Validus

I ask myself this question. What makes this film so great? Well, it's the story of course, but what really sticks out in my mind in this film is the death of Spock. Simply amazing scenes where we see a friendship come to an "end". Even now, even thought I have seen this movie many times, I still swell up with tears every time I these two friends saying goodbye. Watching Kirk not being able to finish his sentence because a lump grows in his throat at the thought his closest friend is gone. This is a truly amazing film with an ending that is one of the best in cinema history. To me, those last few moments make this movie. That's my opinion on why I personally like this film.

 

Why do you feel that this movie is so good, or do you?

332695[/snapback]

I tend to agree with you. The film also has elements that remind one of such films as Master and Commander and other old seafaring stories. That Khan is modeled after Ahab is not a coincidence. The death of Spock is also very poignant, and my reaction was the same as yours. I can think of few moments in science fiction that touched me as deeply (the end of Babylon-5 and the last episode of LEXX).

This is also why I loathed Star Trek III as much as I did. They should have allowed Spock to remain dead. For me, bringing him back was anti-climactic in the extreme...like all the times Marvel has killed off a hero and then managed through cloning/time-travel/magic to bring them back. It just makes death itself seem meaningless from a story-telling standpoint.

I also liked the few minor touches that were added to ST2 on the DVD...espeically Kirks acknowledgement that he only beat Khan because he knew more about star ships then he did...

Seven. I hated the catsuits, but her character was fascinating. I loved the probing into the concept of drones. The people behind the drones are slaves, but they're afraid of venturing outside of their prison, even if given the chance. Really cool.

335965[/snapback]

Hated the catsuits.....??? You're joking, right? Half the reason I liked Voyager was Seven's slinky sexuality and the in-joke (her not being awaire of how good looking she is). I wish they'd kept that silver one from the beginning of Season 4 (sigh). :P

Voyager has often been hailed as the weakest of the series, not withstanding Enterprise which has yet to be given it's chance. Does anyone feel that it deserves this title or that it was better than TNG or TOS etc? I know that the special effects  are better than what came before, but then that is more due to the time that it was made rather than any other factors. Some of the plots were rather contrived I have to admit, and characters weak and repetitive. The lumbering Neelix who only got interesting when he had to leave, the wooden Neelix, the uneven Janeway, the diluted Torres and Hairy Chin who was just a bland ensign. The storylines abounded with time travel, the Borg (who turned into soap opera weekly villans) and the use of mysterious possessions and clouds all re-iterated many of the plot devices that made TNG what it was.

I think that Voyager was a long series of missed opportunities. You cannot convince me that Janeway and Chakotay would never have gotten together after 7 years in deep space with little or no chance of getting home. I found Neelix to be the Jar Jar Binks of Star Trek and often wished the Borg would assimilate him once and for all and be done with it. I think it really shows the weakness of the writing when one considers that the most interesting characters on the show were not even human (The Doctor and Seven). By the time Voyager got to Season 5 is wasn't even "Voyager" anymore. It was The Seven of Nine Show featuring Voyager.

In many ways the show reminded me of Space:1999 in terms of its overall premise...and while there can be no comparing the F/X of the two shows, at least Season 1 of S1999 had some daring and some risk-taking.

I also was bugged by "Species 8472" which was a blatant rip-off of The Shadows from Babylon-5.

Don't misunderstand me, I essentially enjoyed the show, it was good -what's such a let down is that it could have been great if they'd just let the writers do their job without Rick Berman messing with them.

That's easy:

My top three are

1. Star Trek: The Motion Picture

2. Star Trek II

3. Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country

My bottom three are

1. Star Trek: Nemisis (the worst of the worst)

2. Star Trek: Insurrection (second worst)

3. Star Trek: Generations (Kirk gets a lame death) :P

The rest I'm kinda so-so about. I hated that they decided to spend an entire film bringing back Spock and then blowing up the Enterprise. It reminds me of how often characters die in the Marvel Universe only to come back within a few issues...its just stupid plotting. That they repeated the device in "Nemisis" was inexcusable.

Which is your favourite? I'm gonna have to go with 'The Undiscovered Country' purely because General Chang was soooo cool.

197975[/snapback]

I voted for Star Trek: The Motion Picture.

This film has gotten a lot of razzing over the years, and I don't think that's really fair. I've often heard people complain that the biggest problem with it is that its simply too slow. That certainly seems true in the post-MTV cultural environment that has enabled films like Armageddon to succeed while genuinely great science fiction films have languished (like Dark City did).

I feel that ST:TMP is the best for a few reasons. First, it is the only Star Trek film that really stands on its own and succeeds by its own merits. For all the accolades people give ST2, I cannot agree with them. ST2 is doubtless a great action film that out does even the best efforts of George Lucas, but in the end it is an action film and such films cannot really be as enjoyable on repeat viewings as something more cerebral. ST:TMP is great for the same reason 2001: A Space Odyssey is great. Because it is a film that reaches for transcendence and dares to explore questions that are actually worth asking: Who are we? Do we make God in our own image? What do we mean when e say the word "human" exactly?

Most people forget that when the late 70's had rolled around, science fiction was still a genre with few cinematic gems. Star Wars? Sure it made a ton of money, but so what? Lots of films have made money that were terrible (Scooby Doo 2 anyone?)...just because a film makes bank doesn't mean its any good. I tend to think Star Wars is such a film: over rated, badly directed, derivative.* In my judgement Star Wars was blown away for good in 1979 by two films: the aforementioned Star Trek:TMP, and Alien (Dir. Ridley Scott).

The new DVD addresses some minor errors and cleans up a couple of key F/X shots so now it is possible to actually see V'Ger in full view.

*Lucas pretty much stole every good idea in Star Wars from the legend of King Arthur (the Arthur/Merlin relationship is mirrored in the Luke/Obi-Wan characters) and Frank Herbert's "Dune".