Insurrection could be just as enjoyable.

Deepcrush wrote:He seemed to talk a fair bit about the growth of the characters........

Well most of them certainly did grow.....around the waistline !

Atekimogus wrote:

Deepcrush wrote:He seemed to talk a fair bit about the growth of the characters........

Well most of them certainly did grow.....around the waistline !

My mom was watching a movie the other day with Shatner in it, and she asked what year it was made. Rather than look it up I glanced at the screen and said, "Production values, film quality and Shatner's hairpiece and waistline say 1990."

I was only off by a little bit.

I find that I've come to like TMP more and more as I get older. I get why people call it slow - even agree with that criticism to an extent. But in part it's down to the fact that Trek is just a very different type of movie to most sci fi. After Star Wars, sci fi became to a large extent cowboys and indians in space. It's almost automatic these days to think of sci fi movies as action movies. TMP is not and is not intended to be an action movie. It's not Star Wars, it's 2001 : A Space Odyssey, or Silent Running, or Close Encounters, or Solaris. 2001 is slower than TMP by far - hell, nobody even says anything until more than half an hour in. Yet it's considered one of the greatest sci fi movies ever made.

I wouldn't say TMP is necessarily up there with 2001, but that's the league it's batting in and it's a mistake to expect it to be something it isn't. Whilst I don't think it's a perfect film by any means, when I'm in the mood for it I do find it well worth watching.

GrahamKennedy wrote:I find that I've come to like TMP more and more as I get older. I get why people call it slow - even agree with that criticism to an extent. But in part it's down to the fact that Trek is just a very different type of movie to most sci fi. After Star Wars, sci fi became to a large extent cowboys and indians in space. It's almost automatic these days to think of sci fi movies as action movies. TMP is not and is not intended to be an action movie. It's not Star Wars, it's 2001 : A Space Odyssey, or Silent Running, or Close Encounters, or Solaris. 2001 is slower than TMP by far - hell, nobody even says anything until more than half an hour in. Yet it's considered one of the greatest sci fi movies ever made.

I wouldn't say TMP is necessarily up there with 2001, but that's the league it's batting in and it's a mistake to expect it to be something it isn't. Whilst I don't think it's a perfect film by any means, when I'm in the mood for it I do find it well worth watching.

Agreed completely. My friends and I all loved Solaris; the general public was expecting stuff to blow up every ten seconds.

I agree as well, GK - and I also think I've come to appreciate it more over the years. Star Wars was always intended to be a "space opera," Lucas' own little John Carpenter of Mars series. Separated from that by less than half a decade, it is inevitable that people came to expect something similar from TMP.

I think the biggest problem is that while TMP may not have been meant to be a fast paced film. It had times where it was drawn out for no good reason.

Deepcrush wrote:I think the biggest problem is that while TMP may not have been meant to be a fast paced film. It had times where it was drawn out for no good reason.

I think that's the crux of it. A slow paced movie isn't a problem. A slow paced movie because the editor couldn't make cuts is a problem.

Agreed.

Deepcrush wrote:I think the biggest problem is that while TMP may not have been meant to be a fast paced film. It had times where it was drawn out for no good reason.

Well I am not sure I agree here. From todays perspective it is probably right that same scenes - like sfdebris mentioned with the klingons - seem to be drawn out but let us once more compare it to 2001 where you watch almost half an hour a spinning wheel space station with classical music.

From todays perspective, where we got used to photorealistic special effect shots even for television productions, this seem really boring and drawn out but I imagine - wasn't born yet - back then, when those shots where state of the art they did a LOT to emphasize the atmosphere, adding realism etc.

Its like the first lord of rings, I remember watching it in the cinema the first time and I was in awe of the beautiful sets and especially Moria, well a few years later the awe is gone and a lot of scenes only showing beautiful sets seem to be drawn out and boring but back then they did a lot selling the magic of the movie imho.

And if everything else what sfdebris says is true and this movie is really the utter crap some think it to be, it still has the most beautiful 3-4 minutes of like EVER in star trek and I guess you all know what I am talking about, dont you?

Some may consider those minutes boring, I consider it a true valantine to the fans.

As with any film, its a matter of opinion. If you only need 5 minutes for the opening yet you spend nearly an hour covering it. To me thats a waste.

Agreed. Well there are films who seem great the first time you watch them in the cinema but became boring after the second viewing and there are films you watch from time to time and learn to appreciate because with each viewing you still discover neat details you never before noticed.

I guess the XI movie is of the former category, a funride in the cinema and great movie but I wonder how often the DVD will find the way into my player in the future while TMP is in the later category imho.

I don't think the unveiling of the E-A was a waste of time at all. Yes, it was longer than it needed to be to just show the ship; but I don't think it was long enough to overstep the poesy of the scene.

I never understood why they portrayed Kirk as SO rusty. He didn't seem to know ANYTHING about the refit Enterprise. A few minutes research into her new tactical systems would have brought him up to speed on the phaser problem, and so forth. That didn't make much sense to me.

I think that was a somewhat ham0handed way of attempting to easily portray his personal aging process.