XPost: alt.fan.starwars, alt.startrek, rec.arts.sf.starwars.misc
XPost: rec.arts.startrek.current
From: tf_martn@bellsouth.net
"Jaxtraw" wrote in message
news:43923437$0$9311$da0feed9@news.zen.co.uk...
> "Kweeg" wrote in message
> news:GJpkf.22878$ki.2263@pd7tw2no...
> > "Rich Handley" wrote in message
> > news:mss3p1dhll4fuhp5gbrap1vlck4f296crg@4ax.com...
> > > "Ken Maeda" said:
> > > >Whereas nearly all Trek fans will readily admit that ST I and V are
> > > >utterly indefensible with no redeeming qualities whatsoever (well,
> > > >unless you have a thing for Persis Khambatta).
> > >
> > > I happen to love the first Trek film. Yes, it's badly directed in
terms
> > of
> > > too much focus on effects, and yes, it's a rehash of the episode
called
> > > "The Changeling," but I think there's a LOT to like about that film.
> >
> > And ST5 had some of the best Kirk McCoy Spock moments and lines of the
> whole
> > franchise.
> >
>
> It's interesting how rapidly movies get divided into sheep and goats. I
> loved TMP when I first saw it.
Very few people disliked it when it came out. Only years later did it come
to be relegated to the "odd bad, even good" paradigm, one I never really
subscribed to. One needs to keep movies in context sometimes.
These days, I can see the flaws- lack of
> story, lack of action being the main ones.
It did feel more like sf than many of the other movies and had much more
epic scope than any but TWOK, but too much time spent staring at stuff. Plus
some scenes, though amazing especially at the time, do drag.
But it also has a sweeping
> grandeur and feel for Starfleet as a massive organisation that's never
been
> equalled (compare the SF installations in TMP with, say, Starfleet HQ in
> TNG's Conspiracy- which seems to be half a dozen blokes running things
from
> their front room (yes, I know, budgets, nonetheless...)).
Something I never really thought about, but yes. Too often you don't get any
feel for depth in Starfleet, that things go on well outside the confines of
the Enterprise, DS9, or what have you.
A better
> comparison then- the lauded (but by me loathed) STIV- The Voyage To
Feelgood
> TV Movie Land. Starfleet is a couple of rooms and a bizarre debating
chamber
> with two rows of Statler and Waldorf impersonators doing noddies. No sense
> of organisation or structure. Damned thing looks like a fan production by
12
> year olds, who've got their dads to be in it. No sense at all of this
> enormous political/military organisation (what the heck is it anyway? Is
the
> Federation really a benign military dictatorship? Why is that old priest-
> ahem, president- doddling around there? Where is the political system?
What
> the feck is this? Shall I stop ranting?)
I liked IV, but it was an entirely different movie. It was basically a
comedy, something feel good after II and III which were much more serious.
Unfortuantely they took the comedy too far in V.
>
> Anyway. TMP does it right in that regard. It's sad that vision was lost in
> the subsequent movies (due to Meyer's unnecessary stamp on the big red
reset
> button at the start of TWOK).
I loved TWOK to death and I liked that version of ST, but you are right, not
everything had to go.
>
> And ST5 has its good moments too. I just wish somebody had excised the
> rocket boots (very stupid idea, those), they'd spent more than 5 bucks on
> "God" and Row Row Row Your Boat probably wasn't wise either.
>
I thought the movie wasn't horrid, just could have been so much better.
Better God, Heaven, and Hell effects. Better explanation of some of the
plotline. Sybok wasn't believable as a Vulcan or as Spock's brother. His
ability wasn't well explained. The Klingons felt added on. The idea that
Enterprise- at Earth! - is the only ship available.
It did have some good things...as mentioned, some great Spock-McCoy-Kirk
interaction. Some of the humor was good, but some was terrible. I liked the
Bird of Prey at the end. The Romulan woman was hot.
Tim
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
