Star Trek II should have been a direct sequel to TMP by chrisisall

OTHER SCIENCE FICTION SERIES

Star Trek II should have been a direct sequel to TMP

POSTED BY: CHRISISALL
UPDATED: Wednesday, March 5, 2008 18:16
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 5420
PAGE 1 of 1

Tuesday, February 19, 2008 9:00 AM

As good as Wrath Of Khan is, I believe it was a mistake to take Trek out of the hands of Roddenberry. TMP was a grand epic movie, and they reduced the sequels to merely big-screen, adventure-driven episodes, IMO. Harve Bennet was a good writer for The Six Million Dollar Man, but he knew nothing of true science fiction.
For instance, how HARD is it to find a lifeless space body IN THE UNIVERSE?
How can one planet be MISTAKEN for another??
Why no flags for the Ceti-Alpha system in the database?

They turned a potentially amazing series of science fiction films into mere comedy and adventure, both of which were in TOS, but they were part of it, not the whole of it.

Trek fan rantisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 19, 2008 9:24 AM

KAYNA

I love my captain

You know, I've always wondered about that planetary mistaken identity thing. It just didn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Op: You're fighting a war you've already lost.
Mal: Yeah, well I'm known for that.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 19, 2008 11:42 AM

CHRISISALL

Quote:
Originally posted by Kayna:
You know, I've always wondered about that planetary mistaken identity thing. It just didn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

Well, Ceti-Alpha 5 WAS in Ceti-Alpha 6's orbit, so looking out the window it would have seemed to be Ceti-Alpha 6...it's not like they have long range sensors or star charts or computers or anything...

!!!!!Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 19, 2008 1:31 PM

SIMONWHO

A direct sequel wasn't an option. Star Trek TMP was a disappointment at the box office due to how much money had been spent on the franchise ($35m, over three times as much as Star Wars cost) and they were basically given the choice of a much lower budget ($11m in the end) or no movie at all.

Paramount never really treated Star Trek all that well - in fact, it's never really been treated that well. Perhaps this reboot will persuade them to be a little more careful with the golden goose.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, February 20, 2008 8:49 AM

DATALESS

ST:TMP was an hour long episode that we already saw (the Changeling) with an hour long of the ship flying by. It was boring. Their are differences in that episode from the movie but the story was very similar. TMP was anything but a disapointment at the box office $39 mill budget to $82 mill US gross with Worldwide of $139 mill. If they did that with Serenity we'd have Serenity 2 by now and a third one on the way.

They released TMP in 1979 and TWOK in 1982.

ST 2: The Wrath of Khan (TWOK) was exciting and well written. Having it tie in with an episode was really smart.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 21, 2008 9:47 AM

CREVANREAVER

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
As good as Wrath Of Khan is, I believe it was a mistake to take Trek out of the hands of Roddenberry. TMP was a grand epic movie, and they reduced the sequels to merely big-screen, adventure-driven episodes, IMO. Harve Bennet was a good writer for The Six Million Dollar Man, but he knew nothing of true science fiction.
For instance, how HARD is it to find a lifeless space body IN THE UNIVERSE?
How can one planet be MISTAKEN for another??
Why no flags for the Ceti-Alpha system in the database?

Chrisisall, no offense...but I completely disagree with your opinion of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. It was not only the best Star Trek movie, it was one of the greatest scifi movies of all time and one of the greatest sequels of all time.

Even many non-Trekkies enjoyed it.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 21, 2008 10:22 AM

CHRISISALL

Quote:
Originally posted by CrevanReaver:

it was one of the greatest scifi movies of all time

Then how do you explain the really bad science? Eh?

KobiashiChrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 21, 2008 11:25 AM

SIMONWHO

With the really good fiction, obviously!

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 21, 2008 12:34 PM

CHRISISALL

Quote:
Originally posted by SimonWho:
With the really good fiction, obviously!

Good one.

NCC1701isall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 21, 2008 3:35 PM

OPPYH

I don't know. I love all the Trek movies just the way they are(even the bad ones)and I have always felt The Search for Spock was way underrated.

BTW, I'm watching the first season of Enterprise, and contrary to what most Trekkies feel about this series......I LOVE IT!!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 21, 2008 3:38 PM

IMNOTHERE

Quote:
Originally posted by Dataless:
ST:TMP was an hour long episode that we already saw (the Changeling) with an hour long of the ship flying by.

My impression was that they were deliberately trying to imitate the slow-moving style of "2001 - A Space Odessey"...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 21, 2008 4:03 PM

CHRISISALL

Quote:
Originally posted by OPPYH:
I have always felt The Search for Spock was way underrated.

Same here. Nimoy is a great director.

Live long and Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 22, 2008 3:24 PM

CREVANREAVER

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Then how do you explain the really bad science?

Simple...It's science fiction.

The following is from a review of The Chronicles of Riddick that was posted on DarkHorizons.com in 2004:

Quote:
The thing about sci-fi is that many people mistake it for a genre which it isn't exactly. Science Fiction, like period pieces or animation, determines the setting of a story - the tone of it however can be anything like an emotional drama, poitical thriller, action epic, slapstick comedy, murder mystery, horror suspense, and so on. The best sci-fi out there manages to use its setting to its advantage to beef up an already strong idea for a story. That's why the best 'sci-fi' out there are the likes of the family drama/civil rebellion action of the original "Star Wars" trilogy, the jungle assassin thriller "Predator", the political action- dramas of the "Star Trek"/"Babylon 5" universe, the elaborate techno-twisting tales of "Doctor Who", the conspiracy-fueled investigative drama of "The X-Files" or the stalker horror or war movie antics of the first two "Alien" movies. These are strong character-driven complexly plotted dramas who just happen to use space, planets and/or aliens as part of their setting.

Bad sci-fi on the other hand becomes so caught up in exploring all the minute details of the mythology that it forgets that strong characters and clever stories are far more important than the look of the alien creatures or worlds the film is filled with.

Scientifc accuracy be dammed, TWOK was good sci-fi. It had all the positives...strong characters, clever story, etc.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 22, 2008 3:39 PM

CHRISISALL

...shields failing...hull buckling...

Abandon shipisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 22, 2008 3:54 PM

SIMONWHO

Aw. It's not that we don't love ST:TMP, it's just we wouldn't want to lose our precious wrath.

And besides:

KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANNNNNNNNNNNNNN

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 22, 2008 4:04 PM

CHRISISALL

...lost integrity...

OKAY OKAY YOU PEEPS WIN!!!

But TMP is STILL MY favourite big screen Trek.
Followed by Undiscovered Country (Excellent Director AND writer(s)).
But I was there for all of them (Yes, even STV).

:vulcan laughing emoticon:Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, February 23, 2008 4:11 AM

IMNOTHERE

Quote:

KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANNNNNNNNNNNNNN

Why do people give the immortal Shat so much grief over this particular bit of scenery munching?

Remember what's happening at this point in the film: Kirk knows that, thanks to his fiendishly cunning coded message, the Enterprise is coming back for him, yet he doesn't want Khan to know that. Hence he must convey, in one word, all the fear and anger of a man abandoned to a fate worse than death (followed by death)... but heck, he's a starship captain, not an actor!

So, this is not the Shat artlessly hamming it up: this is the Shat's marsterful* and nuanced portrayal of James T Kirk shamelessly hamming it up! The man is a genius - not only should they have given him an Oscar, but they should have let him open the ceremony with his brilliant and misunderstood rendering of "Lucy in the sky with diamonds".

*"marsterful" was originally a typo but I then decided it actually meant "Every bit as good as Dick Van Spike's English accent".

Oh, PS:

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, February 23, 2008 9:06 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Actually I thought it a fine bit of character acting myself, always have.

Kirk (the character) is rather obnoxiously arrogant, vain, and occasionally quick tempered...
And one of the best damn starship captains there ever was, one reason he tends to get away with it.

Khan is rather obnoxiously arrogant too, vain in his own way, and not quite as quick tempered, but it's there, and a very dangerous man in his own right.

So these two are a lot alike and probably share more than a few common interests (like womanising for example) as well as some common history, and both are accustomed to being on giving end of a butt kicking rather than the recieving end.

Very prideful men, the both of them, and barring a few minor nitpicks like an attempted hijacking, might have otherwise wound up the very best of friends, and some of that mutual thing is in there, the whole movie, every dialogue you see that they are enemies by circumstance who might have otherwise been comrades, it shows.

The enemies you hate the very worst are those you empathise with, whom you'd rather share a drink with than an exchange of phasor fire, people who in spite of who and what they are, you cannot help caring about because you see so much of yourself within them.

So Khan tried to put one over on Kirk, and failed, which was a pretty hefty blow to his pride, and having been kicked when he was down, he kinda holds a grudge about it.

So he puts one over on Kirk, hard, and returns the favor with every intent to maroon his ass forever - and were it not for some quick thinking on behalf of Kirk and his first officer, might have gotten away with it.

AND Kirk knows his own stupidity and arrogance by disregarding regulations as is his habit, a habit Khan COUNTED on, led him to this disaster.

And then, Khan has the unrepentant GALL to mock him, and do so from range, over the com where Kirk can't get his hands around the bastards neck.

To say Kirk was pissed would be the understatement of a century, of all the trials, troubles and foes that Kirk ever faced, only Khan managed to kick him square in the balls, and not only get away with it, but cruise away laughing about it as Kirk stood powerless to prevent it.

He REALLY wanted a piece of Khan's hide.

It was absolutely in character, and to be honest, I think WOK was Shatners finest moment as an actor, the chemistry between him and Ricardo Montalbahn was incredible.

Also, no one ever seems to give enough credit to WOK's awesome, awesome soundtrack, especially when it backs the scene following the initial engagement as Reliant sheers past Enterprise by a couple hundred yards, one of the all-time "Holy crap!" moments of Cinema.

Never liked most Trek, just too clean, too perfect, not gritty enough - but I did love WOK, oh yes.

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, February 23, 2008 9:07 AM

SIMONWHO

No grief intended, it's the best bit of the movie. Indeed, ST2 has most of Shatner's best acting work, especially the final scenes with Spock.

I like the idea of Shatner opening the Oscars, especially after his last big award appearence:

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, February 23, 2008 12:50 PM

LORDVELOS

I myself think The Wraith of Khan was and still is the best Trek movie ever!

Yes there were a few plot holes in it like the orbit of Ceti-Alpha 5 and 6. And yes it was very strange to see all of Khans loyal subject in the TV series who were dark skinned and dark hair suddenly become Swedish with blonde hair. But hey I can live with that.

But over all it was more like an original Star Trek episode full of action and I believe that is why I enjoy it the best out of them all.

As for Star Trek The Motion Picture. Well its to my understanding that ST:TMP was created out of the fall out so to speak of a failed renew of Star Trek the TV series that was supposed to be called Star Trek 2

Star Trek 2 never made it on the TV screen. Not one episode was ever shown. Someone killed the show before it ever aired. So they took all the footage of the failed StarTrek 2 and smashed it together to make Star Trek The Motion Picture.

The reason why you see all these boring and crazy visual effects in ST:TMP is because they had to create TIME and fill in space so to speak to even make it movie length. There is like a good 30-40 mintues of crazy visual color effects showing how they get inside the V-ger cloud alone.

Most TV executives sadly HATE Sci-Fi shows. The few Sci-Fi shows that do make it play more like a television drama set in a sci-fi setting. I LOVE the new BattleStar Galatica 2004, but really if you look it the show its more about the drama than anythign else. I have asked people who HATE sci-fi to watch BSG 2004 and they are now hooked on it! Same goes with X-Files, but some would say X-Files is not Sci-Fi so much as it might be labeled supernatural thiller/murder mystry.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 24, 2008 5:57 AM

GTHING

I have a lot of enthusiasm for Star Treks II, III, and IV. TMP, to me, is a guilty pleasure. There are plenty of things wrong with it. However, TMP is also very imaginative, and most people who enjoy the movie enjoy it for that. Just listen carefully to score during the V-Ger sequences; I find that unique. It's a piece of visionary filmmaking.

Bottom line, it was a mistake to call TMP a failure, when they clearly can do far worse. I, for one, want to forget Star Trek V and Star Trek Generations; both were embarrassments. They could have used a TMP-style treatment in both cases; it's like they're afraid of the first movie.

I'm actually braced for the worst with this new movie. It sounds too much like it's going to be another Star Trek Generations.

The Soup -- always a hoot and we don't all die from it.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 24, 2008 9:23 AM

IMNOTHERE

Quote:
Originally posted by lordvelos:
And yes it was very strange to see all of Khans loyal subject in the TV series who were dark skinned and dark hair suddenly become Swedish with blonde hair.

I expect, like the Klingons and their bumpy foreheads, they don't talk about it...

And, thankfully, unlike the Klingons, they didn't try to explain it in Enterprise

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 5, 2008 6:16 PM

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
For instance, how HARD is it to find a lifeless space body IN THE UNIVERSE?

Not very, in reality, but in the Star Trek universe where a new life forms, often English-speaking, appears every week, it might be harder.

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
How can one planet be MISTAKEN for another??
Why no flags for the Ceti-Alpha system in the database?

As I remember Ceti Alpha IV exploded, thereby changing the orbit of Ceti Alpha V. Now if you believe that, it seems reasonable that Ceti Alpha IV might have been mistaken for Ceti Alpha V, except that one might immediately wonder why there was one less planet in the system, and how Ceti Alpha IV exploded, and how it could have changed the orbit of Ceti Alpha V without completely destroying all life on the planet.

I don’t see what your problem is.

Although I did kind of like Wrath of Khan.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE