A Review Of My Favorite Star Trek Movie! (and, it's not the latest one)

After viewing the latest release in the "Star Trek" movie franchise last week (see my review below this one), I was inspired to go back and watch my favorite of these movies--"Star Trek: The Motion Picture." As much as I enjoyed it 30 years ago, I didn't realize that it was re-released on DVD back in 2001 with significant improvements. While the film did well at the box office, it was not what the movie's Director, Robert Wise, had envisioned.

Originally, he was rushed in post-production--many visual and sound effects were abandoned, and several helpful scenes were cut for time. With this new 2001 edition, however, Wise went back and slowly restored the film, adding in the deleted scenes, new digital and sound effects, and remixing the musical score. The result is fantastic. It must be seen on your biggest widescreen with great surround sound!

While It's hard for me to admit, the movie isn't for everyone, especially the ADD generation of today that needs constant movement and dialogue. You might think of it as a slow savor over a gourmet meal, where you take your time enjoying a food's texture, juices, and spices. There are several extended scenes with just gorgeous visuals and music, but no talking.In the spirit of "2001: A Space Odyssey" and "Lawrence of Arabia" this is as much a film about atmosphere and the audience's sensory experience as it is about the advancement of plot and story.

It does have impressive elements of character and conflict throughout, but it reaches beyond the typical plot to ask questions about philosophy and science, love and spirituality. Some might find it stuck in exposition as it grapples with these deepest of ideas. I think its strength is that, with its grand scope, brilliant color, and sound, it makes such ideas cinematic.

The movie brought together several creators with resumes for epic filmmaking. Robert Wise directed such sweeping films as "The Sound of Music," "West Side Story," and the classic sci-fi original, "The Day The Earth Stood Still." The musical Composer, Jerry Goldsmith (also scored "Planet Of The Apes," "Patton," "Chinatown," "Poltergeist," "Hoosiers," & "Rudy"), here crafted one of the best pieces of music, moviemaking has ever produced. The music is as much a character in the film as are Kirk and Spock. The same score, of course, was used in "Star Trek: The Next Generation" series, and I believe in others as well.

The Special Effects Director, Douglas Trumbull, also created the iconic visual masterpieces, "2001: A Space Odyssey," "Close Encounters of the Third Kind," and "Blade Runner." The special effects, along with the recent improvements still stand on their own and, in my opinion, are superior to much of what's done on computers today. Back then, effects were created organically, with humans molding real materials. Models, brass, glass, light, creative photography. Also, much of what you see in this film was the result of hand-crafted artistic paintings. I realize these elements are still used today, but they are not the foundation of most effects-heavy films anymore, and I think, suffer for it. The creative, organic humanity is largely removed in place of what can be done with digital technology.

This was long the fear of Star Trek's creator, writer, and producer, Gene Roddenberry, who, of course, produced and wrote much of this film. Roddenberry was a true Modernist. He believed in humanity, in science, in the optimistic future of human progress. This was his ideal vision. What he feared was that, in reality, technology and knowledge would move so far forward that it would leave what is good and unique about being human, behind.

The tension between humanity and technology/science was the main thread throughout the original TV series and it is moved to the forefront as the main idea with this film. As much as modernism, technological progress, science and logic can advance and improve our lives, they can't meet our need for what is most important. That can only come from the human characteristics of love and faith to reach out beyond ourselves into the unknown. Seeking meaning and purpose. Connecting with our Creator. The beauty of this film is that it celebrates all these ideas seamlessly.

In my opinion, "Star Trek: The Motion Picture" was probably the climax of the Roddenberry franchise (perhaps coupled with its soon-to-follow companion, "The Wrath of Khan"). The original TV series was far superior to its sequels when it came to wrestling with the ideas mentioned above. But, it was far inferior to them when it came to special effects, atmosphere, sound, etc. This film still retained the Roddenberry opus of high ideals, but also had the budget (especially now with the improvements) to give you a true sense of awe with sight and sound.

New versions of "Star Trek" will probably continue to roll out onto our movie screens and TV sets, mostly because the franchise is a proven money-maker. But with Roddenberry, its creator, gone, and with the empty advancements of digital technology and commercialism, I doubt that the triumph of this 30 year-old motion picture and its transcendent, human heart for storytelling will ever be seen again.

(P.S. If you're a uber-geek like me, listen to the Commentaries afterwards. The Director, Composer, and Effects guy all chime in with tons of tasty morsels!)

Star Trek: A Tale Of Two Reviews

With the advent of Netflix and the dwindling choice of quality movies, my wife and I rarely go to the cinema anymore. I'll usually go once or twice a year, saving my trips for movies that should be seen on the big screen. Star Trek was one of these. I wanted to see this one for several reasons. For one, the original Star Trek TV series is probably my favorite show of all time. Two, I saw that J.J. Abrams, the creator of Lost (as well as Alias, Fringe, etc.), was directing. We are such fans of the storytelling in Lost, I knew he'd do a great job. And, three, the movie has received great reviews across the board.

But, when I left the theatre around 12:30 am (we even went to the Thursday sneak peek show, something we never do), I felt like, to be fair, I needed to write two reviews. This movie was made with the idea that the majority of those who will see it are probably not very familiar with the original series. Most probably grew up watching The Next Generation and its minions and the original was not exactly prominent in their minds. And, even for those old enough to remember the original, not all are huge fans like me, so the movie attempts to appeal to all audiences.

So, here are my two reviews:

Epic Summer Blockbuster Grade: A

For the general movie audience, this is a great movie. It occurred to me at one point that I hadn't seen a film on this type of epic scale since The Lord Of The Rings. As summer blockbuster escapist entertainment, it's extremely satisfying.

There is a scope, color and grandeur to the film that is a "feast for the eyes," as they say. The action is often wonderfully paced, and takes you on a roller-coaster ride that will both exhaust and thrill you. It has all the elements of an engaging story--tension, light comedy, romance, etc., and pushes all the sensory buttons to make you glad you came, and for many, likely want to come again.

But, the main strength of the film was the display and development of the characters. And, with J.J. Abrams directing, I fully expected this. Abrams has shown himself to be a master at building a character from the ground up, making the back story be the main story--giving us the background on what makes a character they way he or she is.

His main focus in this regard is with the characters of Kirk and Spock (the others--Uhura, Sulu, Checkov, Scotty--are accurately portrayed and fun to watch, but more window-dressing than anything). While I had some issues with his vision and execution (see my purist review), the development of what made Captain Kirk, Captain Kirk, and Spock, Spock, felt in many ways authentic, emotionally connected, and certainly, compelling. It reaches beneath the surface of their well-known personalities and paints a nice picture of their origins, the connection to their past, their family, and ultimately, to each other. Abrams successfully builds a foundation that generally rings true with the characters in the original series.

Original Star Trek Purist Grade: B-

But, character isn't the only thing you need for a really great movie. You also need a sense of wonder (see my past article on this topic here). And again, this is also something I expected from Abrams, but was disappointed not to see.

In an interview I saw, Abrams tells the story of receiving a gift as a child--a "magic" box. His father told him: 'now, you can open this box, or you can leave it closed.' Abrams chose to leave it closed. He decided, no matter how great the contents of the box were, the magic was much stronger not knowing what was inside. That's what he has done with Lost. It's not about figuring out all the puzzles and uncovering the secrets, it's about relishing in the unknown, the mystery--the wonder.

At the very end of Star Trek, we hear the familiar lines from the original series: "Space...the final frontier...to boldly go where no one has gone before." But sadly, this was a sentiment merely pasted onto the end of a film that had little sense of exploration or the unknown. I know the main story was about character, but to leave out the wonder element really did a disservice to what made the original series so memorable.

As you saw, my "star trek purist" grade isn't an "F". There are many elements in the film that will please the series' fanatic, and they do bring back the elements of strength and conviction that were lost with The Next Generation, etc. But, other than the character strengths mentioned above, for the most part, I felt like this was more of an homage to the original series--giving us nuggets from the original we are nostalgic for--but ultimately changing the format to conform with the 21st Century universe.

And, that universe is one of virtual reality and digital stimuli more than it is about what is really "out there" or beyond us. While I said that many would enjoy roller-coaster feel of the special effects and action, I also felt that they were overdone in many ways. There was so much happening in sight and sound that I was almost too mesmerized to know that something was missing.

It really felt akin to the pulse of the latest video games that are so prevalent with the younger generation. Entertainment today is more about sensation than about ideas, more about the what the eye beholds than what the mind can conceive. In this way, it's not about wonder because it deals mostly in what we can see, not what we can imagine. The original Star Trek, even with its cheesy special effects and culturally-dated delivery, was superior because it reached into the realm of the unseen--philosophy, cultural vision & optimism, and very often, the spiritual & divine.

Abrams admits he was never a big fan of the original (his co-writers were), so maybe that's why he didn't carry this element with him into the new film. But, I suspect he did know, and perhaps in the name of profit, felt he needed to please the audience of today more than the audience of the original. And sadly, the audience of today has seen little of true wonder in movie-making. Mostly (pardon the cliche), sound and fury, signifying nothing.

So, maybe this part of the review isn't as much an indictment on the movie itself, but more an obituary for what has been lost in this genre of sci-fi, cinematic story-telling. I was hoping to see it resurrected with this latest Star Trek installment, but I fear it may never come again.