Compared to the 2009 J.J. Abrams disaster epic,this film was magnificent,a work of sheer unadulterated genius by the late Robert Wise! not a piece of unadulterated horse shit like the "09 Abrams film!
I'm a Star Trek fan from the earliest tv days of the show. Many ST fans are still in denial about this film. We need to break it to them gently----it SUCKED!
Kevin Smith said it was best when he mentioned The Motion Picture was so boring because it was the first time they had a large budget, so your basically getting 2 hours of glory shot of the Enterprise.
@taylormt17 Kevin smith didn't understand that this was the first time the enterprise was ever seen on the big screen, as opposed to a tiny tv set from the 60s or 70s. Its something you can appreciate if you look at the scene in its context,and listen to the beautiful score.
@BlytheWorld1972 Right, because Anakin Skywalker shouting "woo hoo" during a death race was brilliant. Episode I & II were horrific, and episode VI... the ewok battle was pathetic. What a way to end a franchise.
@RobbyArt Trailers were this way back in the 70s. Ever see some trailers for the Godfather? One trailer is nothing but still photos from the movie with narration.
"2001" is my favorite film of all time, and I felt "Star Trek: TMP" just really wanted to be that movie but didn't have enough style or substance to compensate, so it just ends up being boring.
This one falls into last place of my favorites. Star Trek 2: The Wrath Of Khan falls into first place of my favorites with pat 3 into second and Star Trek 6: The Undiscovered Country in 3rd place. Whereas the lighthearted ones like parts 4, 5, and The Motion Picture falls into last place. Don't get me wrong, I love The Next Generation and as well as I keep them separate from the original series.
This film is perhaps the most important chapter in Star Trek history - aside from the original series itself.
It single handedly resurrected Star Trek, delivered truly ground breaking vfx, an adversary so gigantic its terrifying, and even attempted to provide a story worthy of the crew's return - the importance of being human. Also, it provided the template for TNG...
Gene Roddenbery deserved far better treatment for delivering this cinematic milestone. Bless him.
I loved this film the most than the other 5 films of the original casts. But I hated the trailer to this film since it had that jaws like theme to it.
i think the problem with this movie nowdays is its too slow. I'm 13, and im used to fast rapid fire action sequences. so with this movie, it was a bit weird to adjust to it, along with REALLY outdated graphics. It was still a great movie!
@crayzbotzz700 For two great (as in "required reading") classic) Sci-fi movies from the 70s that are both slower-than-molasses space operas, this but very cerebral, might I recommend Arthur C. Clarke's "2001: A Space Odyssey," and Stanislaw Lem's "Solaris" (not the George Clooney remake of Solaris, but the original, in Russian with English subtitles. Gawd, I hope they never remake 2001; Sequels were bad enough.)
@crayzbotzz700 oh, I was just making a little joke. Back then, studios used physical models, compositing, hard work and airbrush art as the "graphics" or special effects. I just find it funny when people use the term 'graphics' to describe film effects prior to about 1990.
I never liked this one. Even watching it without knowing that it was the worse Star Trek film (that is meant as no offense as those who like it, just what I have always read) I know my Mama, older brother, and a friend liked it. I just never did.
I was 11 years old when I went to the theater to see this film for the first time. Man, all I can say was....IT WAS EPIC!!!....Seeing the Enterprise up close,flying by with that big orcestra theme music in the background!....I was totally in awe!!!
I watched it again recently. My honest opinion? It is kind of slow, and I think in parts derivative of both 2001 and The Changeling. Stephen Collins is pretty good, but Persis Khambatta isn't that great an actress.
What I do like is the look. It looks like none of the other movies. Yes, the uniforms look dated, but the design for the ships, V'Ger, etc is amazing.
I don't know if this is how cinema adverts were in those days, but this trailer makes the film look worse then it actually is. It's quite a good film.
This movie is a very good representation of what Star Trek is about, whereas the new movie is an insulting piece of crap. Whereas this movie presents hope for the future through "The Human Adventure is Just Beginning", the 2009 shit was more worried about pop culture and stupid jokes like "Heineken Beer...Classic!".
@INTERNETVID Explain what? "The Human Adventure is Just Beginning" is a slogan (you got that), but it is also describes what Star Trek originally epitomized. I'm not going to bother explaining what it means to you, that would be asinine.
But I'll spell it out for you this time since the real meaning sailed right over your head:
READ CAREFULLY----> An inane movie slogan DOESN'T make a motion picture good.
Even Shatner HIMSELF ridiculed the lame, sophomoric premise of ST-TMP (middle-age/sr. citizen space crew dragged outta retirement to save the Galaxy from menacing cloud) in his late 70's standup routine. You wouldn't recall that since you weren't around at that time.
@INTERNETVID You are so astute! No one ever said it was the slogan itself, you genius, you! Maybe the slogan is just a good way of describing why the movie is good to people who get it, which you don't. William Shatner also satirizes Star Trek in general all the time, what is your point?
The reason why the new 2009 film has great reviews is because it is for a more general audience (but star trek fans appreciate it even more). This film is more for the specific audience of star trek fans. Any bad review from a non-Trekkie I don't take as seriously (though I respect their opinion).
I think the reason why star trek films have gotten bad reviews in the past is because the people of the time didn't "get it" because they didn't "get" star trek.
@TimsVideos17 So something has to be funny and have action to be GOOD? This is Sci fi my friend go watch space odyssey and count the lines of dialogue
@UridonTheMaster If anything the little dialog makes it unique. Remember the twilight episode with the old woman that turns out to be an alien? Not one word of dialog and fantastic writing!
@yoyrut10000 I remember that one of the B&W from the original series. You spend the whole episode thinking some hillbilly woman is being attacked by tiny aliens and then at the end you find out the aliens are earth astronauts visiting a primitive world of giant humanoids.
One of the worst movies ever. Why WOULDN'T it be? The storyline itself is inane + Paramount rushed the production start to finish simply to capitalize on the recent Star Wars phenom + The "Vger" angle was a cheap, transparent payoff from Gene to NASA for naming the Shuttle prototype 'Enterprise' + The endless, boring scenes thru the cheap Trumbull special effects caused the longest collective YAWN in cinema history + The ALL-TIME worst wooden acting when Shat turns, says "No wait! Get a fix.."
I watched all the Star Trek films other than First Contact (which I heard was good) and Nemesis but for some reason I still think that TMP is the best one, even better than the second one. Just my opinion. The music and special effects are pretty good. I only have one big complaint. I remember watching this on DVD for the first time and there's that one scene before the opening credits where the camera is pulling back through stars and along with the Ilia's Theme. Was that necessary?
That was what's called an overture, which was a practice that was reserved for epic motion pictures, especially pictures from the 1950s and 1960s.
"West Side Story" is an example of a picture that used an overture. It was also directed by Robert Wise, the same man who directed "Star Trek: The Motion Picture."
Plus sometimes a film that has an overture also has an intermission, an entr'acte and an exit. Examples: "2001: A Space Odyssey," and "It's a mad mad mad mad world."
LOL "The is the return of Captain Kirk" ...I love that...I love how William Shatner walks out. Gives me the chills... CANT WAIT FOR J.J. ABRAMS "STAR TREK 2" in theaters June 29, 2012. The script is completed was completed March 2011.
@bluenail03 That's what I like about the movie though. It was slow, and it captured the feeling of moving in space. The shuttle moving towards the docking station was epic IMO.
Boring! Star Trek the TV show was never boring and I liked all the other Star Trek films but this one was a celluloid sleeping pill .This film came out in 79 and they called it "The Motion Picture" what is it 1930? Why don't they just call it the moving picture show? Two years after Star Wars my expectations were much higher and what was up with Ms Cue Ball?
@Watcher3223 Ya know I was really young when I first saw this movie and I don't think I have seen it in its' entirety since. Perhaps I would appreciate it more today
Possibly, but it's also possible that you may still find it boring. To add, there's actually nothing wrong with that as there's no movie that will satisfy everybody.
As for me, I think this movie is good in its own way, but, like other movies like "2001" or "Ben-Hur", I have to be in a particular mood to want to watch it.
On average, I'd rather listen to the soundtrack or watch something else, such as "Star Trek IV."
I'd probably recommend you go ahead and rent this movie to watch once. I would recommend the director's cut because it's a tighter film, but it's still going to be a slow, cerebral story.
Again, nothing wrong with that, but, again, it's one of those films where you see it because you haven't before or if you're in the mood for something contemplative and thought-provoking.
Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979) Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982) Star Trek III: The Search for Spock (1984) Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home (1986) Star Trek V: The Final Frontier (1989) Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country (1991) Star Trek: Generations (1994) Star Trek (2009)
today Voyager is about to enter interstellar space. Right on track to, in 250 years, come back to earth in a giant blue cloud and wipe us all out. I've seen that movie!
All credit to Channel 4(Television channel in Britain) have shown all the feature films from the Motion Picture 1979 to "Nemesis" 2003 on 10 consecutive Saturdays.
Now this weekend, they are showing them all 10 films over 2 days!!!!
I really liked the movie and the plot, especially the V'ger. That was so creative! If the remake would be Star Trek XII or something, I would most definitely watch it.
Nostalgic! I remember waiting in line for this movie. I loved the story, even if it was a love story. It was good! Whoever says different, is not a true Star Trek fan. That JJ Abrams' monstrosity was just something he wanted to put his name on. He could not get it, nor will he! To put Star Wars elements into a sci fi classic is doomed to fail. Especially when he puts the middle finger to the fans. These guys made it a legend.
@Goldiney Actually, it was the writers and Rick Berman at the helm that was the reason, not the fans. The fans kept it going for years. When Viacom bought the rights to the show, the merchandise became heavily copyrighted, which led to discontent among the fan base.
@KJOSCOT. Only reason I bothered renting the Abrams Star Trek was for Domenican hottie Zoe Saldana (Uhura). I didn't think the story was that great. Should've let someone like Steven Moffatt, Joss Whedon, or Warren Ellis pen the story.
They give away too much about V'Ger in this trailer. After all you're not supposed to know it's a machine until Spock does his thruster suit exploration of the interior of V'Ger.
I love this trailer. I also imagine this second trailer for Star Trek the Motion Picture as a trailer for my story Galactic Bullet as a movie about a steam train that runs across the cosmos on laser rails.
Are you kidding? It was one of the dumbest movies that I've ever seen in a theater! It was like a cross between The Phantom Menace and Transformers, shot with more color tweaking and lens flares than Minority Report and Blade Runner combined, and strung along on a plot fueled by cheap coincidences, awful characterization, and blatant disregard for the entire Star Trek oeuvre (to say nothing of narrative logic). I'd go deeper into it, but I only have five hundred characters here.
I'm undertaking research trying to find evidence that the images depicting Enterprise improved in conveying "realism" over subsequent Star Trek films but I am finding no fault in these images...bust!
It's quite puzzling that this film that came out in 1979 has MUCH better special effects than any of the following Star Trek movies.
Yes there are quite a few moments that are stretched out in which characters stare dumbfounded at the scenery but - all in all- it has a very good story and just takes it's time to get there. There's not a lot of humor perhaps, but as pure Sci-Fi it's quite something and often overlooked.
viger or voyger created by NASA nearly destroyed us... thank god for our star ship enterprise... yessssss we are saved... captain Kirk we love you.... ( joke ) beam me ANYWHER SCOTTY...
people complain now that the film is boring, or it's too steril (space odyssey like).. Well let me tell you, if you were one of the folks who got to see it in theaters when it first came out like i did, it was a hell of a ride!!
of course after Empire, and ST 2-4, and Terminator, Aliens etc.. everything had to be explosions, and SFX, and CGI... and most of the time that works, and we're used to it now.
but in 79, ST-TMP was pretty a pretty damn awesome sci-fi film.
I do agree that it's a great story, but you have to admit there are some points where it drags a bit. Like the part where the Enterprise is flying through V'Ger. It's basically ten minutes of nothing happening.
1000% Agreed... Abrams made a nice effort but his Star Trek film(s) have too much Star Wars/Matrix action/effects and not enough of the human story with morality, character, and the idea that humanity has "grown up" into a wise and morally developed intelligent species. That concept alone made the "true and original" Star Trek made by Gene Roddenberry so special and memorable! It was his vision of what we as humans would become! That trait seems to be lost in the current Abrams film(s). IMHO
The only problem with this one was pacing. If the entire film had as much good pacing as the first scene with the Klingons did, it would have been an even bigger smash.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
fuck you asshole you know there are star trek fans who actaully like the new movie you all are just on your periods because there follow a storyline thats not total shit so shut the fuck up
No one said that there werent fans that liked the new movie. But most agree that it is not real Star Trek. Just like there are fans that hate the Motion Picture but acknowledge that it is real Star Trek.
PS. Why do you talk to strangers like that? I dare you to say cuss some one off the streets like that, see if you don't wind up with a black eye. Only a true asshole tries to shut people up just because he/she doesnt like what he/she reads.
I like this film,might not be the Wrath of Khan but there are some great character moments and its Kirk,Spock,Bones,Uhura,Scotty,Sulu and even Chekov.Whats not to like.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I always say, let that starship go through some reality and put some damage marks on it when it gets attacked by the cloud. So to a degree, this one was un-realistic.
@AJGreene007 The new screans held, the damage was so small that it could not be seen from a distance, like key scraches on a car. If the writers made the electric volts big enough to be seen on the exteror they would have had to kill half the bridge crue and the warp core would have exploded.
What's so "fantastic" about it? The writing? (CARRBON UNITZ; Belllaaayyy thaaat phaaaserrr orrrderrr!) The plot? (Blue thing is heading for Earth; Kirk and his crew must stop it; they do; something about Spock's brain exploding and a fake Ilia.) The special effects? (This movie has some of the worst compositing that I've ever seen, and from Trumbull and Dykstra, no less!) The music? (Well... OK. I'll give you that one.)
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I think its the hardest to watch cos of the lack of action sequences and its tribute to what seems to be "2001: A Space Oddesey". Even Final Frontier is not as hard to watch cos it has lots of action sequences though they still should have given it over to another director.
One of my favorite Trek movies, it is so underated. People don't get it because they want an action adventure and thats not necessarily what they get. It's kind of like 2001 in that it makes you think about what being human and our relationship with God really is (paralleled with the whole V'Ger/Creator storyline and the Spock/V'Ger storyline).
I read on IMDB that in this movie everyone needs something, Kirk needs the Enterprise, Decker needs to be needed, Illia needs Decker, and so on.
Star Trek The Motion Picture is very underrated by some of the so called " experts". This film has everything required of a good space travel adventure in it. And regarding the uniforms; I like all of them - the TV series, the first movie, and ST II - VI.
Star Trek The Motion Picture is very underrated by some of the so called "experts". This film had everything requried of a good space travel adventure in it. And regarding the uniforms; I like all of them - the TV series, the first movie, and ST II - VI.
"that you left delta 4, or that you didn't even say good bye"
what a load of crap, can't believe i used to be a trekkie. as for the models it wouldn't be possible to do complex rotating action sequences with models, and CGI done properly is just as good as models.
Having seen the trailer for the new Star Trek I have to say that I hate CGI. The models and fx on this film are so much better than what they do with computers. I guess I am old school but I want to go back to minatures. CGI sucks, save it for Pixar. I am old....
i SO agree about the rainbow + organs =70s kitsch. but i suppose that's the beauty of the trailer. it captures quite subtly all of the brilliance of the film.
this was made the same year as Alien
TURBODORK2 15 hours ago
Oh fuck that looks awesome.
ThatKrookedVulture 1 week ago
And I would still take these out-dated special effects over Transformers anyday of the week.
KiddCrowley 1 week ago
Compared to the 2009 J.J. Abrams disaster epic,this film was magnificent,a work of sheer unadulterated genius by the late Robert Wise! not a piece of unadulterated horse shit like the "09 Abrams film!
saml760 2 weeks ago
@saml760 "Come, come, Mister Scott. Young minds. Fresh ideas. Be tolerant." ;)
Kazuo1G 2 weeks ago
I'm a Star Trek fan from the earliest tv days of the show. Many ST fans are still in denial about this film. We need to break it to them gently----it SUCKED!
zooeyhall 1 month ago
@zooeyhall I'm a die hard fan, but nothing to break to me. I loved it, and that is just your opinion.
Revoltingmachine 3 weeks ago
Kevin Smith said it was best when he mentioned The Motion Picture was so boring because it was the first time they had a large budget, so your basically getting 2 hours of glory shot of the Enterprise.
taylormt17 1 month ago
@taylormt17 Kevin smith didn't understand that this was the first time the enterprise was ever seen on the big screen, as opposed to a tiny tv set from the 60s or 70s. Its something you can appreciate if you look at the scene in its context,and listen to the beautiful score.
Revoltingmachine 3 weeks ago
two words for this abysmal crud STAR WARS !!!! nuff said
BlytheWorld1972 1 month ago
@BlytheWorld1972 Right, because Anakin Skywalker shouting "woo hoo" during a death race was brilliant. Episode I & II were horrific, and episode VI... the ewok battle was pathetic. What a way to end a franchise.
Revoltingmachine 3 weeks ago
So boring .
BlytheWorld1972 1 month ago
The movie wasnt bad, tho the major plot-line they did take from an episode of the original series. But that trailer is horrable..
Cannibal713 1 month ago
Wow. Worst trailer ever.
RobbyArt 2 months ago
@RobbyArt Trailers were this way back in the 70s. Ever see some trailers for the Godfather? One trailer is nothing but still photos from the movie with narration.
Revoltingmachine 3 weeks ago
"2001" is my favorite film of all time, and I felt "Star Trek: TMP" just really wanted to be that movie but didn't have enough style or substance to compensate, so it just ends up being boring.
theskull42 2 months ago
@theskull42 But it is still better than the 2009 version by at least 100 times!
Perhaps modern people are more brainless?
maskscraper 2 months ago
@maskscraper oh i dont know. i'd say its better by 1000 times
VeryCupboardy 2 months ago
@VeryCupboardy Or is that correct to say, the directors in 2009 are more retarded?
"Tuvok! Activate the photonic cannon!"
maskscraper 2 months ago
@maskscraper People just don't have patience for st motion picture. So it can easily get bad reviews by those who are not interested.
Revoltingmachine 3 weeks ago
Great video.
Cococrash11 2 months ago
This one falls into last place of my favorites. Star Trek 2: The Wrath Of Khan falls into first place of my favorites with pat 3 into second and Star Trek 6: The Undiscovered Country in 3rd place. Whereas the lighthearted ones like parts 4, 5, and The Motion Picture falls into last place. Don't get me wrong, I love The Next Generation and as well as I keep them separate from the original series.
TonyShow82 3 months ago
god i love the movie poster :)
DIRECTORtyw555 3 months ago 3
@DIRECTORtyw555 I love how the poster was from the ending shot of this trailer with the rainbow colors! so 70s... i love it!
Revoltingmachine 3 weeks ago
This film is perhaps the most important chapter in Star Trek history - aside from the original series itself.
It single handedly resurrected Star Trek, delivered truly ground breaking vfx, an adversary so gigantic its terrifying, and even attempted to provide a story worthy of the crew's return - the importance of being human. Also, it provided the template for TNG...
Gene Roddenbery deserved far better treatment for delivering this cinematic milestone. Bless him.
SamusDrake 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
To boldly go where no man has gone before! That says all pals! \\,//
ADHSkind 4 months ago
I loved this film the most than the other 5 films of the original casts. But I hated the trailer to this film since it had that jaws like theme to it.
hbk00123 4 months ago
Star Trek: The Motion Picture: 4/5
Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan: 4.4/5
Star Trek III: The Search for Spock: 4.4/5
Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home: 4.3/5 (I like it, but i didn't love it)
Star Trek V: The Final Frontier: 2/5
Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country: 4.5/5
horaciosi 5 months ago 2
Still better than Star Trek (2009).
crazy88boss 5 months ago
i think the problem with this movie nowdays is its too slow. I'm 13, and im used to fast rapid fire action sequences. so with this movie, it was a bit weird to adjust to it, along with REALLY outdated graphics. It was still a great movie!
crayzbotzz700 5 months ago
@crayzbotzz700 For two great (as in "required reading") classic) Sci-fi movies from the 70s that are both slower-than-molasses space operas, this but very cerebral, might I recommend Arthur C. Clarke's "2001: A Space Odyssey," and Stanislaw Lem's "Solaris" (not the George Clooney remake of Solaris, but the original, in Russian with English subtitles. Gawd, I hope they never remake 2001; Sequels were bad enough.)
bzert281 5 months ago
@bzert281 I know about space odyssey, I've never heard of solaris. thanks for that, I'll have to look it up
crayzbotzz700 5 months ago
@crayzbotzz700 haha; "graphics"
TranyaAddict 4 months ago
@TranyaAddict ?
crayzbotzz700 4 months ago
@crayzbotzz700 oh, I was just making a little joke. Back then, studios used physical models, compositing, hard work and airbrush art as the "graphics" or special effects. I just find it funny when people use the term 'graphics' to describe film effects prior to about 1990.
TranyaAddict 4 months ago
@TranyaAddict ooooohhh.... I know they did that in star wars, but I never knew they did in star trek...
anyway thanks it makes sense
crayzbotzz700 4 months ago
@TranyaAddict the models look better than the CGI they use today
Revoltingmachine 3 weeks ago
Most people ALWAYS thought it was boring. It had moments, though.
CaptGage 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
It's my favorite of the movies. It perfectly followed the series in theme.
cdrdecker 6 months ago
I never liked this one. Even watching it without knowing that it was the worse Star Trek film (that is meant as no offense as those who like it, just what I have always read) I know my Mama, older brother, and a friend liked it. I just never did.
1kissbee 6 months ago
I was 11 years old when I went to the theater to see this film for the first time. Man, all I can say was....IT WAS EPIC!!!....Seeing the Enterprise up close,flying by with that big orcestra theme music in the background!....I was totally in awe!!!
Wondermouth1 6 months ago
That announcer sounds like Rod Serling ??
spacemouse1 6 months ago
@spacemouse1 i heard it might have been orson welles. i know he did the voiceovers for the teaser trailer and the tv spots.
thirtyoneuniform 6 months ago
The Enterprise refit is one classy starship if I ever saw one! She's a real beauty!
carnivalofsouls2047 7 months ago
I watched it again recently. My honest opinion? It is kind of slow, and I think in parts derivative of both 2001 and The Changeling. Stephen Collins is pretty good, but Persis Khambatta isn't that great an actress.
What I do like is the look. It looks like none of the other movies. Yes, the uniforms look dated, but the design for the ships, V'Ger, etc is amazing.
ItchythaWookiee 7 months ago
Awesome film. My favourite Star Trek movie at all.
skywalker74 7 months ago
I don't know if this is how cinema adverts were in those days, but this trailer makes the film look worse then it actually is. It's quite a good film.
ImagineWizard 8 months ago
VGER
monkeynuts76 8 months ago
This movie is a very good representation of what Star Trek is about, whereas the new movie is an insulting piece of crap. Whereas this movie presents hope for the future through "The Human Adventure is Just Beginning", the 2009 shit was more worried about pop culture and stupid jokes like "Heineken Beer...Classic!".
TheBigPicProductions 8 months ago
@TheBigPicProductions "..this movie presents hope for the future.."
How?
"..through 'The Human Adventure is Just Beginning'"
Through that movie slogan?
Please explain.
INTERNETVID 8 months ago
@INTERNETVID Explain what? "The Human Adventure is Just Beginning" is a slogan (you got that), but it is also describes what Star Trek originally epitomized. I'm not going to bother explaining what it means to you, that would be asinine.
TheBigPicProductions 8 months ago
@TheBigPicProductions "you got that"
Of course I did.
But I'll spell it out for you this time since the real meaning sailed right over your head:
READ CAREFULLY----> An inane movie slogan DOESN'T make a motion picture good.
Even Shatner HIMSELF ridiculed the lame, sophomoric premise of ST-TMP (middle-age/sr. citizen space crew dragged outta retirement to save the Galaxy from menacing cloud) in his late 70's standup routine. You wouldn't recall that since you weren't around at that time.
INTERNETVID 8 months ago
@INTERNETVID You are so astute! No one ever said it was the slogan itself, you genius, you! Maybe the slogan is just a good way of describing why the movie is good to people who get it, which you don't. William Shatner also satirizes Star Trek in general all the time, what is your point?
richy27able 8 months ago
The reason why the new 2009 film has great reviews is because it is for a more general audience (but star trek fans appreciate it even more). This film is more for the specific audience of star trek fans. Any bad review from a non-Trekkie I don't take as seriously (though I respect their opinion).
yoyrut10000 8 months ago
I think the reason why star trek films have gotten bad reviews in the past is because the people of the time didn't "get it" because they didn't "get" star trek.
daniel7899999 8 months ago
She is BALD!
thewizard747 9 months ago 7
Even though I do agree with some of the criticism that this movie gets it is still my favorite one with the original crew.
trekfanful 9 months ago
@trekfanful actually it's one of the best Star Trek films of all.
trekfanful 9 months ago
Comment removed
TimsVideos17 9 months ago
@TimsVideos17 So something has to be funny and have action to be GOOD? This is Sci fi my friend go watch space odyssey and count the lines of dialogue
UridonTheMaster 8 months ago
@UridonTheMaster If anything the little dialog makes it unique. Remember the twilight episode with the old woman that turns out to be an alien? Not one word of dialog and fantastic writing!
yoyrut10000 8 months ago
@yoyrut10000 I remember that one of the B&W from the original series. You spend the whole episode thinking some hillbilly woman is being attacked by tiny aliens and then at the end you find out the aliens are earth astronauts visiting a primitive world of giant humanoids.
Anonymous01959 8 months ago
One of the worst movies ever. Why WOULDN'T it be? The storyline itself is inane + Paramount rushed the production start to finish simply to capitalize on the recent Star Wars phenom + The "Vger" angle was a cheap, transparent payoff from Gene to NASA for naming the Shuttle prototype 'Enterprise' + The endless, boring scenes thru the cheap Trumbull special effects caused the longest collective YAWN in cinema history + The ALL-TIME worst wooden acting when Shat turns, says "No wait! Get a fix.."
INTERNETVID 9 months ago
@INTERNETVID Get bent. Seriously.
TheBigPicProductions 8 months ago
This is an example of a preview that paled in comparison to the teaser trailer.
Watcher3223 9 months ago
I watched all the Star Trek films other than First Contact (which I heard was good) and Nemesis but for some reason I still think that TMP is the best one, even better than the second one. Just my opinion. The music and special effects are pretty good. I only have one big complaint. I remember watching this on DVD for the first time and there's that one scene before the opening credits where the camera is pulling back through stars and along with the Ilia's Theme. Was that necessary?
mzhivago925 10 months ago
@mzhivago925
That was what's called an overture, which was a practice that was reserved for epic motion pictures, especially pictures from the 1950s and 1960s.
"West Side Story" is an example of a picture that used an overture. It was also directed by Robert Wise, the same man who directed "Star Trek: The Motion Picture."
Plus sometimes a film that has an overture also has an intermission, an entr'acte and an exit. Examples: "2001: A Space Odyssey," and "It's a mad mad mad mad world."
Watcher3223 9 months ago
i'm so fucking sick and tire of everyone saying oh jj abram star trek is the best ever. bull fucking shit
thebuckrogers22 10 months ago
LOL "The is the return of Captain Kirk" ...I love that...I love how William Shatner walks out. Gives me the chills... CANT WAIT FOR J.J. ABRAMS "STAR TREK 2" in theaters June 29, 2012. The script is completed was completed March 2011.
megaplexnews 11 months ago
Star Trek is really hopeful; that's probably why I like it so much.
spagerbot 11 months ago
it did have pretty awesome effects of its time!
halflifeproductionz 11 months ago
Great film....but for those fans that like explosions, etc., this is not for them. This TREK movie is more cerebral and philisophycal.
bluenail03 1 year ago 10
@bluenail03 That's what I like about the movie though. It was slow, and it captured the feeling of moving in space. The shuttle moving towards the docking station was epic IMO.
Revoltingmachine 2 months ago
@Revoltingmachine I think they tried to add a bit of "2001" to it.
bluenail03 2 months ago
@bluenail03 I liked the movie but I wouldn't call it philosophical.
RobbyArt 2 months ago
Boring! Star Trek the TV show was never boring and I liked all the other Star Trek films but this one was a celluloid sleeping pill .This film came out in 79 and they called it "The Motion Picture" what is it 1930? Why don't they just call it the moving picture show? Two years after Star Wars my expectations were much higher and what was up with Ms Cue Ball?
MrBuc128 1 year ago
@MrBuc128 "Boring! Star Trek the TV show was never boring and I liked all the other Star Trek films but this one was a celluloid sleeping pill"
The other problem was that "ST:TMP" wasn't really finished when it ended up being released in 1979.
The production went over budget and fell behind schedule and there was no time to tighten the pace of the film in editing.
The director's edition released in 2001 helped a lot, but it's still a slower, more contemplative film than average.
Watcher3223 9 months ago
@Watcher3223 Ya know I was really young when I first saw this movie and I don't think I have seen it in its' entirety since. Perhaps I would appreciate it more today
MrBuc128 9 months ago
@MrBuc128
Possibly, but it's also possible that you may still find it boring. To add, there's actually nothing wrong with that as there's no movie that will satisfy everybody.
As for me, I think this movie is good in its own way, but, like other movies like "2001" or "Ben-Hur", I have to be in a particular mood to want to watch it.
On average, I'd rather listen to the soundtrack or watch something else, such as "Star Trek IV."
Watcher3223 9 months ago
@MrBuc128
I'd probably recommend you go ahead and rent this movie to watch once. I would recommend the director's cut because it's a tighter film, but it's still going to be a slow, cerebral story.
Again, nothing wrong with that, but, again, it's one of those films where you see it because you haven't before or if you're in the mood for something contemplative and thought-provoking.
Watcher3223 9 months ago
Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979) Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982) Star Trek III: The Search for Spock (1984) Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home (1986) Star Trek V: The Final Frontier (1989) Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country (1991) Star Trek: Generations (1994) Star Trek (2009)
Every1unitedable 1 year ago
today Voyager is about to enter interstellar space. Right on track to, in 250 years, come back to earth in a giant blue cloud and wipe us all out. I've seen that movie!
mattbolinder 1 year ago
This film was okay, but I liked the Starfleet uniforms better in the 2nd movie. The uniforms in this movie was just too plain & ordinary.
IamAdamWafer 1 year ago
I am a Trek fan but I didnt like this movie at all. Might be just to old :S But at least its the real Trek not that JJ new shit :S
Shockwaver08 1 year ago
i love the touch with the rainbow beamdown x) love story fo' shå
Fluorit 1 year ago
Meh. The first half feels like a poor man's 2001: A Space Odyssey. The end is pretty good, though.
Oh, and the trailer is neat. :P
rybuger1 1 year ago
Great Movie! :)
DaddlerTheDalek 1 year ago
Great start to the franchise.
bobgrantsbus 1 year ago 2
All credit to Channel 4(Television channel in Britain) have shown all the feature films from the Motion Picture 1979 to "Nemesis" 2003 on 10 consecutive Saturdays.
Now this weekend, they are showing them all 10 films over 2 days!!!!
theman2017inc 1 year ago
I really liked the movie and the plot, especially the V'ger. That was so creative! If the remake would be Star Trek XII or something, I would most definitely watch it.
theimpossiblers 1 year ago
Holy crap, I feel like I just watched the movie!
HawkGTboy 1 year ago
Nostalgic! I remember waiting in line for this movie. I loved the story, even if it was a love story. It was good! Whoever says different, is not a true Star Trek fan. That JJ Abrams' monstrosity was just something he wanted to put his name on. He could not get it, nor will he! To put Star Wars elements into a sci fi classic is doomed to fail. Especially when he puts the middle finger to the fans. These guys made it a legend.
KJOSCOT 1 year ago
@KJOSCOT I'm sorry, but the true Star Trek fans were the reason Star Trek was dying. JJ Abram's rebooted, and saved the franchise.
Goldiney 1 year ago
@Goldiney Actually, it was the writers and Rick Berman at the helm that was the reason, not the fans. The fans kept it going for years. When Viacom bought the rights to the show, the merchandise became heavily copyrighted, which led to discontent among the fan base.
KJOSCOT 1 year ago
@KJOSCOT. Only reason I bothered renting the Abrams Star Trek was for Domenican hottie Zoe Saldana (Uhura). I didn't think the story was that great. Should've let someone like Steven Moffatt, Joss Whedon, or Warren Ellis pen the story.
1977Melville 1 year ago
They give away too much about V'Ger in this trailer. After all you're not supposed to know it's a machine until Spock does his thruster suit exploration of the interior of V'Ger.
dafmurray 1 year ago
I love this trailer. I also imagine this second trailer for Star Trek the Motion Picture as a trailer for my story Galactic Bullet as a movie about a steam train that runs across the cosmos on laser rails.
ronbond007 1 year ago
the mistake was using a script concept for a 1 hour tv show expanded into a full 2 hour movie
the script was for st 2.0
the other problem was not allowing the cast to age
both these issues were fixed in khan
brabon1 1 year ago
This is the stupidest star trek movie! They should not have put Shatner in it. This should not have been star trek at all!
nidhi077 1 year ago
Boring, wrath of khan is so much better!
5613n8 1 year ago 4
i must say that the new version of Star Trek (of J.J.Abrams) was too good..
don't know about these old versions...but the new version rocks......
MrSpike195 1 year ago
@MrSpike195
Are you kidding? It was one of the dumbest movies that I've ever seen in a theater! It was like a cross between The Phantom Menace and Transformers, shot with more color tweaking and lens flares than Minority Report and Blade Runner combined, and strung along on a plot fueled by cheap coincidences, awful characterization, and blatant disregard for the entire Star Trek oeuvre (to say nothing of narrative logic). I'd go deeper into it, but I only have five hundred characters here.
Stopmotionist 1 year ago
This race of "living machines" on this film,who send the voyager back to earth was the Borg?
popqvn 1 year ago
ugghh, why the uniform change?
WWEinvadesTNA8 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I can enjoy this film, but it is basically a remake of the nomad episode. They could have been more original.
starsiegeplayer 1 year ago
I've never been able to track down the music score used in the bulk of this trailer. Does anyone know what it is?
charlieladder 1 year ago
@charlieladder The music in this trailer is from "Black Sunday," composed by John Williams.
Jimd1701 1 year ago
@Jimd1701 Thanks! I can't believe I didn't realize that (I'm a serious Williams admirer).
charlieladder 1 year ago
I'm undertaking research trying to find evidence that the images depicting Enterprise improved in conveying "realism" over subsequent Star Trek films but I am finding no fault in these images...bust!
ehmpeters 1 year ago
@ehmpeters
That's because they re-used the model.
Stopmotionist 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Check out my reivew fo rthis film, and other classics at my website,
greatmoviereview.weebly.com
JosephPD19881 1 year ago
It has a very 2001: A Space Odyssey feel to it. I love it.
CovePointProductions 1 year ago 3
The best Science Fiction Star Trek movie.
It's quite puzzling that this film that came out in 1979 has MUCH better special effects than any of the following Star Trek movies.
Yes there are quite a few moments that are stretched out in which characters stare dumbfounded at the scenery but - all in all- it has a very good story and just takes it's time to get there. There's not a lot of humor perhaps, but as pure Sci-Fi it's quite something and often overlooked.
Sci-fi fans should not miss it!
bluesgurugod 1 year ago 8
Comment removed
Cururaukar 1 year ago
Love the spectrum effects/title screen!
CaptainBuckRogers 1 year ago
viger or voyger created by NASA nearly destroyed us... thank god for our star ship enterprise... yessssss we are saved... captain Kirk we love you.... ( joke ) beam me ANYWHER SCOTTY...
fairhillnorrie 1 year ago
What a crap trailer :/
duuude4 1 year ago
One of the best Sci-fi's adventures yet!
oiramldx 1 year ago
somejackball right on the ball, I was there in the cinema in 1979 to watch this, and it was awesome. I was 13 years old.
mickbramley 1 year ago 3
people complain now that the film is boring, or it's too steril (space odyssey like).. Well let me tell you, if you were one of the folks who got to see it in theaters when it first came out like i did, it was a hell of a ride!!
of course after Empire, and ST 2-4, and Terminator, Aliens etc.. everything had to be explosions, and SFX, and CGI... and most of the time that works, and we're used to it now.
but in 79, ST-TMP was pretty a pretty damn awesome sci-fi film.
somejackball 1 year ago 11
I do agree that it's a great story, but you have to admit there are some points where it drags a bit. Like the part where the Enterprise is flying through V'Ger. It's basically ten minutes of nothing happening.
evrbody 1 year ago
1000% Agreed... Abrams made a nice effort but his Star Trek film(s) have too much Star Wars/Matrix action/effects and not enough of the human story with morality, character, and the idea that humanity has "grown up" into a wise and morally developed intelligent species. That concept alone made the "true and original" Star Trek made by Gene Roddenberry so special and memorable! It was his vision of what we as humans would become! That trait seems to be lost in the current Abrams film(s). IMHO
sgtmyers88 1 year ago
one of the best trek movies.
bradhig 1 year ago 4
The only problem with this one was pacing. If the entire film had as much good pacing as the first scene with the Klingons did, it would have been an even bigger smash.
ngobleus 1 year ago
It may be slow but good Sci-Fi is about story and moralty, not explosions. Forget Jar Jar Abrams this is real Star Trek!
BondFreek 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
fuck you asshole you know there are star trek fans who actaully like the new movie you all are just on your periods because there follow a storyline thats not total shit so shut the fuck up
megahypernova 2 years ago
No one said that there werent fans that liked the new movie. But most agree that it is not real Star Trek. Just like there are fans that hate the Motion Picture but acknowledge that it is real Star Trek.
PS. Why do you talk to strangers like that? I dare you to say cuss some one off the streets like that, see if you don't wind up with a black eye. Only a true asshole tries to shut people up just because he/she doesnt like what he/she reads.
BondFreek 1 year ago 4
I still love this film, I don't care what anyone says :p
TheRamenAvenger 2 years ago 64
Same here. No matter if it is the theatrical cut from 1979, the TV cut from 1983 or the Director's Edition from 2002. I love this movie.
FekLeyrTarg 2 years ago 4
I like this film,might not be the Wrath of Khan but there are some great character moments and its Kirk,Spock,Bones,Uhura,Scotty,Sulu and even Chekov.Whats not to like.
tergygirl 2 years ago 7
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I always say, let that starship go through some reality and put some damage marks on it when it gets attacked by the cloud. So to a degree, this one was un-realistic.
AJGreene007 2 years ago
@AJGreene007 The new screans held, the damage was so small that it could not be seen from a distance, like key scraches on a car. If the writers made the electric volts big enough to be seen on the exteror they would have had to kill half the bridge crue and the warp core would have exploded.
BondFreek 2 years ago
This is by far the most realistic and impressive of all the old films. Too bad they rushed into production without even having a completed script!
The Jerry Goldsmith soundtrack is amazing (the one heard in this trailer is John Williams' Black Sunday)
plastique45 2 years ago 4
The best Star Trek film, period.
dangkoen 2 years ago 7
This has been flagged as spam show
you're on crack
joeylodes 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
snore
monkeynuts76 2 years ago
It does start slow, but its one of the most fantastic sci-fi movies ever made.
Michael272727 2 years ago 56
@Michael272727 Exactly. It's a feast for the eyes. Makes up for a little slow. Love old school FX's.
CaptainBuckRogers 1 year ago
@Michael272727
What's so "fantastic" about it? The writing? (CARRBON UNITZ; Belllaaayyy thaaat phaaaserrr orrrderrr!) The plot? (Blue thing is heading for Earth; Kirk and his crew must stop it; they do; something about Spock's brain exploding and a fake Ilia.) The special effects? (This movie has some of the worst compositing that I've ever seen, and from Trumbull and Dykstra, no less!) The music? (Well... OK. I'll give you that one.)
It was basically The Black Hole, but serious.
Stopmotionist 1 year ago
im a huge star trek fan but this was my least favorite of all the films
godofrock12 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I think its the hardest to watch cos of the lack of action sequences and its tribute to what seems to be "2001: A Space Oddesey". Even Final Frontier is not as hard to watch cos it has lots of action sequences though they still should have given it over to another director.
warrioroftheworld01 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
This has to be one of the most boring Star Trek Movies ever. The second being Star Trek: Insurrection.
rprince418 2 years ago
now you all know wrath of khan is the best :)
gamwam 2 years ago
I actually really like the organ part, it's rather cool-sounding.
JoelandtheBots 2 years ago
At 1:00, kind of looks like Mark Hamill :)
Zli69 2 years ago
One of my favorite Trek movies, it is so underated. People don't get it because they want an action adventure and thats not necessarily what they get. It's kind of like 2001 in that it makes you think about what being human and our relationship with God really is (paralleled with the whole V'Ger/Creator storyline and the Spock/V'Ger storyline).
I read on IMDB that in this movie everyone needs something, Kirk needs the Enterprise, Decker needs to be needed, Illia needs Decker, and so on.
john6380 2 years ago 6
Good points john, but some of it was too drawn out. I know it didn't have to be an action space opera, though.
CaptGage 2 years ago
If it hadn't been for Star Wars, it would have become the TV episode it should have been.
JoelandtheBots 2 years ago
Point taken. It coulda been more concise.
CaptGage 2 years ago
The new Star Trek whips this film's candy ass!
duff007 2 years ago
Yes it does, duff!
CaptGage 2 years ago
You fuckin schmuck.
WhoRunBarterTown 2 years ago
Hell yah!
rprince418 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Star Trek The Motion Picture is very underrated by some of the so called " experts". This film has everything required of a good space travel adventure in it. And regarding the uniforms; I like all of them - the TV series, the first movie, and ST II - VI.
Star Trek (TOS) lives and live it does !
Hulk7Rules 2 years ago
Star Trek The Motion Picture is very underrated by some of the so called "experts". This film had everything requried of a good space travel adventure in it. And regarding the uniforms; I like all of them - the TV series, the first movie, and ST II - VI.
Star Trek (TOS) lives and live it does !
Hulk7Rules 2 years ago 2
1:16 Now THAT is an alarm. I want a ringtone of that noise.
bloatiq 2 years ago
They really didn't know how to make movie trailers back then, do they?
33marcus33 2 years ago
i agree:)
Vluppey 2 years ago
"TO CHALLENGE A VAST... LIVING... MACHINE... DESTRUCTION!"
Huh?
NihilisticToast 2 years ago
it's probably living machine OF destruction.... but i don't hear it either.
hush00 2 years ago
holy god...the trailer sucked
not that it mattered...i was gonna watch the movie anyway
brabon1 2 years ago
"im sorry"
"that you left delta 4, or that you didn't even say good bye"
what a load of crap, can't believe i used to be a trekkie. as for the models it wouldn't be possible to do complex rotating action sequences with models, and CGI done properly is just as good as models.
what a terrible trailer.
baltarsparklemotion 2 years ago
Having seen the trailer for the new Star Trek I have to say that I hate CGI. The models and fx on this film are so much better than what they do with computers. I guess I am old school but I want to go back to minatures. CGI sucks, save it for Pixar. I am old....
TackleberryLives 2 years ago
yes models are better. they look more real
skinflutey 2 years ago
Well said mate - long live models...(gee George Lucas is going to be pissed of with us lol)
mintyspace 2 years ago 2
how is this movie?
Kinnikujoe1 2 years ago
it's the best star trek movie
startrekking2 2 years ago
II and VI are the best
keridog1 2 years ago
still ... in my entire life ... the ONLY film i ever feel asleep while watching in the theatre. beyond terrible.
I agree with keridog1 ... II and VI ... the best! both directed by Nick Myers. plus II has the incredible score by Horner ... it put him on the map!
joeylodes 2 years ago
it was ight good plot needed more action the best ive seen is wrath of kahn
nymetsfan9121 2 years ago
Estos cabrones son los papás de Star Wars.
Jorge7211 3 years ago
Estos cabrones son los papás de Star Wars.
Jorge7211 3 years ago
Estos cabrones son los papás de Star Wars.
Jorge7211 3 years ago
the original teaser is much, much, better
brianhay84 3 years ago
I like this trailer better than the teaser. Refreshing narration, suspensful music, etc..
megaplexnews 2 years ago
i SO agree about the rainbow + organs =70s kitsch. but i suppose that's the beauty of the trailer. it captures quite subtly all of the brilliance of the film.
andrewzhang6666 3 years ago