Last movie you watched

[Hubbs]

Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979)

To think this this film came out when I was just one year old, just like 'Star Wars' which came out a year before I was born, makes me think.

I'm not a Star Trek fan and never have been although I did always enjoy the films with the original crew, never got into any of the TV series. I always preferred the Star Wars franchise for many reasons but one is because it always looked so superior. The first Trek film really does show the difference between the two franchises, not taking anything away from ST but it always did look more plastic and obviously fake.

The effects in this first film are a mixed bag really, the sequences towards the finale inside 'V'Ger' don't look too bad (nice '2001' type fantasy lighting effects), various ship shots look nice throughout and the costumes although drab don't age too badly. For the most part though this film has aged badly if we're honest about it, I don't wanna keep comparing it to SW but there is a clear difference in quality which still stands to this day.

What I did always like about Trek was the way it tries to be realistic or at least approach things in a realistic fashion. The start of the film is almost done in a Kubrick style with some nice camera work. Not sure if they are merely homaging or copying '2001' but you can see the influences in one sequence as we are treated to grandiose panorama of the Enterprise as she sits in her docking bay accompanied by a stirring Trek instrumental score. I do like the way Wise gave the film a slow pace, lots of character and background building alongside plenty of mission dialog and technical problems that might occur in reality for such a scenario.

The film was criticised for this slow unadventurous style but I like it, its one of the more realistic Trek films and could almost be tagged as 'serious sci-fi'. Another aspect of this film and other Trek films I like is the plot. Seems straight forward enough as the team are sent to intercept a mysterious alien phenomena heading towards earth, but I liked how the plot has its intriguing twist at the end. Its not groundbreaking but it just makes you think a little, right up to the very end your unsure what the hell will happen, how 'Kirk' will save the day and what's the deal behind the alien cloud thing, that's good movie making.

I really don't know why the film had such a hard time upon release. It carries on from the classic TV show with everything you would expect but on a grander scale. The continuity from the TV show to the big screen is handled well I thought although I'm no Trek expert. You have the typical Trek visuals and sounds, the crew handle most of the action from the ships bridge through the good old big screen on the wall, everyone is present and correct doing what they do etc...

Sure its not an in your face phaser fest with hand to hand fights with large lizard men but I for one thought the serious route was a good way to go. The film does feel more of an exploration adventure, it takes its time, slowly builds, lots of space jargon...you don't know what their on about half the time but it just sounds good, I use my 'realism' card again.

Overall the special effects look fuzzy in places, lots of beige colour schemes going on with the ship and crew, plenty of nasty bluescreen evident I'm afraid but its still very enjoyable sci-fi. Star Trek has its own little niche of being semi serious and approaching everything logically but still utilizing just enough fantasy to make it a pleasant ride.

[Hubbs]

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982)

I never did understand how this film was so much more successful and popular than the first. Quite clearly the film has gone for a slightly more silly plot losing allot of the straight laced sci-fi from the first. I suppose you could say they lost the aspiring '2001' type sequences and went back to the more well known cardboard effects of Star Trek, shame.

Now I realise the slow building straight faced Star Trek we got in the first film was frowned upon but its hard to see what the fans actually wanted in a big screen version. There were complaints that the original was just an outstretched TV episode with fancy visuals, yet this sequel (in my opinion) was even more of an outstretched TV episode with lousy visuals.

I gotta give it to the creative teams behind the film, it was damn brave going ahead with this plot that's for sure. If you look at the facts here...the plot follows on from an episode which was in the old original TV series back in the mid 60's. So already you are possibly excluding most of your target audience as I'm sure many had not seen this episode and possibly not allot of the original series (of course many would have). So technically unless you had seen that episode you would be wondering what on earth happened before hand and feeling somewhat in the dark.

A bold move on the plot methinks, could of gone all wrong there. That aside I think the film looked pretty poor also, the effects looked allot rougher (which is saying something) and in general the grandiose feeling you got in the first film seemed to have been sucked away. What you had left was a quite cheap looking and very generic film, the only thing that looked spruced up were the character uniforms.

For me the franchise went backwards with this outing, it was kinda cool how they explored and expanded an old TV episode but the whole thing is so basic. I liked the slow strategic 'galleon' type starship battle between 'Kirk' and 'Khan' in the nebulae but apart from that there was nothing really that stuck out as a big moment.

Of course a sneering seething Ricardo Montalbán really helped the film with his portrayal of the dastardly 'Khan' but he doesn't do much does he. A curious one this, I know its a fan favourite and it saved the Star Trek franchise at the time of release but I just don't see why or how. I guess it was all about less fancy eye candy and a more 'down to earth' gritty Trek adventure.

[Hubbs]

Star Trek III: The Search for Spock (1984)

To this day it still seems a funny choice to have cast Chris Lloyd as a Klingon. Such a wiry guy with a weak parched voice and definitely more of a comedic actor. I'm not sure he pulled it off really, I can see his his other amusing film characters shining through every time he's in shot hehe and he's not really very threatening. There isn't really any reason for him to be involved either, he's just there, in space, for no reason and decides to go after the 'Genesis' data, no background a tall.

So despite a slightly weak villain the main plus point is that the continuity carries on nicely from the second film with everyone present and correct accept the character of 'Saavik' (no longer Alley), of course the plot carries on nicely also. It actually feels very much like a huge film cut in two (this and 'Khan') or back to back filming, not much difference between the two.

The story does feel rather contrived with a major U-turn, 'Spock' had been killed off in a grand heroic manner to end the film franchise. The second film did well (unexpectedly?) so they had to think of a way to bring him back to life so the franchise could be milked further haha. This does equal much spiritual Vulcan jiggery pokery which is interesting but at the same time a bit heavy and tends to drag the sci-fi down into another realm or genre even. Personally I didn't like that side of the story, it just doesn't seem to work for me and its all too convenient.

I have always thought that the story behind 'David' being 'Kirk's' son was never really explored properly either. We discover this revelation in 'Khan' but its so subdued I would of thought we might get more in this third film, but no. Even in death 'kirk's' son gets no real epic send off, the whole thing from start to finish is glossed over pretty lazily really, oh well.

Everything else within the film is pretty much the standard look and feel of the second film simply carried on, nothing much to rave about really, its all quite average. Effects are still rather poor to be frank, the starship sequences look a touch neater this time but the planet surface of 'Genesis' has some nasty obvious set work accompanied by some even worse destruction effects as the planet disintegrates. 'Kirk' and company even remain in the same uniforms for this continuing adventure!. Both the second and third films have one other plus point in their favour and that was Horner and his instrumental score. The first film lacked a good score but this is fixed with gusto by Horner as he provides much needed emotion and vigor to the films. That was one reason the first film seemed a bit limp at times.

Its all a bit hokey in all honesty, almost like a young teens comicbook film. It does seem like this story idea could simply be a small chapter in the Trek universe that could of been explained within a TV episode, there really isn't any outstanding movie moments a tall. Speaking of hokey...don't you just love seeing Shatner in fist fights, the finale fight between 'Kirk' and 'Kruge' really was pretty dire to say the least haha. Talk about fluffy theatrical fisticuffs! never at any point does it look real or remotely intense, lets face it neither actors are the athletic fighting type. Absolutely terrible yet probably close to the real Star Trek of the mid 60's, I did enjoy that scene.

The whole film feels very much like a 'made for TV' movie and only slightly less cheaper looking than the second. The acting is wooden but that is part of the charm admittedly, we expect that, but the film just doesn't have any cinematic impact what so ever. Funnily enough this film does also feel closer to its TV origins than the semi serious sci-fi of the original (as did 'Khan'), I put that down to the low values of pretty much everything, 'cardboard effects'.

End of the day you just can't go wrong with a good old fashioned adventure with the old crew of the Enterprise. This film is probably a bit worse than 'Khan' but it still manages to be fun in a very silly quirky way whilst remaining faithful to original source material. Can't deny its always a good romp.

Keep an eye out for the small cameo by Miguel Ferrer as a crew member onboard the Excelsior

[LargeLeader]

I personally love Star Trek III. Never understood the hate.

[Hubbs]

Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home (1986)

This was the first Star Trek movie I saw at the cinema, and to top that I think I saw it whilst in the US of A too

So the story continues from where it left of in 'The Search for Spock' with Nimoy again at the helm. What can one say about this Trek outing, it certainly took a different route and clearly went for a more comedic approach. Was this the right approach? well maybe, I can't deny that the film is very entertaining with some well crafted family fun moments that make all the veteran actors even more endearing in their now historical roles.

How can anyone fail to love these guys? quite literately old age pensioners in space and still saving the earth, what a team!. So yes a big kudos for the alternate direction and some lovely amusing moments which can't fail to make you smile.

On the other hand did this film really do much to bolster Star Treks sci-fi rankings within the hall of fame/classics?. I'm not so sure really, we all know Star Trek has that little niche of semi serious logical sci-fi mixed with blatant fantasy but for me this plot just took one step too far. There is really only so far you can go before you have to step back and say 'hold on'.

Earth is in trouble (again) so the ageing crew simply decide to use a 'time warp' into the past to casually pick up some humpback whales and bounce back to the their present before anyone knew they were there. Now is it me or is this premise just a tad beyond the realms of a reasonably sensible film? the last film saw a character resurrected and now they can jump through time to fix problems, these guys can't be beaten!.
The story is an ingenious creation (but they do tend to come across allot of unknown energy sapping...problems), a good message about the environment and endangered species but for me the time travel thing just never sat well, its too convenient and renders the Enterprise crew almost insurmountable in any given situation.

That aside its a completely new breathe of fresh air to have the film set almost entirely on a planet surface, especially our own. This does infact render special effects almost obsolete for the film, almost. There are still many nasty bluescreen shots, standard obvious sets and some hideous whale footage crowbarred in but also the odd nice starship model, usual Trek look really.

I can see why this did well upon release as its a fun film with a good message and happy ending, its Star Trek all over. For me the plot has gone from generic in the last two films to completely outlandish in this film, much suspension of disbelief required here. Much like the previous two films I neither overly dislike or overly like this fourth effort. I enjoyed it for what's it worth and of course knew what to expect, but compare these Trek films to other sci-fi and they do look quite childish.

[NERMAL]

Undiscovered Country, then Wrath (or the otherway around. I can never make up my mind on these two) then Search, then the rest...

[SM]

I really don't know why the film had such a hard time upon release.

'Cos it has really long boring sequences of the crew looking at pretty colours on the view screen.  And really long boring beauty shots of the Enterprise.

I never did understand how this film was so much more successful and popular than the first.

1) Shatner, Nimoy, Montalban and to a lesser extent Kelley are all on fire. Kirstie Alley does a great job with Saavik too.

2) The 'Hornblower in space' more militaristic look was streets ahead of the Original Series and TMP.

3) Great theme about aging and ultimately dying, juxtaposed with new life.

4) Spock's death is among the best ever committed to film.

5) Horner's score is at least as good as Goldsmith's.

6) Reliant is sweet looking ship.

7) The battle is like old style sailing battle ships fighting in a fog.

8 ) It doesn't have really long boring sequences of the crew looking at pretty colours on the view screen.  And really long boring beauty shots of the Enterprise.

The trilogy of 2, 3 and 4 are the best for mine, with 6 just behind.  1 and 5 cop a lot of shit.  Some of it is deserved, but a lot isn't.

[NERMAL]

'Cos it has really long boring sequences of the crew looking at pretty colours on the view screen.  And really long boring beauty shots of the Enterprise.

1) Shatner, Nimoy, Montalban and to a lesser extent Kelley are all on fire. Kirstie Alley does a great job with Saavik too.

2) The 'Hornblower in space' more militaristic look was streets ahead of the Original Series and TMP.

3) Great theme about aging and ultimately dying, juxtaposed with new life.

4) Spock's death is among the best ever committed to film.

5) Horner's score is at least as good as Goldsmith's.

6) Reliant is sweet looking ship.

7) The battle is like old style sailing battle ships fighting in a fog.

8 ) It doesn't have really long boring sequences of the crew looking at pretty colours on the view screen.  And really long boring beauty shots of the Enterprise.

The trilogy of 2, 3 and 4 are the best for mine, with 6 just behind.  1 and 5 cop a lot of shit.  Some of it is deserved, but a lot isn't.

+
Everything I wanted to say.

[Hudson]

Star Trek 2 & 4 are kind of Star Trek movies for anyone, as in people who might even already dislike Star Trek. Star Trek 3 is absolutely not for anyone; it's appeal is limited to fans of the original series in my opinion.

[SM]

Not really.  It follows directly on from the second film, so if you dug that, you'll likely be able to get into it.  It just lacks the punch of the second flick.  The two major set pieces of stealing, then later blowing up the Enterprise are fantastic, but other stuff can drag a bit.  And Uhura got the shitty end of the stick.  They show how they can automate transporters on the Enterprise - why couldn't Uhura go with them by doing the same thing?

[Hudson]

I disagree. I think it kind of lacks the simple entertainment value of 2 and 4. It's not catchy or accessible to just anyone. Even if you don't know jack about 2 or 3 most people can at least enjoy and be entertained by 4. I think even if you had seen part 2 there's no guarantee you'd like part 3. Like you mentioned, it can get draggy.

Not bad by any means but its not saying much in my opinion to call it the best of the odd numbered films.

[beckmen]

I only watched a few random eps of TOS and I liked The Search for Spock plenty. Christopher Lloyd, man. The Final Frontier is the only one I didn't really like, and even that film has its moments.

[Sebastian]

The Last Circus
It lost itself some towards the end, but damn. If you ever wanted to see a machete-wielding clown slitting throats, this is for you.

Wrath of the Titans
Better than its predecessor but that's probably not saying much. Ain't a whole lot to look at besides its pretty visuals.

[Hubbs]

Well its all personal preference of course but after watching these again I really quite liked the original look and feel. The following films for me tend to be more light weight with silly plots that don't intrigue, all good fun but just outstretched TV episodes really.

I wish they kept more of the serious sweeping sci-fi for all of them, Wise made the first look swish.

[Tryfan915]

Children of Men on blu-ray. For once I turned on the 5.1 and the audio was so dynamic. Really enhanced the film. 9/10

Alien, also on blu-ray. Has watching Prometheus changed my perception of the film and the Space Jockey in particular? Not in the slightest 10/10.