[I Voted Baltar]

obsolete toaster, on 17 July 2011 - 08:37 PM, said:

And frankly, how did a guy like that get a Chinese name, anyway? Because he doesn't look anywhere near Chinese to me (especially with blue eyes and a rather prominent shnozz).

Things like that don't bug me that much. The US is a perfect example of a lot of racial heritage mixed into one big pot. I'd like to think that eventually, keep mixing and race wouldn't matter at all.

[obsolete toaster]

I Voted Baltar, on 18 July 2011 - 03:59 AM, said:

Things like that don't bug me that much. The US is a perfect example of a lot of racial heritage mixed into one big pot. I'd like to think that eventually, keep mixing and race wouldn't matter at all.

Oh, and I'm all for it but it just seems odd that Soong, even by his 24th century incarnation, seems to dress almost stereotypically Chinese; maybe the original Soong was dropped off at a Buddhist monastery as an orphan? Who knows. Maybe ancient Chinese style clothing makes a huge comeback in the 24th century (ala Firefly, with the big evil "Alliance" between China and the UK/US)
I think I'd read somewhere (it might've been CFQ magazine) that Soong was originally going to be played by actor Keye Luke (Master Po from the vintage TV series, Kung Fu); and I found a link at MemoryAlpha that confirms this: Keye Luke/Memory Alpha. Luke also played "Number One Son" in the old Charlie Chan movies, as well as TOS Star Trek's Governor Cory in "Whom Gods Destroy?"


Data's almost daddy?

"Father, why did you create me?"
"Ah good question, Number One son..."

[dsgtdave]

I'm digging the arch episodes very much. Season 4 is cool so far.

One thing Enterprise should be shamed for is that horrific opening theme. Worst ever and they didn't do themselves any favors with an upbeat version of it.

[obsolete toaster]

dsgtdave, on 19 July 2011 - 07:40 PM, said:

I'm digging the arch episodes very much. Season 4 is cool so far.

One thing Enterprise should be shamed for is that horrific opening theme. Worst ever and they didn't do themselves any favors with an upbeat version of it.

I hear you; re-using the end title from "Patch Adams" (a piece of s**t movie in it's own right) was the nadir of Star Trek musical creativity.
I like the end title instrumental piece a LOT better; it could've easily been re-jiggered into a main title song (make it a little more stately, with a bit more oomph and it could've really been something).

As it is? "Faith of the Heart" sounds like Michael Bolton doing a f**king morning coffee commercial...

[ensign edwards]

Quote

One thing Enterprise should be shamed for is that horrific opening theme. Worst ever and they didn't do themselves any favors with an upbeat version of it.

This is one aspect of Enterprise I will never defend. That song was an abomination.

[dsgtdave]

The blatant ties to the TOS and cleverness of season 4 has me giddy. This is, as has been pointed out by esteemed members here, what Enterprise should be. If they had done archs like this a little earlier this very well could have made a 5 or 6 season run. I agree with you OT.

These Are The Voyages was an absolute travesty to Enterprise. A frakking TNG episode with a clearly bloated and aging Riker and Troi in a holodeck program? How do you totally disrespect the characters and the series by offering that? What a piece of crap! They totally took away closure for the actors and the fans and I'm glad the actors in the series felt the same way. Tucker dying was just dumb and unnecessary. Seems like this was written on a cocktail napkin during happy hour.

Other than that it was great.

[I Voted Baltar]

The worst part for me was the TNG episode it was based on. It didn't seem to fit whatsoever, and it would have been nice to end on something a little more fitting with the rest of the season.

Aside from the end monologue, it really let the season down.

[p0is0n0us]

I agree that the final episode of Enterprise was a major slap in the face for everyone concerned. I never pictured Riker having a hard time speaking to Picard. It seemed weird to me that he had to run a hologram program and take the role of the ships chef in order to pluck up the courage to speak to him.?

[obsolete toaster]

dsgtdave, on 24 July 2011 - 06:40 AM, said:

The blatant ties to the TOS and cleverness of season 4 has me giddy. This is, as has been pointed out by esteemed members here, what Enterprise should be. If they had done archs like this a little earlier this very well could have made a 5 or 6 season run. I agree with you OT.

These Are The Voyages was an absolute travesty to Enterprise. A frakking TNG episode with a clearly bloated and aging Riker and Troi in a holodeck program? How do you totally disrespect the characters and the series by offering that? What a piece of crap! They totally took away closure for the actors and the fans and I'm glad the actors in the series felt the same way. Tucker dying was just dumb and unnecessary. Seems like this was written on a cocktail napkin during happy hour.

Other than that it was great.

Agreed. These Are the Voyages sucked. Trying to shoehorn Enterprise's finale into an episode of TNG was an insult. Not to mention that Frakes and Sirtis really looked too old to play their 12-years-younger selves. You could almost see the toothbrush-applied shoe polish in Riker's gray beard!

And Trip's death felt arbitrary; agreed. IMHO, I thought "Demons" and "Terra Prime" were the real ending of the show; especially when Trip and T'Pol are in her quarters mourning Elizabeth and saying how a Vulcan/human hybrid IS genetically possible. It paves the way for Spock's birth and more 'infinite diversity' in Star Trek's 'future.'
That is my 'preferred' ending to the show; I'd rather pretend TATV just didn't happen...

Oops! Just talking about TATV has aggravated my flu; gotta go!

[ensign edwards]

TATV was a deeply flawed episode, but unlike most people, I do think it had some redeeming features. It did a good job of saying goodbye to all the characters, and that scene with Trip and Riker at the end was one of my all time favourites in all the Trek franchise.

[obsolete toaster]

ensign edwards, on 26 July 2011 - 09:20 AM, said:

TATV was a deeply flawed episode, but unlike most people, I do think it had some redeeming features. It did a good job of saying goodbye to all the characters, and that scene with Trip and Riker at the end was one of my all time favourites in all the Trek franchise.

The ONLY redeeming features I can personally vouch for are the CGI recreations of the Enterprise D and the 1701-E rebuilt interior sets. But everything else about this episode was just too wrong-headed for me to get any kind of real enjoyment out of; and exacerbated by the fact that it was supposed to be the ENT series finale, not TNGs. It would've only worked slightly better for me if they'd put it mid-season somewhere and not killed Trip in such a meaningless 'red-shirt' way.

As a finale, "Terra Prime" and "Demons" work much better...

[ensign edwards]

Quote

As a finale, "Terra Prime" and "Demons" work much better...

I can't really argue with that.

[obsolete toaster]

(OT blows some 'cosmic dust' off this thread)

There. Pretty as a picture!


Found an intriguing (if very Freudian), in-depth analysis of Star Trek-The Motion Picture (by critic John Kenneth Muir) online last night; am reposting it HERE.

For the most part? I agree with Muir's review; and as I get older and my personal tastes seem to get away from superficial, 'eye-candy' driven science fiction and back to the more ideas-driven stuff I used to read a lot in high school? I find that my perceptions (and appreciation) of ST-TMP have changed a lot since I first saw it in 1979....



It's kind of "Star Trek 2001: A Solaris Picture." But these days, it just seems to grow on me more and more every time I watch it.
And up until ST09, it was one of the few Star Trek movies to have TRUE cinematic production values.... it LOOKED like a movie, and not a big episode.

[Zipper]

obsolete toaster, on 24 February 2012 - 02:00 AM, said:

For the most part? I agree with Muir's review; and as I get older and my personal tastes seem to get away from superficial, 'eye-candy' driven science fiction and back to the more ideas-driven stuff I used to read a lot in high school? I find that my perceptions (and appreciation) of ST-TMP have changed a lot since I first saw it in 1979....

Heck I thought the 2009 Star Trek was more eye candy then substance.

[obsolete toaster]

Zipper, on 24 February 2012 - 02:29 AM, said:

Heck I thought the 2009 Star Trek was more eye candy then substance.

I agree ST09 was a LOT of eye candy over story; but for some reason, it's just so damn rewatchable. I think if ST-TMP had been more 'zippy' like that, it'd have been remembered more fondly. ST09 is a good 'primer' for people who aren't familiar with Star Trek (it's almost a ST theme ride, it's so insanely fun!). It's focus is more on the characters than the story, and for some reason, I was OK with that.

But I think ST-TMP (while a complete bore to modern audiences) has aged well for me; it gets more and more impressive the more I watch it. But yeah, I also agree with the (perhaps unintentional) sexual metaphors in the review. There's a LOT more to the movie than I ever realized as a kid....

[p0is0n0us]

I was always a huge fan of TMP. I agree thatt he plot is very slow paced but because we know the characters I was ok with that. I was also impressed when the Directors Cut came out because they fixed the continuity (Spock on Vulcan changing from day to night) and managed to blend new CGI with it being intrusive.

ST09 I've lost count of how many times I've seen it, something I cant say for a lot of the movies (Insurrection I'm looking at you). I agree that it's pure eye candy but as mentioned it's more about the characters and does work extremely well.

I will say that Mrs P. didn't like ST09 because she said that she felt that it was people impresonating the original cast. As such she couldn't take it seriously.

Over Xmas ST3 was on and I really enjoyed it. I know people go on about teh odd numbered St's but I disagree with them.

Here's my movie breakdown.

ST: TMP: Very Good
ST2 TWOK: Pretty much the ultimate ST movie.
ST3 TSFS: Good
ST4 TVH: Didn't overly care for. I was never into time travel movies beause I've seen too many.
ST5 TFF: Wasn't impressed.
ST6 TUC: Very good, Nicholas Meyer does a good job at the helm.
ST G: When it first came out I didn't like it. Over time I came to enjoy it.
ST FC: Was a good action movie, I enjoyed it.
ST I: Snooze fest, hated it.
ST N: I actually enjoyed it. I know the plot was crap but I enjoyed it as an action movie.
ST 09: Very good, eye candy and fun plot.

[obsolete toaster]

p0is0n0us, on 24 February 2012 - 10:55 AM, said:

I was always a huge fan of TMP. I agree thatt he plot is very slow paced but because we know the characters I was ok with that. I was also impressed when the Directors Cut came out because they fixed the continuity (Spock on Vulcan changing from day to night) and managed to blend new CGI with it being intrusive.

ST09 I've lost count of how many times I've seen it, something I cant say for a lot of the movies (Insurrection I'm looking at you). I agree that it's pure eye candy but as mentioned it's more about the characters and does work extremely well.

I will say that Mrs P. didn't like ST09 because she said that she felt that it was people impresonating the original cast. As such she couldn't take it seriously.

Over Xmas ST3 was on and I really enjoyed it. I know people go on about teh odd numbered St's but I disagree with them.

Here's my movie breakdown.

ST: TMP: Very Good
ST2 TWOK: Pretty much the ultimate ST movie.
ST3 TSFS: Good
ST4 TVH: Didn't overly care for. I was never into time travel movies beause I've seen too many.
ST5 TFF: Wasn't impressed.
ST6 TUC: Very good, Nicholas Meyer does a good job at the helm.
ST G: When it first came out I didn't like it. Over time I came to enjoy it.
ST FC: Was a good action movie, I enjoyed it.
ST I: Snooze fest, hated it.
ST N: I actually enjoyed it. I know the plot was crap but I enjoyed it as an action movie.
ST 09: Very good, eye candy and fun plot.

Pretty much agree (though my ratings might vary slightly; I thought TVH was a fun romp, but I agree it is a little bit overrated. TUC is better by far...

And Insurrection is, IMO, the WORST Star Trek movie of them all. It is neither epic in scope nor particularly standout in any way. It's like one of the those middle of the road TNG episodes you forget the titles of. At least TFF has that 'watchable train wreck' quality to it; it took risks, however badly they failed. INS is just so... ordinary. It looks and feels like one of those episodes that was padded with 'funny bits' to fill it's running time. I can't think of a single sequence in that film that felt like a real 'movie' to me, and not a TV episode. That one feels the most 'at home' on the small screen (and I don't mean that in a good way; it's supposed to be a MOVIE). I very much remember my experience of watching it in the theatre, as it was my 'birthday movie' in 1998. Not my best present that day...

Star Trek-TMP's stock just slowly rises higher and higher each time I see it (the Director's Cut, of course). It themes are far more science fiction and sophisticated than ANY of the Star Trek films, really. It's the 2001 approach to Star Trek. And while I admit, I prefer the 'warmth' of TWOK and ST09, ST-TMP is a noble, intriguing experiment and up until ST09, it was one of only a few ST movies that really FELT like a movie. With opulent production value and scale. A tribute to Robert Wise ("The Day the Earth Stood Still" "Andromeda Strain"). And even though the crew uniforms looked like Dr Denton PJs, the ship and special effects looked simply gorgeous.

I am also one of the few people I'm aware of who did NOT find the 6 minute Enterprise drydock flyby or the V'ger cloud entry boring. I thought they were mesmerizing and hypnotic. And of course, in today's post-MTV rapid-fire edited world, scenes like those would never be attempted again in a mainstream movie (six minutes gazing at the hull of a ship? Never. Half of today's ADHD, ritalin-popping audience would be asleep in three). A shame really, as those sequences gave that movie a scale I will never forget. When I saw it in the theatre as a kid, I felt the size and POWER of the Enterprise and the eerie, alien beauty of the V'ger cloud. I don't we'll ever see scenes like those ever again....


Then again, I am also a HUGE fan of 2001: A Space Odyssey (my favorite science fiction film of all time) and the Russian-made 1972 SOLARIS (another mesmerizing, hypnotic film. It casts a spell if you allow it...). Most of my friends cannot understand my yen for those movies (especially since I struggled to stay awake during Lord of the Rings....)

[ensign edwards]

I always liked Insurrection, but it was one of the first movies I ever saw in the theater, so that may bias me.

[obsolete toaster]

ensign edwards, on 04 March 2012 - 10:58 AM, said:

I always liked Insurrection, but it was one of the first movies I ever saw in the theater, so that may bias me.

My similar bias with ST-TMP; it was the first time I saw the Enterprise on the big screen... and it looked REALLY big!

[obsolete toaster]

Trying to find an appropriate thread to dump this thought into, but yesterday (June 4th) was the 30th anniversary of the north American release of "The Wrath of Khan."
IMO, that deserves some recognition. No matter one's opinion of the movie (I happen to love it), it literally brought a stalled franchise back to life after the abortive, troubled first movie (which I also enjoy, but for different reasons). TWOK, like the Genesis device of the movie, "created life from lifelessness. Matter (was) reorganized with life-generating results" (30 years of life-generating results, to be exact; 9 more sequels, and four more live-action series)....


My own remembrances of the release...
I remember ditching a day of school to see this on opening day. It was so very worth it! Stylistically, it was day and night from the first movie (which was more of a intellectual, cooler, 2001-style movie; “Khan” was a warmer, more nautical-feeling space opera). And in the pre-internet days, the mystery of Spock’s death remained so until opening day. The bold colors just popped off the screen.

I think in the summer of ‘82, I must have seen “Wrath of Khan” about 5 or 6 times. That summer was amazing! There was also “Road Warrior,” “Blade Runner”, “Poltergeist” and sooo many others that year (”E.T” was not my cup of joe, but I’ll throw it in too). But IMO, “Wrath of Khan” was easily the best of the bunch. Certainly the most rewatchable (although the “Blade Runner Final Cut” is also up there). Non genre movies I loved that year were "World According To Garp" and the movie about that 'other' Indian revolutionary (besides Khan), "Gandhi."

I even remember buying the ‘photonovel’ of "Wrath of Khan" (a black and white photo caption book of the entire movie; I remember being pi$$ed as it wasn't in color like the first movie's), the CED videodisc (a needle and groove video record; full of skips and playback issues), the laser disc (big, clumsy, 12″ precursors to DVDs; in both pan and scan and letterbox formats) and of course, I’ve also bought the movie twice on DVD as well (theatrical and special editions). Few films (a handful or so) I would multiple dip for (”Jaws”, “2001″, the original Star Wars trilogy, etc). “Star Trek 2: The Wrath of Khan” is certainly one of them!
"It was the best of times...."

After 30 years, thinking back on those times makes me feel "old.... worn out." But here's hoping future ST movies can once again make me feel "young, as when the world was new..."