Star Trek - Space: The Final Frontier

[L50LasPak]

I wonder what the reception was at the time. Must have been pretty bad. Far worse movies have been 'rehabilitated'.

It was fucking DESTROYED by the critics in 1979.

EDIT: Roger Ebert liked it though.

I think they said pretty much what you guys are saying

It was too long, too abstract and too boring

Especially in a post-Star Wars context.

TMP set the box office record for highest opening weekend gross. It also defeated Superman and the 1978 re-release of Star Wars in its third week, which most movies tend to be lucky if they survive the second weekend especially in this day and age. It was the highest grossing Star Trek movie in the franchise literally until the 2009 remake came out, and they had China's help to break that record (4 was the most profitable Trek movie and remains so to this day, but TMP put the most asses in seats). Audiences generally liked it. If the movie did not have the bloated budget brought on by Phase II's development costs, it would have been a smash hit, probably one of the biggest successes of its era.

It still grossed $139 million against its $44 million (estimated) budget. That's pretty god damn impressive if you ask me. I think reputation colors this movie terribly in peoples minds. That and the godawful Director's Cut, which cuts out like half of the character scenes and only shortens the special effects sequences everyone hates by only ten or twenty seconds a pop. And adds a CGI V'Ger, because if Lucas did it by god we've got to do it too.


This part is obviously ancedotal, but the two times its played on KF movienight it got a fairly positive response from newbies, so it clearly has wider appeal than just the Trek nerds who think its super cerebral bro.

I also don't know how much stock I'd put in critical opinion, these are the same people who personally saw to it that The Thing was ruined at the box office the year it came out, and called it gory nonsense with nothing complicated going on.

 

[White Devil]

I don't care how much TMP made, it's a boring shit fest with terrible uniforms and a plot that moves slower than old people fucking. The only part of the movie I liked was the glory shots of the Enterprise at the beginning. It's not cerebral at all, anyone who thinks that is a fucking retard. It's just boring.

 

[UnKillFill]

TMP set the box office record for highest opening weekend gross. It also defeated Superman and the 1978 re-release of Star Wars in its third week, which most movies tend to be lucky if they survive the second weekend especially in this day and age. It was the highest grossing Star Trek movie in the franchise literally until the 2009 remake came out, and they had China's help to break that record (4 was the most profitable Trek movie and remains so to this day, but TMP put the most asses in seats). Audiences generally liked it. If the movie did not have the bloated budget brought on by Phase II's development costs, it would have been a smash hit, probably one of the biggest successes of its era.

It still grossed $139 million against its $44 million (estimated) budget. That's pretty god damn impressive if you ask me. I think reputation colors this movie terribly in peoples minds. That and the godawful Director's Cut, which cuts out like half of the character scenes and only shortens the special effects sequences everyone hates by only ten or twenty seconds a pop. And adds a CGI V'Ger, because if Lucas did it by god we've got to do it too.


This part is obviously ancedotal, but the two times its played on KF movienight it got a fairly positive response from newbies, so it clearly has wider appeal than just the Trek nerds who think its super cerebral bro.

I also don't know how much stock I'd put in critical opinion, these are the same people who personally saw to it that The Thing was ruined at the box office the year it came out, and called it gory nonsense with nothing complicated going on.

It was still a bad movie.

 

[White Devil]

It was still a bad movie.

By his reasoning in that post, we should all be bowing down to Avatar as the King of All Movies.

 

[L50LasPak]

By his reasoning in that post, we should all be bowing down to Avatar as the King of All Movies.

My point is people did have a strong positive response to it though. If it was really so slow and boring and totally incomprehensible, how did it keep Joe Retard in the theater when Kirk doesn't even get to fire phasers at anything? No, I don't think the effects were good enough to hold the average person's attention for that long, I think there was at least a bit more to it than that. I don't think the movie is that hard to follow, its just slow. Which yeah, it is slow, but its hardly the slowest movie I've ever seen.

The idea that the movie is "cerebral" (its really not, its pretty surface level) is probably marketing concocted by Gene Roddenberry though. Its interesting to note that word also came up when he complained about test audiences supposedly not liking The Cage because it was "too cerebral", when in reality the Desilu executives felt like the story was a bit too far up its own ass, something that coincidentally TMP is also guilty of.

 

[White Devil]

My point is people did have a strong positive response to it though. If it was really so slow and boring and totally incomprehensible, how did it keep Joe Retard in the theater when Kirk doesn't even get to fire phasers at anything? No, I don't think the effects were good enough to hold the average person's attention for that long, I think there was at least a bit more to it than that. I don't think the movie is that hard to follow, its just slow. Which yeah, it is slow, but its hardly the slowest movie I've ever seen.

The idea that the movie is "cerebral" (its really not, its pretty surface level) is probably marketing concocted by Gene Roddenberry though. Its interesting to note that word also came up when he complained about test audiences supposedly not liking The Cage because it was "too cerebral", when in reality the Desilu executives felt like the story was a bit too far up its own ass, something that coincidentally TMP is also guilty of.

It's 1979, there hadn't been any Star Trek content for 10 years unless you count the cartoon and Trek had grown a huge following in that time. Of course people are going to sit through it because of the franchise. We saw this same thing with The Phantom Menace, and plenty of people just getting out of theaters said they enjoyed that.

I think people said they enjoyed it back then because of the novelty of the experience, of it being the first Trek movie and the first new thing in a decade.

 

[Captain Syrup]

We saw this same thing with The Phantom Menace, and plenty of people just getting out of theaters said they enjoyed that.

That and audiences are generally fine with a once-popular series going on cruise control.

 

[L50LasPak]

It's 1979, there hadn't been any Star Trek content for 10 years unless you count the cartoon and Trek had grown a huge following in that time. Of course people are going to sit through it because of the franchise. We saw this same thing with The Phantom Menace, and plenty of people just getting out of theaters say they enjoyed that.

I think people said they enjoyed it back then because of the novelty of the experience, of it being the first Trek movie and the first new thing in a decade.

That and audiences are generally fine with a once-popular series going on cruise control. At least here in the States.

Yes, but Star Trek's fanbase had been whittled down to a core group of people at that point. When TMP relaunched the franchise, the Star Trek name wasn't a guaranteed moneymaker. It had nowhere near the insane marquee value that The Phantom Menace did upon its release. Trek fans were religiously devoted sure but there just weren't anywhere near as many of them.

It also wasn't the only SF film released that year, Moonraker came out ahead of TMP and was apparently the biggest movie of that year. On top of that, Disney's attempt at getting into the sci-fi ring with The Black Hole came out only a few days after TMP did, and that was savaged both critically and at the box office so it wasn't like people were just going to any SF movie they could find out of Star Wars fever.

If the movie's success was really attributable to a gimmick, it wouldn't have held its place at the box office for consecutive weeks, it probably would have imploded a lot like its competitor The Black Hole did; a decent opening weekend and then falling to obscurity after the first wave of movie-goers realized it didn't have anything else to it.

Its slow, its talky and yeah, its plot is really not that complicated. The Kirk/Spock/Bones dynamic is pretty much front and center because that's all there is to it, which I'm pretty sure is what carries the movie more than anything, both back then and now.

 

[White Devil]

Yes, but Star Trek's fanbase had been whittled down to a core group of people at that point. When TMP relaunched the franchise, the Star Trek name wasn't a guaranteed moneymaker. It had nowhere near the insane marquee value that The Phantom Menace did upon its release. Trek fans were religiously devoted sure but there just weren't anywhere near as many of them.

It also wasn't the only SF film released that year, Moonraker came out ahead of TMP and was apparently the biggest movie of that year. On top of that, Disney's attempt at getting into the sci-fi ring with The Black Hole came out only a few days after TMP did, and that was savaged both critically and at the box office so it wasn't like people were just going to any SF movie they could find out of Star Wars fever.

If the movie's success was really attributable to a gimmick, it wouldn't have held its place at the box office for consecutive weaks, it probably would have imploded a lot like its competitor The Black Hole did; a decent opening weekend and then falling to obscurity after the first wave of movie-goers realized it didn't have anything else to it.

Its slow, its talky and yeah, its plot is really not that complicated. The Kirk/Spock/Bones dynamic is pretty much front and center because that's all there is to it, which I'm pretty sure is what carries the movie more than anything, both back then and now.

I'm really not sure we're able to say how just how many people were Star Trek fans in 1979. It's not like how it is today with that shit where every franchise has a huge calculable pig pen of autists. I don't think they would have made TMP if they didn't think it would put asses in seats. There must have been some nascent demand for it outside of Gene Roddenberry's ego.

Speaking of, The Black Hole was not a very good movie at all, even for 70s sci fi schlock. It felt more like a token effort by Disney than a real effort at trying to compete with other sci fi juggernauts of the time.

 

[Sweet and Savoury]

oh man...I liked the Black Hole too

Must be a generational thing?

 

[L50LasPak]

I'm really not sure we're able to say how just how many people were Star Trek fans in 1979. It's not like how it is today with that shit where every franchise has a huge calculable pig pen of autists. I don't think they would have made TMP if they didn't think it would put asses in seats. There must have been some nascent demand for it outside of Gene Roddenberry's ego.

I generally agree with this, I just don't think The Phantom Menace is a good point of comparison because the insane hype surrounding that movie is really difficult to put into perspective. The only think I can think of on that scale would be something like Beatlemania, which popular or not I don't think Trek was able to draw upon.

Paramount did say that the movie performed "below expectations" implying they somehow expected an even bigger success, but that could be Hollywood accounting bullshit.

Speaking of, The Black Hole was not a very good movie at all, even for 70s sci fi schlock. It felt more like a token effort by Disney than a real effort at trying to compete with other sci fi juggernauts of the time.

oh man...I liked the Black Hole too

Must be a generational thing?

I thought I liked the movie more than I did but after rewatching it from the top recently its got really terrible problems. It didn't help that I surrounded it with other stuff from the same era that night like Moonraker, Starcrash and Silent Running. Which, while I'm sitll making a point of comparison, TMP is far better paced than Moonraker or Silent Running are. Moonraker was shockingly slow in parts and roughly the same length as the original cut of TMP, though the ending really made up for it. Silent Running was, well, Silent Running. I like that movie but man it makes TMP look like a horse race by comparison.

The Black Hole really did suck though, but the weird part is Disney spent a fair chunk of change on it. $25 million, which while not as high as TMP or Moonraker was a fair chunk of change and more than double the budget of Star Wars. By all indications they didn't skimp out on the movie, so to this day I can't figure out why it looks like shit.

 

[Sweet and Savoury]

Silent Running?

Was that the hippie one with the weird robots and all about space trees?

I have fond memories of that but it's been 30 years so I dunno if it held up

 

[L50LasPak]

Silent Running?

Was that the hippie one with the weird robots and all about space trees?

I have fond memories of that but it's been 30 years so I dunno if it held up

It holds up pretty well, you just have to be patient with both its runtime and its really weird premise. I actually like the idea that even though the environment is basically dead, the world is otherwise a utopia and technology has solved most if not all of the basic problems faced by mankind. That alone is a pretty ballsy move even if its a background detail.

 

[UnKillFill]

The (Slow) Motion Picture was the cinematic equivalent of jangling keys in front of a baby. I have no doubt that when it first came out, the special effects wowed the pants off of the average late 70's movie-goer.

But they say that "The Great Train Robbery" back in the early 1900's made people faint in droves just because of a scene at the end where where it looks like the a gunslinger is pulling a gun on and shooting the audience.

The audience weren't used to that yet, and that made it a lot more memorable to them at the time... But today, it's literally nothing.

I usually respect the hell out of Stanley Kubrick, but 2001: A Space Odyssey, was the exact same shit just with a different name. I think in some ways it was even worse than TMP... The story for that one made even less fucking sense than TMP, if that's even possible, and had even more "far out" special effects that just look ridiculous 40 years later. (But to be fair, they both looked ridiculous even just 20 years later when I first saw them.)

It's fitting that you mentioned Avatar, @White Devil. It's now well over 100 years after The Great Train Robbery, but it's still the same damn shit. People go apeshit for visuals that impress them at the time- But barely a decade later, and I bet most people reading this right now would have a hard time even finding one person who considers "Avatar" to be in their top 10 favorite movies. I bet most of you don't even remember it very well. I know I don't.

But yeah, it sure made a shit ton of money- And it wasn't a good movie either.

edit: fixed a typo

 

[L50LasPak]

I don't agree with the Avatar comparison. I think that movie's success was purely the product of marketing and that it could have looked like anything and still sold. Audiences have changed a lot since even the early 90s, and marketing is an entity unto itself these days. Reviews are written ahead of time and critics are given a list of selling points to directly market the film to the reader/viewer. If you tell the people today that a movie has the greatest visuals of all time, they will believe it, regardless of whether or not that's the case (Avatar looked quite fake to me even when it was still brand new). I think the same type of mass manipulation is responsible for The Phantom Menace and The Force Awakens, as well as other stuff like capeshit being popular.

Nothing, not even Star Wars had access to that level of influence over people during that era. And the original Star Wars had one of the largest marketing campaigns ever at the time of its release. Gimmick flicks were box office poison up until very recently; audiences back then could and would ditch a movie if it didn't satisfy them.

 

[Kornula]

I wonder what the reception was at the time. Must have been pretty bad. Far worse movies have been 'rehabilitated'.

I Loved it when I first saw it on a big ass screen in 1979. Mind you, myself and a friend ripped on it out loud the whole time... but we loved it. It is amazing on the big screen.. PS, it's 2001 a Space Odyssey for dummies. Yes, most critics hated it...but its a weak ass story., super boring sets and costumes. But the visual effects of flying through V'ger is fun..only on a big screen.

[edit] There is an interesting Star Trekish story in TMP... and it has characters...but god damn, those uniforms are pajamas. If I were an extra in that, I'd ask if they can give me a better looking uniform to wear.. or a paycheck big as Shatners.

@UnKillShredDur

I have made that exact same comparison to Avitar. It's a shit movie...but it looks pretty.

 

[L50LasPak]

terrible uniforms

but god damn, those uniforms are pajamas. If I were an extra in that, I'd ask if they can give me a better looking uniform to wear.. or a paycheck big as Shatners.

The uniforms really are a work of art in just how godawful they are. Knowing they tortured the actors too is just icing on the cake. About the only sensible thing anyone wears is that weird short sleeve thing Shatner puts on after the wormhole scene and those heavy field jackets at the end. The only good thing that came of them is they took a nice dark red color when given a dye job leading to the Wrath of Khan uniforms (others such as charcoal grey, black and navy blue were tested but apparently came out badly). Definitely a low point in the entire franchise, as much as I'll defend the movie's other flaws.

 

[Flexo]

oh man...I liked the Black Hole too

Must be a generational thing?

Here you go.

I generally agree with this, I just don't think The Phantom Menace is a good point of comparison because the insane hype surrounding that movie is really difficult to put into perspective

You mean the hype of TPM?

Here's how:

There was SO much hype for TPM that it was referenced in another movie's trailer.

 

[Miller]

Some Orville news: according to JP, they have pretty much wrapped up the third season and while it will only have 10 episodes they will be longer than 40 min.

 

[Captain Syrup]

On the whole, I like Orville. But Claire and her dildo Isaac took a turn for the weird.