One of my all-time favorites too. It's magical, wondrous, and heavy. It's the only Trek movie that feels like a work of art, and the only Trek film even remotely connected to the humanism that Gene Roddenberry wanted to promote. The Wrath of Khan is the better adventure film, but The Motion Picture is the one closest to my heart.
I remember seeing the trailer in a cinema as a kid and was just blown away by it. When the film arrived, I didn't care it wasn't as fast as Star Wars, I just loved seeing my favourite show as a movie lol.
I loved this film back in 1979/1980 and I love it even more today. Guess which Trek film out of all 13 has the BEST soundtrack? This one. Thanks to the legendary Jerry Goldsmith.
Bug Spattered Jacket as much mixed feelings I have with some the later movies and the reboot movies, I still mostly enjoy them, but Walter Koenig just explains the problem with them perfectly.
Me too. I was growing up in a shitty country. When I have first seen Star Trek, communism fell in this part of Europe and our lives turned for a while into chaos. Unemployment and criminality started to grow rapidly, so it was so relaxing to see a TV show which said to be - Don't be afraid, the present times suck, but the future will be much better.
I remember seeing this as a kid in the late seventies and at the time I wondered where the Star Trek I knew went. The Enterprise itself was breathtaking, ten minutes of spaceship porn, I still love that refit version. But the movie itself didn't have any whimsical or light hearted moments, it wasn't funny, I don't remember much joy or happiness from the cast, the relationships all seemed strained, it felt stoic almost stilted at the time. Somehow they totally missed the formula of why people loved the tv show. They did get their mojo back on the second Khan movie, it had humor, comradery, friendship, it was dramatic, emotional but it had some action, it felt like Star Trek again, it had all the things I don't remember from TMP.
The ultimate computer episode with William Marshall Blacula.love Blacula if your a trekie you gotta love Blacula and scream Blacula scream..Gary Mitchell was the best episode the fight with him and Kirk epic.
For my part, I will never understand why JJ Abrams felt the need to break Canon. Why not show Kirk, Spock, McCoy and co meeting for the first time, wasn't that enough? No..we had to rewrite Star Trek History...it was an ego thing if you ask me...
I call it laziness. Just like with every reboot, the studio just tries to cash in on a recognizable brand while some people still like it, instead of being creative and coming up with something new and fresh.
I have to agree with the ego angle. Abrams clearly wanted to re-make the show in his own image with his own version of Trek history. Let us not forget, the original canon had all characters meet on the Enterprise. Spock was already there when Kirk took over command after the departure of Captain Pike, Scott and Sulu joined either later or at the same time and McCoy replaced Dr Piper when he left after the "Gary Mitchell" incident (that's if we go by production order, of course). It's most unlikely they met at the Academy since there are several years of rank between them and as for Scott being stationed at some remote Ice-Station-Zebra style outpost...don't ask me where in the hell that came from!!! That being said, I really don't know why I'm sitting here writing about this stuff except that it's 10:30 on Saturday night, I've had several sherrys and there's nothing else for me to do!
As others have said the Abrams Trek series does not break canon; it was an alternate timeline that affected the trajectory of Kirk, Spock, McCoy's lives and brought them together sooner than later. Nevertheless, why all this fixation with canon? It's not like TOS or the TOS movies were canonically consistent. Off the top of my head: James T. Kirk was James R. Kirk in the first episode. TOS messes up the time period numerous times, sometimes they're 200 years in the future, one mention implies they're 500. Spock expresses emotion very early on then, as he develops, it's said he doesn't have any emotion, then as he and Vulcans are develop even more it's said he does have emotions but Vulcans are conditioned to repress them. Moreover, the Federation didn't have a proper name either, Kirk called it "The United Earth Probe Agency." And if we include the movies we have doozie's like Khan's "I never forget a face!" even though Chekhov never met Khan in Space Seed. Or Klingon's pink blood, or the fact that Klingons were redesigned in TMP from their TOS iteration. It goes on and on. Canon is overrated and is the province of narrow minds. If you watch Star Trek to keep track of canon you're doing it wrong.
My mom started me on my love for Star Trek. She was 20 in 1966. In 1979 I was 3 and she took me to see the motion picture. My first movie. So there was a demographic of young women as well. NBC missed the mark for sure.
TrekkieChannel yes but the budget was excessive and the reviews for TMP werent kind. Wrath of Khan was made for less than half of TMP's budget. The first movie did prove the audience was there.
TMP was really boring and wasted their high budget on boring SFX scenes. Reading about the previous proposed script of "Planet of the Titans" as a TOS movie I'm really puzzled at the logic of hollywood the concept and opening storyboard was really fantastic it even had the Klingons and time travel to ancient Paleolithic earth !
It's not for this current generation of X Men and Avengers fans....it's not a high action film. It's about a thinking person's perspective....but even so...I agree there was a bit much to it....all the same though.....it's a classic....it really is.
A terrible script and overdone special effects. Star Trek was never about special effects. It was about people. George Lucas made the same mistakes in the prequels.
The Motion Picture is one of my all time favorite films. It has a certain feel to it that makes it weirdly unique. Thank you for the documentary.
+Rylee B You're welcome
I agree
One of my all-time favorites too. It's magical, wondrous, and heavy. It's the only Trek movie that feels like a work of art, and the only Trek film even remotely connected to the humanism that Gene Roddenberry wanted to promote. The Wrath of Khan is the better adventure film, but The Motion Picture is the one closest to my heart.
That's a damn good trailer, with Orson Welles voice.
I remember seeing the trailer in a cinema as a kid and was just blown away by it. When the film arrived, I didn't care it wasn't as fast as Star Wars, I just loved seeing my favourite show as a movie lol.
you can call me uncultured if you want to. But Ilia's Theme in my opinion is one of the most beautiful pieces of music ever created.
Agreed.
True story!!!! 🥰
Don’t know why they had to make her bald
A tip : you can watch movies at kaldroStream. Been using it for watching a lot of movies recently.
@Ameer Drew definitely, I have been watching on kaldroStream for months myself =)
I loved this film back in 1979/1980 and I love it even more today. Guess which Trek film out of all 13 has the BEST soundtrack? This one. Thanks to the legendary Jerry Goldsmith.
I Will Always Love You, Lady Majel Barrett Roddenberry as,Nurse Chapel
Wow, Chekov nails the problem with most movies today at 11:00!
That's basically the perfect description of why I don't like the reboot movies (and most of the TNG movies)
Bug Spattered Jacket
as much mixed feelings I have with some the later movies and the reboot movies, I still mostly enjoy them,
but Walter Koenig just explains the problem with them perfectly.
4:49 It was these ideas that really got me hooked on Star Trek.
Me too. I was growing up in a shitty country. When I have first seen Star Trek, communism fell in this part of Europe and our lives turned for a while into chaos. Unemployment and criminality started to grow rapidly, so it was so relaxing to see a TV show which said to be - Don't be afraid, the present times suck, but the future will be much better.
V'ger scared the hell out of me. The idea of being... absorbed...is terrifying.
11:20 Isn't this what Bill wanted to originally do with ST5 - The final frontier?
I Met Mark Lenard and Grace Lee Whitney and Walter Koenig and George Takei at The Conventions in Wisconsin and in San Diego at Comic-Con
I remember seeing this as a kid in the late seventies and at the time I wondered where the Star Trek I knew went. The Enterprise itself was breathtaking, ten minutes of spaceship porn, I still love that refit version. But the movie itself didn't have any whimsical or light hearted moments, it wasn't funny, I don't remember much joy or happiness from the cast, the relationships all seemed strained, it felt stoic almost stilted at the time. Somehow they totally missed the formula of why people loved the tv show. They did get their mojo back on the second Khan movie, it had humor, comradery, friendship, it was dramatic, emotional but it had some action, it felt like Star Trek again, it had all the things I don't remember from TMP.
I Met Jimmy Doohan Twice at The Conventions and He Remembered My Name
That first idea for the feature later became the basis for the 2009 feature!
Cue Harlan Ellison at 11:41.
The ultimate computer episode with William Marshall Blacula.love Blacula if your a trekie you gotta love Blacula and scream Blacula scream..Gary Mitchell was the best episode the fight with him and Kirk epic.
For my part, I will never understand why JJ Abrams felt the need to break Canon. Why not show Kirk, Spock, McCoy and co meeting for the first time, wasn't that enough? No..we had to rewrite Star Trek History...it was an ego thing if you ask me...
I call it laziness. Just like with every reboot, the studio just tries to cash in on a recognizable brand while some people still like it, instead of being creative and coming up with something new and fresh.
I have to agree with the ego angle. Abrams clearly wanted to re-make the show in his own image with his own version of Trek history. Let us not forget, the original canon had all characters meet on the Enterprise. Spock was already there when Kirk took over command after the departure of Captain Pike, Scott and Sulu joined either later or at the same time and McCoy replaced Dr Piper when he left after the "Gary Mitchell" incident (that's if we go by production order, of course).
It's most unlikely they met at the Academy since there are several years of rank between them and as for Scott being stationed at some remote Ice-Station-Zebra style outpost...don't ask me where in the hell that came from!!!
That being said, I really don't know why I'm sitting here writing about this stuff except that it's 10:30 on Saturday night, I've had several sherrys and there's nothing else for me to do!
@@TrekkieChannel As i understand it it was a rights issue
It's an AU though, it doesn't really "break" canon. I really don't see the hate for the new movies.
As others have said the Abrams Trek series does not break canon; it was an alternate timeline that affected the trajectory of Kirk, Spock, McCoy's lives and brought them together sooner than later.
Nevertheless, why all this fixation with canon? It's not like TOS or the TOS movies were canonically consistent. Off the top of my head: James T. Kirk was James R. Kirk in the first episode. TOS messes up the time period numerous times, sometimes they're 200 years in the future, one mention implies they're 500. Spock expresses emotion very early on then, as he develops, it's said he doesn't have any emotion, then as he and Vulcans are develop even more it's said he does have emotions but Vulcans are conditioned to repress them. Moreover, the Federation didn't have a proper name either, Kirk called it "The United Earth Probe Agency." And if we include the movies we have doozie's like Khan's "I never forget a face!" even though Chekhov never met Khan in Space Seed. Or Klingon's pink blood, or the fact that Klingons were redesigned in TMP from their TOS iteration.
It goes on and on.
Canon is overrated and is the province of narrow minds. If you watch Star Trek to keep track of canon you're doing it wrong.
Biggest design flaw of the starship Enterprise is that you can't land it. Where is the landing gear??
My mom started me on my love for Star Trek. She was 20 in 1966. In 1979 I was 3 and she took me to see the motion picture. My first movie. So there was a demographic of young women as well. NBC missed the mark for sure.
11:19 He basically described Star Trek 5
That concept work for Planet of Titans looks like the ship design for Discovery!
That's just a coincidence. Riiiiiiight?
Where's part 2?
Down, pulled by CBS
is from this trailer where Dolby stole the sound for (THX THE AUDIENCE IS LISTENING)?
Thx used a piece called Deep Note.
So where is part 2???
If you don't see it on my channel you probably live in a country in which Paramount in all of their wisdom decided to block it.
That hair!
and Orson Wells as Orson Wells...
I think he ran the pub on the Enterprise. Cheers.
You mean 10 Forward, don't you? :-D
+Bert Visscher--Of course, friend. I simply figure that if Orson is running the place, it would rightfully be called a pub. Cheers.
There would be no wrath of Khan without the failure of TMP. It goes to show you that a smaller budget really makes you think outside the box.
Well, I wouldn't call it a failure.Financially it was a success.
TrekkieChannel yes but the budget was excessive and the reviews for TMP werent kind. Wrath of Khan was made for less than half of TMP's budget. The first movie did prove the audience was there.
I agree with that.
TMP made 3 times its production budget; $139 mill against $49 mill.
matthewakian2 its budget was overblown and the film was a critical failure.
TMP was really boring and wasted their high budget on boring SFX scenes. Reading about the previous proposed script of "Planet of the Titans" as a TOS movie I'm really puzzled at the logic of hollywood the concept and opening storyboard was really fantastic it even had the Klingons and time travel to ancient Paleolithic earth !
I am hoping for a filmed version of Titans since they came up with the 2009 reboot
It's not for this current generation of X Men and Avengers fans....it's not a high action film. It's about a thinking person's perspective....but even so...I agree there was a bit much to it....all the same though.....it's a classic....it really is.
A terrible script and overdone special effects. Star Trek was never about special effects. It was about people. George Lucas made the same mistakes in the prequels.