USS Phoenix
Logo
USS Phoenix forum / Star Trek / TMP vs TWoK
 Strona:  ««  1  2  3  »» 
Autor Wiadomość
Q__
Moderator
#31 - Wysłana: 13 Mar 2016 19:15:45
Odpowiedz 
Q__
Moderator
#32 - Wysłana: 15 Lip 2016 01:46:30 - Edytowany przez: Q__
Odpowiedz 
Kolejna (częściowa) obrona TMP:

Star Trek: The Motion Picture is the most beautiful Trek film, and the least human
/.../ a partial defense of the weird first film

Star Trek turns 50 this year. It is the most important of the great pop culture franchises, maybe, the first realized vision of a cross-platform fictionalized universe. There are long-running narrative ideas that predate Trek’s 1966 TV debut, sure: James Bond, Middle-Earth, Godzilla, Spider-Man, Superman, Sherlock Holmes. But the Star Trek half-century is the half-century of fandom, canon, mythology, spin-offs, young faces growing old across sequels and reboots. It is the age that fandom took over the movie industry – or the age of the movie industry co-opting fandom. Consider: The other franchises had to come to Hollywood. Trek started here – to the south, in Culver City, at Desilu Productions, rescued from development oblivion because Lucille Ball had serious sway.

If you want to understand everything fascinating about our movie moment – the push and pull between fans and creators, between beloved actors and the characters who define them, between the executives with all the money and the creators with all the ideas, between the demand for more of what has already worked and the constant need to set off in bold new directions, between the infinite creative possibilities of special effects and the infinite destructive possibilities of special effects – you need to understand Star Trek. It is the miracle of modern entertainment.

Star Trek turns 50 this year. It is the most inessential of the great pop culture franchises, maybe, forever chasing the stylistic advances of younger upstart entertainments, forever entrapped in narrative tropes and hackneyed philosophy, a vision of the future long past. Once progressive in vision, the franchise turned conservative in its desperate curation. In Trek, you see the beginning of the Faustian bargain between fan and executive – between the person who wants more of the same, and the person unwilling to try anything new – that would transform genre storytelling from the fascinating fringe into the vanilla mainstream. In Trek, you see the end of science fiction as a venue for ideas; the never-ending birth of remake culture; you can pinpoint the moment when every movie needed to be an action movie.

If you want to understand everything depressing about our movie moment – how every movie is an advertisement for another movie, how the most expensive films in history have less emotional impact than a middling episode of Better Call Saul, how directors became crossing guards, how actors became spokespeople, why a Pulitzer Prize-winning author is working on the Hasbro Cinematic Universe – you have to understand Star Trek. It is the downward spiral, the totalitarian Mirror Universe. It is modern entertainment’s original sin.

There is no simple way to understand Star Trek. There are high highs and low lows. There is canon and fanon, a general sense that continuity doesn’t matter running alongside a fierce protection of holy canon. There are arguments: Kirk vs Picard, Deep Space Nine vs everything, Voyager was secretly brilliant the whole time, J.J. saved Trek, J.J. ruined Trek.

Best to focus in, I think. On July 22, the 13th Star Trek movie will arrive in theaters. If Star Trek Beyond is awful, it still might not be the worst Star Trek movie. If Beyond is fantastic, it still might not be the best Star Trek movie. Trek cinema is all over the map: Thrilling, boring, experimental, primitive, expensive, shoestring. Maybe Star Trek should only be a TV show. (A new one arrives 2017.) Maybe Star Trek should only be about an Enterprise. Maybe it should just end. Maybe we’re just beginning. Every week from now until Beyond, we’ll look closely at one of the movies, in chronological order from Kirk to Picard to Kirk again. Hopefully, we’ll understand more at the end.

––––––––

There are some moments in Star Trek: The Motion Picture that are so beautiful – serene, cosmic, passionately alive with the possibility of The Infinite. You want to cry, you don’t know why. There are planetscapes and solaric abstractions and effervescent fugue-core incoherence rippling across electric oceans. The villain in The Motion Picture is one such abstraction: A demi-god vapor-planet of unknown origin and unknowable purpose. It is the first thing we see in the movie, and we never really see it at all.

In the first scene of The Motion Picture, three Klingon ships approach the cloud. In 1979, a Star Trek fan would have recognized the design of the Klingon ships. But things would have also looked different, to that diehard Trek fan. The camera follows the ships move across the stars – the kind of special effect that was practically impossible when Star Trek was on TV.

The Klingons are different, too: more alien, with makeup and forehead prosthetics. The subtext could be understood by a child: Star Trek is now $tar Trek!. And things sound better, too. The Motion Picture opens with the new Star Trek theme by Jerry Goldsmith, one of the greatest and most instantly recognizable musical cues in the last four decades. And the first scene is set to Goldsmith’s Klingon Battle Theme. That track might actually be better than Goldsmith’s theme tune, the way John Williams’ “The Imperial March” is deeper, richer, funnier, more dramatic than the Star Wars main theme.

The Motion Picture needs you to know that it’s a movie, by god. It’s right there in the title: “The Motion Picture,” a phrase connoting something bigger, better, more official, maybe even more pure than all that had come before. (You can feel an implication: Wouldn’t Star Trek be even better on the big screen?)

Today, “The Motion Picture” is a meaningless title. It runs along another outdated idea: That movies are fundamentally better than television. Almost four decades on, TV is more like movies, and movies are more like TV. And – roll with me, please – “motion pictures” stopped being A Thing You Watch and started being Your Life And How You Express Yourself. Your ten-year-old nephew makes motion pictures. Your ten-year-old nephew films from better angles than Robert Wise.

Wise directed The Motion Picture. He is one of perhaps twenty people who you could say saved Star Trek, and he is one of perhaps thirty who you could say almost destroyed Star Trek. (The lists overlap. Gene Roddenberry’s on both, at the top.) But if you allow for some wide wiggle room in your definition of “authorship,” all the best motion pictures in The Motion Picture comes from Douglas Trumbull.

Trumbull was a special-effects guy, worked on some of the most famous sequences in 2001: A Space Odyssey, was just finishing Close Encounters of the Third Kind, would soon craft the neon gritworlds of Blade Runner. An impressive run, and one that maybe Trumbull himself only appreciates as a complimentary prize from fate. In the early ’70s, Trumbull directed Silent Running, a Big Idea space thinker that earned the kind of negative money cult sensations always earn.

Trumbull only agreed to do The Motion Picture out of spite. Paramount was in a jam; he was on contract to them; they needed him; he wanted nothing to do with Paramount ever again. So he agreed to finish the movies’ special effects on a tight turnaround, on the condition that he would never have to work with Paramount again. He worked his team hard – in his own telling, Trumbull wound up in the hospital for two weeks, exhausted. Working alongside onetime protégé John Dykstra (who created some of the most memorable effects in Star Wars) and much of the Close Encounters team, Trumbull the weirdest and gorgeous and often wildly incongruous visions ever seen in a science fiction movie.

Much of it looks unreal, like this early shot of Planet Vulcan, rendered across matte paintings and smoke effects and the tease of rockform gargantuans. Who knows how this played in 1979, so soon after Star Wars imagined alien planets as real on-location set-ups in Tunisia and Guatemala.

In the best and maybe most despised sequence from The Motion Picture, the Starship Enterprise enters the godcloud, and, for 10 minutes, we see an interior that seems to hold the cosmos. It’s the closest thing to a tesseract ever caught on film: The deeper we go, the more there is.

There’s a shot in this sequence that may be the single most stunning image ever captured in a Star Trek project. Maybe that doesn’t matter as much as we think; maybe the franchise only gets worse when the people involved think “stunning images” are what define Star Trek. But, toward the end of this journey inwards, the camera pulls back to what a cinematographer might call a “Cosmically Extreme Long Shot,” and we see the great starship Enterprise, a tiny speck on this monster’s horizon.

Later, Spock puts on a spacesuit and goes on his own private journey through what you can only safely describe as a cosmic vaginal endoscape. The cutting strategy is familiar to anyone who saw 2001: Spock’s face, something crazy, Spock’s face, something crazy. At the end of Spock’s journey, there is a woman – Ilia, but it doesn’t matter, names don’t matter in The Motion Picture, nothing any person does really matters. We know that’s not the real woman; she’s back on the Enterprise, or some version of her is.

But Spock is tantalized. To the extent that any character has a “journey” in The Motion Picture, Spock has been seeking something the whole movie. A higher state of consciousness, maybe? He seems to find it here, in this glowing representation of WOMAN. An unearthly glow encompasses him, erasing his face from our sight. He reaches out his hands – to mindmeld, to know.

The mindmeld blasts Spock backwards. The effect is, no other way of saying this, orgasmic. Spock describes the strange thoughts he experienced, inside the creature’s brain. “Is this all I am?” he says. “Is there nothing more?”
Q__
Moderator
#33 - Wysłana: 15 Lip 2016 01:47:44 - Edytowany przez: Q__
Odpowiedz 
The Motion Picture’s monster is in the midst of an existential crisis, it turns out. It was a computer, created by man – Voyager 7 6, or “V’GER,” a satellite sent out to the stars. In the stars, it found more computers, which gave it inconceivable power. It has seen everything now – and, in achieving total cosmic awareness, it has also achieved sentience. It lives: So what?

In The Motion Picture, the “what now” is… well, sex. Or togetherness. Or the awareness of other life. Or the knowledge that we live only so that we can create other things that live. It’s all a bit abstract – but don’t Zen Buddhists seem pretty happy? The movie ends with Ilia and Decker – another nothing character, they might as well be named Eve and Adam, Woman and Man, Thing One and Thing Two – bonding with the cloud-thing. The climactic image of them – receiving enlightenment? ascending to a higher state? dying? being reborn? – is one of the silliest and most transcendent special effects shots ever.

“I think we gave it the ability to create its own sense of purpose,” concludes SpockKirk. You might point out, rightly, that “creating a sense of purpose” is not the most dramatic concept for a movie. You might also point out, just as rightly, that “creating a sense of purpose” is the central experience of humanity. How do you put such a vague but universal experience onscreen? How do you conjure up the fear that there is no purpose? Maybe you need a new language, something beyond words. Cinema, or whatever cinema used to be.

Decades later, Wise worked on a special cut of The Motion Picture. It was released with added digital effects – not the first time a major moment in Trek history happened because of Star Wars, not the last time a terrible moment in Trek history happened because of Star Wars. That special cut adds in a few shots that seem to clearly identify what V’Ger looks like. This is helpful only if you think that incoherence was The Motion Picture’s problem, and not its saving grace. The first Star Trek film has almost no real story, and the characters are only “characters” because we know their names and faces from a long-dead TV show. But you could spend a long time pondering the image of the Enterprise, dwarfed and surrounded by V’Ger.

You wonder what it must have been like, to see that on a big screen. You wonder what it must have felt like, to only see motion pictures on the big screen. You wonder, above all, what it was like to feel so small in the universe.

The Motion Picture depends on you loving space – and I mean “space” both ways, as in “everything outside of Earth” and as in “height and depth and width and distance.” In 2016, nobody pays much attention to outer space, except as one more piece of nostalgiabait trending curiosity. (Is Pluto still not a planet?) And maybe we don’t pay as much attention to the other definition of space: What does distance mean, to digital natives?

So The Motion Picture is beloved by film theorists and special effects nerds and people who treat marijuana as a sacrament. But in 2016, special effects are too common – and marijuana too legal – to feel sacred.

–––––––––––––––––––

Kirk looks at the Enterprise for the first time around minute 16 of The Motion Picture, and doesn’t stop until minute 23. Kirk and Scotty are riding a little shuttle to their ship, and that ride takes seven minutes of screen time. It is slow, and nothing “happens,” unless you love Douglas Trumbull’s special effects and Jerry Goldsmith’s music, unless you can groove onto the idea that “Looking” is an active state. (Wrath of Khan is to The Motion Picture as The Motion Picture is to Solaris.)

Kirk’s returning to the old ship after years behind a desk. He ascended from the captain’s chair to become, ahem “Chief of Starfleet Operations.” One of the many accidental gags in The Motion Picture’s nonsense script is that Kirk must have been truly terrible at operating Starfleet. There is a giant killer gas cloud coming towards Earth – and “the only starship in interception range is the Enterprise.” The only starship? Isn’t Earth, like, the center of Starfleet Operations? Wouldn’t this be, like, the Joint Chiefs saying, “We’ve only got one fighter jet defending Washington!”)

Kirk is out of practice. “You haven’t logged a single star hour in two years!” declares Commander Decker, the man who would have been in charge of the Enterprise if Kirk hadn’t unretired himself. Decker is played by Stephen Collins, with retroactively creepy blandness. There is a ghost of a good idea here, the whole DNA of Wrath of Khan: What if Kirk is too old for this? But part of the strangeness of The Motion Picture is that the special effects sequences are vivid, mad with pulsating power – and the scenes with human beings are void, stilted, static. Wise shoots with wide angles and deep focus, so you can appreciate how full this Enterprise is of humans standing immobile, unresponsive.

Wise had a huge budget, and so he built huge sets, each less compelling than the last. The Enterprise’s Rec Room looks as playful as a prison cell, and the observation lounge allows crew members to sit on asylum sofas and contemplate the eternal void.

You could say that the whole problem of Star Trek – or a problem that many brilliant creators and actors have grappled with – is how stilted the core ethos of the franchise is, on narrative and visual levels. Star Trek must have a cast of characters who obey authority and work together. Everyone’s an officer in some codified organized military or other. Everyone wears a uniform. Because most of the action happens with the main characters on “The Bridge,” most of the climactic sequences in Star Trek history happen with all our heroes sitting down.

Wise does not try to bring life to this structure. He doesn’t send the crew into a fistfight, doesn’t blow up the ship, doesn’t ram spaceships into each other. He does send a couple characters out into space – but they don’t fire lasers at anyone. Late in the long first act, Dr. McCoy arrives on the Enterprise, and Kirk asks him for help. Look at how Shatner insistently extends his hand; that is the closest Kirk comes to an action scene in The Motion Picture.

Maybe the problem was Roddenberry. The creator of Star Trek spent the decade after Star Trek trying to bring back Star Trek. He would not let it die. You think of George Miller, returning to create the perfect Mad Max 30 years later. Or maybe you think of George Lucas, who returned to the saga he created with no clear sense of what made the saga work so well. Or maybe you think of other people – Chris Carter? Roger Kumble? Anyone on Fuller House who isn’t John Stamos? – returning to the most popular item on a long-dormant IMDb page.

Roddenberry was devoted to Star Trek, but he carried the blame for all the perceived faults of The Motion Picture. This is the only Trek film Roddenberry really worked on. History repeats: Years later, Roddenberry was booted from The Next Generation. Mythology holds that Roddenberry’s utopian vision was the antithesis of drama. So in The Motion Picture, Decker is only ever mildly upset with Kirk, and Kirk is only ever mildly concerned about Spock.

The film can’t even commit to a lack of emotion. One of Ilia’s first terrible lines is, “My oath of celibacy is on the record, Captain.” Soon, celibate Ilia is transformed into an emotionless robot – two different layers of Spocklike indifference! But Ilia can’t keep her eyes off love interest Decker, and Decker can’t stop smiling at her. Here again, another ghost of a good idea – what if Kirk Junior had to romance Lady Spock for the good of the cosmos! – but the outcome is never in doubt, the drama never dangerous.

Roddenberry was a utopianist. He believed in the best ideas about humanity getting along. This is the beautiful thing about Star Trek, and it is why people who love Star Trek get nervous whenever some new Star Trek thing tries to be dark, or less-than-hopeful. It strikes me that the vision of Starfleet in The Motion Picture is as close as Roddenberry ever got to a pure utopia. Everyone is so… serene. Everyone is so… peaceful. Everyone is so… bland. George Takei, Nichelle Nichols, and Walter Koenig are only in the movie to smile at Kirk.

Kubrick’s big joke in 2001 was that the computer was more human than the humans. That’s another accidental joke in The Motion Picture. Shatner, dangerously toned-down, seems more Vulcan than the Vulcan. The Enterprise crew listens patiently to Kirk giving commands, follows orders. Spock pursues great knowledge, with no ambition or thirst. He seeks cosmic transcendence with all the exhausted energy of a TSA officer opening her 31st carry-on of the day, knowing there’s probably nothing inside but a toenail clipper and a forgotten half-empty water bottle.

The Motion Picture has a simple problem: It’s too goddamn slow. Every other Star Trek film is, in some way, a reaction against that complaint. But the slowness creates the great parts of The Motion Picture – those long moments of sound and image, unencumbered by plot or character or even dialogue. You could argue that The Motion Picture is 2001 for Dummies, or the misbegotten mash-up of 2001 and Star Wars with placeholders where characters should be.

But The Motion Picture is reaching for something no other Trek film has even tried to reach for. It is Head-Trip science fiction, Big Question science fiction. No one involved can think of a compelling way to dramatize those questions. Surely there was a way, though! You think of “Balance of Terror,” one of the greatest of all Star Trek stories. “Balance of Terror” is a bottle episode about people in one set trying to outthink people on another set. Like a lot of great original series episodes, it might as well have a declarative title: “THIS IS ABOUT THE COLD WAR.” The characters have no psychology: They exist as mouthpieces for thought-notions, “Let’s shoot first,” “Let’s give them the benefit of the doubt,” “We can’t trust anyone,” “We need to trust someone.” The narrative is Socratic, but there’s nothing wrong with that. Not every fight needs to be choreographed.
Q__
Moderator
#34 - Wysłana: 15 Lip 2016 01:49:12
Odpowiedz 
Could The Motion Picture have worked like that, as a thoughtful exploration? It still almost does, even if everyone besides DeForest Kelley looks bored. There’s no other film like it – besides maybe Final Frontier (more on that in four weeks). So The Motion Picture is a fascinating curio. There are better Treks, but they’re smaller, too, and maybe less ambitious. This could be the last Star Trek ever. Will anyone ever even try to write the last Star Trek?

FASHION NOTES:

Further sign of the cognitive dissonance that powers The Motion Picture: The special effects are colorful, neon-dark against the infinite, and the clothes are beige, gray, light brown, and off-white. The clothes look like furniture, the furniture looks like clothes. These are the shortest-lived of the Trek uniforms, and the extras all look like they’re wearing pajamas. I am not sure we will ever be in a moment like this again: One of the most expensive movies of the year takes for granted that you want to see middle-aged men wear V-necks.

But, devil’s advocate: The Motion Picture uniforms are the only Star Trek costumes that look made for comfort. They are loose, turtlenecks and sweatshirts, onesies, shirts that don’t ever get tucked in. Witness the Holy Trinity in slanket-chic.

The grand exception is Ilia, played by Persis Khambatta. An Indian model with silent-cinema eyes, Khambatta was cast as Ilia when The Motion Picture was going to be a new TV show, and her character only just barely transitioned to the feature film, with the barest whisp of a backstory and a kinda-nude scene. Captured and reprogrammed by V’Ger, Ilia returns to the Enterprise in a barely-there bathrobe with a cowl and high heels – a clear sign that V’Ger is much kinkier than the movie allows.

WORTH NOTING FOR FUTURE FRANCHISE REFERENCE:

The first lens flare in any Star Trek film occurs about 35 minutes into the original theatrical cut. You can see it floating next to Sulu’s head. This was almost certainly a mistake brought on by Wise’s abject love for unnecessary camera trickery. But penicillin was a mistake, too.

http://www.ew.com/article/2016/04/29/star-trek-mot ion-picture-geekly

(Pozwoliłem sobie zacytować w całości, bo doprawdy fascynująca i głęboka...)
Q__
Moderator
#35 - Wysłana: 22 Sier 2016 20:08:36
Odpowiedz 
Kpiny z osławionej popremierowej recenzji TMP z magazynu "Time":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Jxzuh_WH0Y

Jak widać nie tylko u nas wypowiadają się o ST osoby nie mające o nim pojęcia (i najwidoczniej niezdolne go zrozumieć).
Q__
Moderator
#36 - Wysłana: 11 Paź 2016 10:41:44
Odpowiedz 
krzychu

krzychu:
jak dla mnie to star trek 4 voyage home

A wiesz, że twórca lalkowych wersji TMP i TWoK, które tu linkowałem, zrobił też - z okazji Jubileuszu - takąż wersję czwórki?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=duEDdcVlXjI

ps. Tu zaś mamy odcinek TrekYards o stroju Carol Marcus z TWoK (w kolekcji Petersa i ten):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1OVSQFjeZI
Q__
Moderator
#37 - Wysłana: 26 Gru 2016 21:24:37 - Edytowany przez: Q__
Odpowiedz 
Kolejna obrona TMP:

To Slowly Go Where No Man Has Gone Before: In Defense of ‘Star Trek: The Motion Picture’
Matt Singer

The poster for Star Trek: The Motion Picture is so dramatic. The faces of William Shatner’s Captain Kirk, Leonard Nimoy’s Mr. Spock, and Persis Khambatta’s Lieutenant Ilia refracted through a rainbow spectrum of light. That image promises excitement beyond imagination. Adventure! Passion! Every color under the rainbow!

So why is the film so ... beige?

Look at that; not a single primary color on screen. The original Star Trek television show was so visually dynamic, with splashes of bright reds, blues, and yellows. Star Trek: The Motion Picture is the opposite. It’s like an explosion at a milk factory. It’s Star Trek: The Wrath of Khaki. (According to the Star Trek: The Motion Picture Blu-ray commentary, director Robert Wise felt the classic Trek uniforms looked “garish” on the big screen and decided to change them.)

I suspect that’s one big reason why Star Trek: The Motion Picture is widely regarded as one of the worst Star Trek movies. It is also, somewhat perversely, one reason I like it more than almost anyone I know and find myself drawn back to it over and over again, perpetually caught in its hypnotic, tractor-beam-like pull.

With hundreds of millions of dollars on the line, blockbuster filmmakers typically have to play it safe, catering to the masses with simple stories and messages. Star Trek: The Motion Picture didn’t do any of that. True to Captain Kirk’s famous catchphrase, Star Trek boldly went from television to film with grandiose ambitions. Who spends the equivalent of $115 million in 2016 dollars to alienate audiences with tortoise-like pacing, philosophical musings, and psychedelic imagery? With Star Trek: The Motion Picture, Paramount Pictures did. Even its subtitle suggest towering aspirations. This isn’t a movie, it’s a motion picture.

Where the original Star Trek television series (and most of the films that followed The Motion Picture) were lively and colorful, ST: TMP was deliberate and contemplative. Trek finally made the jump to the silver screen in large part because of the wild financial success of the original Star Wars, but TMP feels nothing like the original Star Wars. Moody, methodical, and downright depressing at times, Star Trek: The Motion Picture is as much a rejection of the Star Wars sci-fi model as a space epic made in its wake. The results are much closer in tone and spirit to Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey; a thoughtful consideration of a possible future where technology enables mankind to encounter (and join with) an evolved alien consciousness.

The plot isn’t a huge departure from classic Trek; the crew of an updated Starship Enterprise must confront a UFO on a collision course with Earth. (It’s almost the exact same premise as “The Changeling,” a second season episode about an Earth probe that evolved into a killing machine.) The difference is entirely in the presentation of that premise. After a prologue in which the cloud (named V’Ger) destroys some Klingon warships, the movie shifts to Earth, where James T. Kirk, now an admiral chained to a desk at Starfleet Headquarters, uses this new threat to leverage himself back into command of the Enterprise. He demotes the Enterprise’s new captain, Willard Decker (Stephen Collins), and orders the ship out of Spacedock — but only after about 35 minutes of leisurely preamble.

Every aspect of the original Star Trek’s technology was about speed. The Enterprise’s warp engines allowed it to travel faster than the speed of light; its transporters could beam crew members across vast distances in the blink of an eye. The opening credits of each Star Trek episode showcased the Enterprise zipping around outer space. In ST: TMP, it takes Captain Kirk six minutes just to board to the damn ship on a shuttlecraft.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b52b4yORX6U

Once Kirk finally arrives and assumes command, he takes the ship into warp speed and its first action sequence: The new Enterprise suffers an engine glitch and careens into a wormhole, which is visualized onscreen with bleeding light and colors and everyone onscreen moving and talking really reeeeeeally slowly.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PPUdrMzvxrc

The line readings are so stilted — “Phoooootoooooon torrrrpeeeeeedooooos!” — they’re almost comical. Is Kirk trapped in a wormhole or is he doing an impression of Dory speaking whale? Star Trek: The Motion Picture may be the only production in Hollywood history where the action scenes actually slow the movie down. (And this thing didn’t exactly move like lightning to begin with.) In ST:TMP, even superluminal motion happens at a snail’s pace.

This is an observation, not a criticism. The movie moves slowly because it’s designed to move slowly. Star Trek: The Motion Picture, unlike so many blockbusters, is not engineered to work like an amusement park ride. It’s much more observational, like a guy considering an amusement park ride from a distance and admiring its aesthetic beauty. It imagines, in a way few science-fiction movies do, how the granular operation of a giant spaceship might actually work. It gets into the minutia of things like chain of command, bureaucracy, and technological errors. Exploring the galaxy in The Motion Picture isn’t fun; it’s a job. And it’s a pretty monotonous one sometimes.

You see it in both of the clips above; the way Scotty (James Doohan) takes Kirk up to the Enterprise in a roundabout way, not just to give the audience time to appreciate Douglas Trumbull’s incredible special effects, but because that is how traffic flows around the Enterprise while it’s parked. Observe the systematic way the Enterprise leaves Spacedock in the second clip; permission from dock control, maneuvering thrusters, thrusters at station keeping. Every order is given and then repeated. This is a movie about process. If Steven Soderbergh made a Star Trek, it might look a little like The Motion Picture.

(This attention to the mundane is why the uniforms, bland and boring as they are, make sense. What kind of military organization wears flashy multicolored regalia? These soft pastels and utilitarian jumpsuits fits the film’s more grounded approach to space travel and exploration.)

TMP’s meticulous structure also suits its characters. Now deep into middle age and a full decade removed from their final live-action TV appearance, Kirk, McCoy, and the rest are no longer the hotheaded cowboys of the original series. They’re getting older, and facing the frustrations and disappointments that come with that. They’re graying at the temples and sagging at the bellies. Kirk’s fitness to command is repeatedly challenged by Decker, who accuses him of being rusty. (He’s right, too.) Spock returns from a lengthy stint on Vulcan where he tried (and failed) to ritualistically purge all his human emotions. Dr. McCoy shows up for duty in a hobo beard and a giant astrosign medallion like he’s auditioning for a role in the crossover Grizzy Adams Meet the Wild and Crazy Guys in Space.

In this environment and with these characters, a breathless thriller would simply not make sense. One might even call director Robert Wise and producer Gene Roddenberry’s decision to match their film’s structure to their heroes’ temperaments entirely logical.

Even with a muted color palette, and even in the midst of a story about the sometimes tedious nature of outer-space life, Star Trek: The Motion Pictures has some truly gorgeous visuals. Wise takes full advantage of the widescreen frame, providing images that were never possible on the old Star Trek television show, and weren’t possible in many of the movies that followed, most of which were scaled down significantly from The Motion Picture, and occasionally shot on retrofitted television sets. As wonderful as the later movies were, they often felt like television shows projected on the big screen. Star Trek: The Motion Picture looks like a movie.

TMP also plays much better in a theater, where you can shut out the world and give yourself over completely to its hypnotic imagery. No wonder a generation of VHS and DVD viewers hate the film; it isn’t nearly as effective on home video. Once the Enterprise journeys inside V’Ger, the visuals get even more grand. These are some of the loveliest images the Star Trek franchise has ever produced:

Also lovely: Jerry Goldsmith’s magnificent score for the film. His terrific theme later became the music under the opening credits of Star Trek: The Next Generation. In a widely derided film, this is probably the only universally beloved element:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7AiSbxZYViE

What should also be beloved about The Motion Picture is the depiction of the relationship between Kirk and Spock, which is maybe the most tender of any in the Star Trek canon. Fans of Kirk/Spock need look no further than scenes like the ones below. The subtext here is so obvious it’s not even subtext.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zR7Zj6ZFyUY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3yVzfns77Y
Q__
Moderator
#38 - Wysłana: 26 Gru 2016 21:26:32 - Edytowany przez: Q__
Odpowiedz 

These scenes mark a significant shift in the Spock character, who finally embraces his human side at the end of the movie. And they fit perfectly in TMP, which is largely a story of “simple feeling” about the importance of emotion in the grand scheme of the cosmos. In the end, what defeats V’Ger isn’t great weaponry or overwhelming power. It’s simple human love. Unfortunately, (SPOILER ALERT for the most famous Star Trek movie moment of all time) Spock got killed in the next movie, and the process of bringing him back to life basically erased all of his character development in The Motion Picture. One wonders if people would like TMP more if Star Trek II hadn’t ended in Spock’s death, and his evolution in The Motion Picture had been allowed to continue in future movies.

If you’re looking for someone to argue The Motion Picture is the best Star Trek movie with the original cast, you’ll have to look elsewhere. I still prefer The Wrath of Khan or the underrated The Undiscovered Country. As much as they fit in this context, the uniforms are so hideous (Why do they have belt buckles but no belts? Why?!?) that it’s sometimes hard to take the movie as seriously as it would like. I mean, look at that jackass security officer between Spock and Decker.

That guy’s supposed to maintain order on the bridge? He looks like he just came from playing laser tag. (My buddy and Trek fan supreme Jordan Hoffman says he looks like an extra who wandered out of the set of Spaceballs, and he’s absolutely right.)

In a recent interview with SFX Magazine, current Captain Kirk Chris Pine said he didn’t think “cerebral” Star Trek would work in “today’s marketplace.” “You can hide things in there,” he added. “Star Trek Into Darkness has crazy, really demanding questions and themes, but you have to hide it under the guise of wham-bam explosions and planets blowing up.”

Whether Pine is right or wrong is debatable. It’s inarguable, though, that the Star Trek movies he’s made have been less brainy than most of the ones from the previous cast. In fact, Pine’s Star Treks are way more like Star Wars than The Motion Picture, the Star Trek whose production was a direct result of Star Wars’ success. That doesn’t mean they’re necessarily bad; the first Pine Trek is enormously entertaining. Just that they’re a bit more ordinary, a bit more formulaic, and a lot less weird.

That’s all the more reason to celebrate Star Trek: The Motion Picture, which defied tradition at almost every turn and was a truly cerebral piece of science fiction on an epic scale. The Star Trek movies that followed were often much more conventionally entertaining. But they were rarely more formally adventurous.

Vulcan philosophy (and therefore Star Trek itself) is built on the concept of “infinite diversity in infinite combinations,” and one of the best things about this franchise after 50 years is the fact that the movies now reflect that diversity; there is a Star Trek movie for any mood or situation. If you want thrilling naval adventure, go with Wrath of Khan. If you want self-referential humor, pick The Voyage Home. If you want modern visual effects, try J.J. Abrams’ Star Trek. And if you’re in the mood to ponder man’s place in the universe while blissing out on amazing cinematic vistas, turn on Star Trek: The Motion Picture.

http://screencrush.com/star-trek-the-motion-pictur e-defense/

Oraz pochwała efektów specjalnych TMP:
http://nerdist.com/the-fx-of-79-star-trek-the-moti on-picture/

I dla odmiany pochwała TWoK jako sequela idealnego:
http://nerdist.com/the-wrath-of-khan-is-the-most-i mproved-movie-sequel-and-most-sequels-suck/

I dyskusja czemu fani ST tak często odrzucają ten film:
https://www.reddit.com/r/startrek/comments/4todqg/ why_is_it_that_more_fans_dont_like_star_trek_the/
Q__
Moderator
#39 - Wysłana: 8 Sty 2017 16:09:19
Odpowiedz 
W sumie chyba niezłe podsumowanie różnicy pomiędzy filozofią Roddenberry'ego stojącą za TMP a filozofią Meyera stojącą za TWoK można uzyskać porównując sławetny orbital space dock (zwany też Centroplexem) z pierwszego z tych filmów ze stacją Regula I - z drugiego.
Z jednej strony dopieszczony probertowski projekt trzeciorzędnej orbitalnej stacyjki (która, mimo to, wymyślona jest dość szczegółowo), położonej tuż nad Ziemią, a mimo to zaopatrzoną we własne luksusy. Z drugiej - nierealistycznie mała i surowa jak na pograniczną placówkę (na co zwracali uwagę panowie od TrekYards), dysponująca kształtem uzyskanym przez proste (leniwe wręcz) odwrócenie (i uproszczenie) poprzedniego, kosmiczna instalacja, której celem jest zapewnienie zaplecza popadającej w kryzys Federacji.
Utopia i prawie-dystopia. Względny technorealizm i pokazanie widzowi byle czego (bo nie na technologię zamierza się dać akcent).
A przy tym... obie konstrukcje są powszechnie znane, mimo to.
Q__
Moderator
#40 - Wysłana: 23 Sty 2017 09:58:15 - Edytowany przez: Q__
Odpowiedz 
Eviva

Eviva:
Zdecydowanie TWOK. Nie ma dłużyzn TMP, intryga jest ciekawsza i logicznie spójniejsza.

Z tą spójnością to bym nie przesadzał:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6x8B8sawTI
Choć i TMP coś tam ta sama ekipa wypomniała (znacznie bardziej na siłę jednak, mam wrażenie - zwł., że większość zarzutów dotyczy długości scen i przyjętej przez Wise'a estetyki):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O8QClFbROf4

ps. I jeszcze trochę o tym jak to z zakończeniem TWoK było:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_cNRAT7a2I
Q__
Moderator
#41 - Wysłana: 25 Kwi 2017 18:31:20
Odpowiedz 
Q__
Moderator
#42 - Wysłana: 15 Maj 2017 22:07:33
Odpowiedz 
Przycięta do nieco ponad 20 minut wersja TMP z muzyką Daft Punk (z "TRON: Legacy"):
https://vimeo.com/217336882

Drobne info o niej:
http://www.treknews.net/2017/05/15/star-trek-motio n-picture-daft-punk-tron/
Q__
Moderator
#43 - Wysłana: 31 Maj 2017 07:17:52 - Edytowany przez: Q__
Odpowiedz 
W najbliższy weekend będziemy obchodzić 35 rocznicę premiery TWoK. Oto okolicznościowy wywiad z Meyerem:
http://trekmovie.com/2017/05/30/interview-nicholas -meyer-on-why-star-trek-the-wrath-of-khan-endures- after-35-years/
Picard
Użytkownik
#44 - Wysłana: 4 Cze 2017 23:58:10 - Edytowany przez: Picard
Odpowiedz 
1982 (35 lat temu) odbyła się premiera filmu Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan

Z kalendarza, ku pamięci
Q__
Moderator
#45 - Wysłana: 5 Cze 2017 21:41:08 - Edytowany przez: Q__
Odpowiedz 
Picard

Nie jestem entuzjastą TWoK, wolę TMP, ale stanowczo jest to jeden z najlepszych (i najważniejszych) filmów ST tak czy owak. Więc i stanowczo warty pamięci, wdzięcznej pamięci. Zrobił ktoś sobie "urodzinową" powtórkę?
Q__
Moderator
#46 - Wysłana: 7 Cze 2017 12:27:28
Odpowiedz 
Q__
Moderator
#47 - Wysłana: 15 Cze 2017 01:06:44
Odpowiedz 
Q__
Moderator
#48 - Wysłana: 19 Lip 2017 16:19:56 - Edytowany przez: Q__
Odpowiedz 
TrekFanProductions o TWoK (co ciekawe - nie w opozycji do TMP):
https://trekfanproductions.com/star-trek-ii-the-wr ath-of-khan-a-film-review

Bo i jest okazja... W 35 rocznicę swojej premiery TWoK wraca do kin:
http://www.treknews.net/2017/07/20/star-trek-ii-wr ath-of-khan-35-anniversary/
Q__
Moderator
#49 - Wysłana: 21 Lip 2017 08:04:31
Odpowiedz 
Q__
Moderator
#50 - Wysłana: 2 Sier 2017 16:26:07 - Edytowany przez: Q__
Odpowiedz 
Q__
Moderator
#51 - Wysłana: 9 Sier 2017 22:36:03 - Edytowany przez: Q__
Odpowiedz 
Q__
Moderator
#52 - Wysłana: 30 Sier 2017 22:33:15 - Edytowany przez: Q__
Odpowiedz 
Q__
Moderator
#53 - Wysłana: 2 Wrz 2017 22:29:27 - Edytowany przez: Q__
Odpowiedz 
Okolicznościowy wywiad z Meyerem o Roddenberrym, Shatnerze i Robercie Sallinie, którego wkład w powstanie TWoK bywa niedoceniany:
https://trekmovie.com/2017/09/01/interview-nichola s-meyer-on-roddenberry-shatner-and-the-unsung-hero -of-star-trek-ii/
Q__
Moderator
#54 - Wysłana: 6 Wrz 2017 23:57:45 - Edytowany przez: Q__
Odpowiedz 
I okolicznościowy wywiad ze Shatnerem (oczywiście, nie tylko o TWoK mowa*):
https://trekmovie.com/2017/09/06/interview-william -shatner-on-why-star-trek-ii-worked-if-he-would-ap pear-in-discovery-and-more/

* Więc o TMP również.
Q__
Moderator
#55 - Wysłana: 8 Wrz 2017 19:06:32
Odpowiedz 
Nadal okolicznościowo... Fan-trailer TWoK utrzymany we współczesnej stylistyce*:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ToQ7wAwZ8w
Który zachwycił Lane'a:
https://fanfilmfactor.com/2017/09/08/a-tale-of-ii- trailers/

I - dla porównanie - zwiastun oryginalny:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKEuczXJK_0

* Czy w efekcie ST II... Discovery nie przypomina?
reyden
Użytkownik
#56 - Wysłana: 8 Wrz 2017 22:05:08
Odpowiedz 
Ja tam żadnej współczesnej stylistyki ( czy to Abramsverse czy DSC ) tam nie widzę , przemontowane sceny plus kilka których nie było w oryginalne , chyba że ci chodzi o m.in. strzały z fazerów - w oryginalnym ST II już takie były .
Q__
Moderator
#57 - Wysłana: 9 Wrz 2017 10:31:50 - Edytowany przez: Q__
Odpowiedz 
reyden

1. Chodziło mi o - dość irytujący po prawdzie (co chwila ciemno się robi) - styl montażu zwiastuna (wiadomo, same ujęcia się od niego nie unowocześnią).

2. Trochę ironizowałem, wskazując, że da się i z klasycznego ST zrobić trailer, w którym - zgodnie z obecną modą - będą dominowały emocjonalne okrzyki i strzelanie*.

* Co teoretycznie otwiera możliwość, że i w DSC będzie coś - coś klasyczno-Trekowego, I mean - poza pokazanymi nam okrzykami, strzałami i emocjami (acz oczywiście tego nie przesądza).

ps. Kolejny wywiad z Meyerem:
http://www.indiewire.com/2017/09/star-trek-wrath-o f-khan-director-nicholas-meyer-interview-fans-1201 874340/
Q__
Moderator
#58 - Wysłana: 16 Wrz 2017 12:33:55 - Edytowany przez: Q__
Odpowiedz 
Wygląda na to, że te kinowe pokazy remasterowanego ST II cieszą się sporą popularnością, zorganizowano więc kolejny:
https://trekmovie.com/2017/09/15/encore-35th-anniv ersary-screenings-of-star-trek-ii-the-wrath-of-kha n-set-for-september-21st/
Q__
Moderator
#59 - Wysłana: 6 Gru 2017 11:27:01
Odpowiedz 
Od twórców, którzy swego czasu stworzyli
Q__:
Fan-trailer TWoK utrzymany we współczesnej stylistyce

równie nowoczesny trailer TMP:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C75dPdKIzmE
Q__
Moderator
#60 - Wysłana: 7 Gru 2017 17:03:09
Odpowiedz 
Heh, nikt nie załapał przyczyny, dla której wczoraj ten trailerek wrzuciłem. A to miało być przypomnienie, że dziś rocznica premiery.

ps. ST.com rocznicowo:
http://www.startrek.com/article/the-motion-picture -opened-38-years-ago-today
 Strona:  ««  1  2  3  »» 
USS Phoenix forum / Star Trek / TMP vs TWoK

Twoja wypowiedź
Styl pogrubiony  Styl pochylony  Obraz Łącza  URL Łącza  :) ;) :-p :-( Więcej emotikon...  Wyłącz emotikony

» Login  » Hasło 
Tylko zarejestrowani użytkownicy mogą tutaj pisać. Zaloguj się przed napisaniem wiadomości albo zarejstruj najpierw.
 
Wygenerowane przez miniBB®


© Copyright 2001-2009 by USS Phoenix Team.   Dołącz sidebar Mozilli.   Konfiguruj wygląd.
Część materiałów na tej stronie pochodzi z oryginalnego serwisu USS Solaris za wiedzą i zgodą autorów.
Star Trek, Star Trek The Next Generation, Deep Space Nine, Voyager oraz Enterprise to zastrzeżone znaki towarowe Paramount Pictures.

Pobierz Firefoksa!