posted
After just having bought and re-watched this film, I am once again confirmed in my belief that its reputation as a "bad" Trek movie is scarcely deserved and has been blown completely out of proportion by fans who obviously didn't bother to truly watch it.
Apart from a single significant flaw (which I shall examine shortly) this film is quite decent and enjoyable Trek. It is evocative of the Original Series in a number of ways, especially in its character moments between Kirk, Spock, and McCoy. These are some of the best found in any of the TOS movies. Every scene between these three is richly steeped in their strong bond of friendship and loyalty---from the opening sequence in Yosemite to their imprisonment and escape from the brig together to their final "cosmic thoughts" at the observation window---at times warm and affectionate, at times mutually antagonistic, and always a pleasure to watch. The "Big Three" are also furnished with several character development points that are at least as interesting and important as those in TWOK and TUC. (The two films that everyone raves about as being the most character development-intense.) These include McCoy's torment over his part in his father's death, Kirk's musings on death and family, and Spock's conflict with his renegade brother. (A solid performance by Laurence Luckinbill as Sybok provides the film with a convincing and original pro/antagonist, and the revelation of his relationship to Spock was well executed and effective IMO.)
Many poeple complain that there is too much humor in the film and that the other cast members are utilized simply for "cheap laughs." I do not feel this is true. They provide comic relief, true, but in the same capable manner in which they did so on TOS, a series full of incidences where the characters play for laughs. (Hell, Chekov's character was created for the specific purpose of being played for laughs!) And the film is certainly no more "injected with jokes" than TVH, which I personally feel is more guilty of clownishness than TFF. Besides, underlying the humor there are a smattering of great character moments, at least one for each of the main cast (Scotty's jailbreak, Uhura's dancing, [and singing, just like in TOS! yay!] Chekov's "acting captain" bit, and Sulu's participation in the strike team and subsequent piloting of the shuttle, etc.) which is more than they ever got in many TOS episodes.
Having said this, however, I *am* glad that they didn't put any MORE humor in the film than they did. There's enough there already, and the next thing to come would be things like the "Screw you too!" deleted scene, which is way too extraneous to fit smoothly with the rest of the movie.
The other major complaint this film receives is that the special effects are inferior to those of the other movies in the series, and it's quite true that they aren't as snappy. But all I have to say in response to this that they're AT LEAST as good or BETTER than those of TOS, which was just as enjoyable with its primitive VFX (and perhaps moreso) as it would have been with flashy eye candy. People who watch ST for the effects think Nemesis was a good movie. Give me character moments over space battles any day...
...I must admit that Yosemite matte at the end looked pretty damn BAD, tough...
The theme is a classic Trek favorite. Man seeks God and barely escapes the trickery of an alien impersonator, ultimately discovering that what he sought was within himself all along. But this time the story gets to this point by a route that allows us to enjoy a number of interesting incidents along the way. (The Nimbus III hostage situation, compelte with the cavalry literally riding in, and then the unexpected conclusion of the operation being just one example.) I also felt that the scenario of the ship being hijacked by fantics on a quest was handled much better here than in "The Way to Eden." I wasn't bothered, as some people seemed to be, by the malfunctions that plague the Enterprise in the film. I thought it was nice to see all the myriad little things than can go wrong on a starship and I felt it was effective in showing how well Kirk & company do their stuff, even when their equipment conks out on them. I also liked seeing new sections of the ship such as the shuttlebay, brigg, and observation deck. (Even if the windows of the latter *don't* match the model's exterior.)
While the impression I get from every single interview (the one on the new DVD is particularly groaningly funny) or behind-the-scenes anecdote is that William Shatner is something of an imbecile, I must say that I quite like his direction of this movie. The composition of the shots, particularly in the use of lighting and framing, is very effective. I hadn't noticed this before I saw the movie in widescreen. Perhaps he missed his true calling...
Now we come to the one major flaw that I mentioned earlier. It is well known that the movie was written to have a bigger climactic sequence on Sha Ka Ree, but this was precluded by the budget, and this does show somewhat in the finished product. I've always felt that the climax as filmed doesn't pay off quite as much dramatic tension as was built up by the main body of the film. It's not detrimental by any means, as the filmmakers did their best to work with what they had and pulled it off reasonably well. It's just barely still noticeable, subtly. While I'm no great fan at all of decades-old movies being updated with CGI and whatnot, (I absolutely deplore the TMP DE) I must admit that it would have been interesting to see what would have been done had Paramount decided to do a full Director's Edition of TFF.
So the climax isn't as rewarding as it should or could have been. As I said, this is a significant flaw in the film. However, I personally feel that the rest of the film does much to make up for it.
There are also lesser issues, like the underdevelopment of the Klingons' role in the plot, but this is often how it was in TOS. Unlike the Klingons of TNG and DS9, these are just cookie-cutter bad guys. Nothing new there, though. Also, how ridiculous it is to go to the center of the galaxy. (I did notice something interesting about this for the first time, however. There is only a single sequence of lines regarding this in the entirety of the movie. Tasteful editing of the shots would leave the location of the "Great Barrier" nondescript and all would be fine. It could be just another region of space like the Delphic Expanse. The cuts in the film seem compatible with this.) These represent the only examples of bad writing in the film.
As to the special features on the new DVD itself, it pretty much contains the same kinds of mildly interesting things that the other SEs offer. (With the exception of TMP, which actually has a lot of genuinely intriguing stuff.) A makeup test reel reveals that an Andorian deity was originally to be included in the "faces of God" lineup, but it doesn't seem to be in the actual film. Also, a long-standing rumor that the feline bar room dancer was referred to as a "kzinrette" by the makeup guys is debunked. Nope, it's just plain old "cat woman." The deleted scenes are neat to have, but I'm glad they were ultimately left out. They aren't very well executed, and I have no issues with the editing of the final film.
The one thing that is pretty cool is the "Rockman" test footage. Ten of these creatures were originally to feature in the expanded climax of the movie, but budget restrictions reduced their number to a single creature, which was finally eliminated because apparently they thought it didn't look convincing enough. However, from the test footage I think it showed promise, especially under the lighting conditions planned. The animatronic skull worked well, IMO, and overall it was quite nicely reminiscent of the Gorn from TOS "Arena" and the Excalbian from "The Savage Curtain." But I suppose there would have needed to be more than one to be effective in the movie. Still, it might have been a little better than the glowing God-face chasing Kirk up the mountain...
Anyway, there's my long-winded little review. I'm told that MrNeutron will now promptly tear it to pieces. Oh well...
-MMoM
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
I hadn't planned on tearing your review apart, but the film.
One quick comment onthe review, though: saying the effects aren't so bad because they're better than TOS is damning with faint praise, indeed. It's no more germane to the quality of the film as a film than comparing its cinematography, lighting, or sets to TOS. The apt comparison is to it contemporaries...the Trek films.
And when you stand up its effect work to any other Trek film, TFF's effects fall down flat. Bad mattes. Stacatto motion (a crap motion control rig that can't expose film while the camera is in motion!). Bad lighting. And cheats like scaling down a static image of the Enterprise in an optical printer instead of actually shoting a flyby pass of it (as it heads for the Great Barrier).
Bad bad bad FX!
-------------------- "Well, I mean, it's generally understood that, of all of the people in the world, Mike Nelson is the best." -- ULTRA MAGNUS, steadfast in curmudgeon
Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Yes, you're correct. I guess I wasn't really trying to deny that they were bad, but more saying that I don't really CARE that they're bad, because other elements of the film aren't, and likening it to my also not caring that TOS effects are (largely) equally bad for similar reasons.
So then...I take it you're just compiling your thoughts before you launch into your anti-review?
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Mim, the flaw in your defense of TFF's humor is that much of that movie's humor was seriously degrading to the supporting cast. Scotty, an engineering veteran of fifty years, knocks himself out cold by running into a low-hanging beam. Uhura has to do exotic dances as the distraction. The finest ship in the fleet suffering multiple malfunctions for no reason that's even remotely justified other than to serve the plot. Another ragtag band of goons hijacking a Federation starship without the slightest hint of real resistance. And don't get me started on just how pathetic the Klingons were this time around.
I definitely agree that the interaction between the Big Three is definitely the highlight of the movie, but IMO that's the story's only redeeming quality. Yes, the "Man Seeks God" theme is a classic Trekkian staple in theory, but as portrayed on film appears extremely idiotic. And I'm not sure how successful it was over the years, anyway.
(And before anyone jumps on me, I thought that "Nemesis" was a horrible movie too. I'm not just hating TFF for its crappy effects. )
I respect the fact that Shatner had a grander vision for his film, that never got realized because of budget concerns. However, the mark of a good screenwriter and director is the ability to compensate for these limitations and still provide an entertaining and interesting work. TWOK was filmed on a shoestring budget (and not just because of the reuse of stock shots from TMP), and yet twenty years later it remains the most popular Trek film of all (on average, of course). Therefore, although I'm sympathetic to the restrictions, the fact remains that all I've got to watch is what made it onto the screen. That's what I've got to base my opinion on.
"Captain, please... not in front of the Klingons."
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Valid points all-round. YES the effects were crappy. YES the plot made Swiss cheese look airtight, And YES there are several errors that us Treknical people have a hard time forgiving (Turboshafts, centre of the galaxy and whatnot)
However the character moments in this film are second to none, the 'big three' scenes seam effortless. While I agree that the humour is at times cringe worthy, it is often the only thing stopping the movie from taking itself to seriously, which with a plot this thin would make the characters look REALLY foolish. BTW, I loved the bit where Scotty knocks himself out!
On the plus side we do get to see parts of the ship and technology that have never been seen before (which for us Treknical types is always a good thing), namely the Shuttlebay, the observation lounge, the Jeffries tubes, the shuttlecraft and of course the Captain's log.
In regards to the Direction, I believe Shatner has admitted responsibility for the undeniable weakness of the film as a whole. I think he put it down to his inexperience with dealing with the 'suits' and allowing too many cooks in the kitchen.
I agree that the Klingons were portrayed as being weak and ineffective, but remember that Klaa was obviously a young and inexperienced 'Junior Officer' (he can't be that senior given that he ended up as a translator) who spent most of his time taking pot shots at space garbage and cultural treasures. I see him as a somewhat over-eager cadet wanting to prove himself a little too much. He is certainly no equal of Kor, Kang, Koloth or Kruge and I don't believe that he was supposed to be a serious threat.
posted
The Klingon chick was pretty hot, though, continuing the fine tradition of hot Klingon villain-women started with Kruge's ill-fated honey.
Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Aban Rune: The Klingon chick was pretty hot, though, continuing the fine tradition of hot Klingon villain-women started with Kruge's ill-fated honey.
Started by Mara in "The Day of the Dove," actually.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
I'm waiting to buy it, based on the answer to one question... does the additional material show making of the sets? I would want it for model building and general STAR TREK background info.
Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
I too, am waiting to buy it....just as soon as hell freezes over.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Reverend: BTW, I loved the bit where Scotty knocks himself out!
Why, because he makes a complete fool of himself? How the heck can someone walk so soundly into a steel (or duranium, or whatever) beam in the middle of the corridor and knock themselves out for over half an hour? And just who put such a protuberance in a hallway on a starship, anyway?
Yeah, the scene's funny on its own, simply for the slapstick humor. But it makes Scotty look like a complete idiot.
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by MrNeutron: TFF's effects fall down flat. Bad mattes. Stacatto motion (a crap motion control rig that can't expose film while the camera is in motion!).
Just to clarify on this: the mo-con rig was fine; it was the optical team's inability to pull effective mattes from normally shot (blur incorporated) motion control that led to the lamentable decision to shoot each frame w/o blur. The main rig (not the one they shot static ships with, which was a discard from THE BLACK HOLE) was custombuilt for the show. But the fault in that instance is with Optical House, the company that did the matte work for Ferren. Optical House did okay work on other films, but clearly didn't have experience dealing with these kind of objects like ILM did.
There is blame a plenty to go around on the fx for the flick, but in this case, it belongs more with them (and with Winter and Paramount for selecting Ferren w/o vetting him and who he was working with -- Wallach on the miniatures, Optical House on the mattework) and of course with Ferren himself for not dealing with the schedule realistically (he has to take the blame for ordering that mo-con rig, which didn't arrive until Feb 89 for a movie that had to be in theaters just 4 months later!)
As for the DVD ... I was massively disappointed with the extras. I had heard about various cut scenes for years and really expected to see a lot more of them on the supplement. I really wanted to see more of the stuff from Shatner's cut, which had a longer storming of Paradise City by Sybok's guys, plus a longer fight between the Starfleet team and Sybok's forces. I was also surprised to see nothing illustrating the totally abandoned first take on the god planet with the Hudson Valley kinds of matte art that Illusion Arts had been approached to supply. There's more concept art of the rockman and various other aspects of the film to be found in the old STARLOG off trek 5 mag than in the supplement on the disk.
The picture quality is tons better (sharper and contrastier) than the laserdisk, which I've damn near worn out in the last decade, as I rewatch TREK 5 more than any other ST picture, because I love all the Kirk/Spock/McCoy stuff and I really admire the way Shatner moved the camera and his sense of composition. I also liked what he aimed for as a filmmaker, regardless of how flawed some of the execution turned out. And I marvel at some of the stuff that DID turn out, like the shot where the fullsize shuttle lands on the planet and all the guys jump out, all in one take.
I once talked with the physical fx guy, Mike Wood, and he told me that Shatner had to deal with more things going wrong at once than just about any director he'd ever worked for, and that if he'd had more support from Paramount a lot of those aspects would have been addressed beforehand and he wouldn't have had to be distracted by them on-set.
Shatner has never acknowledged it to the best of my knowledge, but I think if he had pulled a Nick Meyer and threatened to put his own money into reshooting the stuff that Paramount nixed pre-release (I'm talking theatrical release), Paramount might have taken him more seriously or allocated extra dollars that could have minimized the damage the flawed fx had on the film. (When Paramount didn't want to fork out for a big bridge explosion retake on KHAN, Meyer just said, 'take it out of my directing fee' and that was enough for Par to just go, 'okay, if you want it that bad, we'll pay.' I don't imagine Shatner ever considered that kind of approach, but if he'd been more experienced business wise he might have ... or if he'd been more desperately passionate.)
-------------------- Achievement is its own reward; pride obscures it.
Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Mark Nguyen: There's suppsed to be a hidden gag reel... How's that?
Mark
Only one minute, basically one gag (described in the MAKING TREK 5 book) repeated, with the producers filmed using a makeshift mallet intercut with KSM flying up the elevator shaft, like a circus strongman attraction. It's barely worth watching (you use the left control from the cut scenes to jump onto the little circular graphic and then hit enter, as I recall.)
-------------------- Achievement is its own reward; pride obscures it.
Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
posted
I agree that the interplay of the Big 3 was the best part of the movie. The bit with Scotty was hilarious BECAUSE it was a bit degrading. Scotty always knows the ship inside out so it was funny to see him GOOF in a SILLY incident that shouldn't happen to someone of his expertise.
The FX most certainly "Pulled Vacuum". The irony is that Paramount didn't want to put in more $ because they were afraid it would flop, but because they DIDN'T put in the $, it DID flop.
-------------------- I am the Anti-Abaddon. I build models at a scale of 2500/1
Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Give me character moments over space battles any day...![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
