It really does seem rather ridiculous that everyone on Nimbus III, and then everyone on board the Enterprise, was moved by the whole "share your pain" telepathy of Sybok to follow him and then, all of a sudden, Kirk, Spock, and McCoy are the only three people in the galaxy who are able to resist him. And that's only because Nimoy and Kelley pushed back. In Shatner's original story, Kirk alone was able to resist Sybok and even Spock and McCoy betray him. Only when Nimoy and Kelley flat refused to play that did he relent.
"Star Trek V: The Final Frontier" or "Star Trek: Generations"?
- Thread starter Lord Garth
- Start date
I think it would have been more effective if they'd gone in the direction of the people for whom Sybok eased their pain being so grateful to him that they voluntarily joined his cause, versus it coming across more as brainwashing.
That said, at my age, I feel as though there's something deeply pessimistic about the idea that people are so hobbled by their past traumas that they'd be so incredibly relieved to experience involuntary therapy. I know the audience is supposed to go with Kirk's "I need my pain!" belief (although "Requiem for Methuselah" sends a rather different message), but why is Kirk so much better than everyone else Sybok has encountered?
That said, at my age, I feel as though there's something deeply pessimistic about the idea that people are so hobbled by their past traumas that they'd be so incredibly relieved to experience involuntary therapy. I know the audience is supposed to go with Kirk's "I need my pain!" belief (although "Requiem for Methuselah" sends a rather different message), but why is Kirk so much better than everyone else Sybok has encountered?
Because Shatner conceived the story and directed the film. I mean, it really is that simple, unfortunately.
As to the "taking away the pain" thing, the novelization of TFF makes an attempt to explain exactly what was going on. Essentially, according to the book, it was a type of telepathy/mind meld that was more akin to mind control than simply erasing someone's pain. It's been many, many years since I read it, so I am fuzzy on the details, but there was at least an attempt to explain why everyone went along with Sybok more than just "oh, he made me feel better, so I'm going to betray all my friends." (The novel also explains why Spock calls them "mashmelons.")
I have two thoughts: one, Kirk has made peace with his pain to the point that he was in control of it. He no longer buried it, or denied it but acknowledged it, and then moved forward. In the classic Stoic style Kirk did not let him be governed by that past pain.
The other, albeit more cynical side, is that Kirk was to be shown to be the best and had to come out on top. Though, that is in the grand tradition of Star Trek Kirk is usually the last one out. See "This Side of Paradise" as another example.
I've read the novelization, though I don't remember there being a mind control element to what Sybok was doing there. My (very possibly flawed!) recollection was that it did try to play more that the people became so grateful to him that they committed themselves to his cause, though perhaps even their gratefulness was being accentuated by the mind meld? At least it was more than the film gave us.
Either way, it made most of Our Heroes look pretty bad. :|
1) Yeah, but again, that suggests that nobody else had managed to similarly cope with their pain. Which is kind of ridiculous.
2) I've never exactly been a fan of exaggerated Kirk exceptionalism, though I do like how it's handled in "This Side of Paradise".
Difference between coping and processing.
Perils of being the main character, you tend to be exceptional.
I'd say GEN is the better movie, but that doesn't mean I don't enjoy V.
V is probably the TOS movie that feels most like the series -- like one of the trash heavy episodes that are so bad they're good. There are times when I really enjoy these episodes, and it's the same for me with V. Also, V was the first Star Trek movie I ever saw in a theatre, and I was still young enough not to notice much of the trash, and still have fond memories.
I also have fond memories of GEN: It was the first new Star Trek after the Trek-overload of 1994 (in Germany, TNG from "The Loss" to "All Good Things", as well as DS9 seasons 1 and 2 aired for the first time -- which means we got 141 new Star Trek episodes in just one year alone!) ... so I was really looking forward to GEN for months. I had also bought the soundtrack CD before the movie came out and loved it. When I finally saw the movie, it maybe wasn't spectacular, but I really enjoyed it.
Tl;dr:
I enjoy both, but despite some flaws, GEN doesn't display the same trash level as V, imo.
V is probably the TOS movie that feels most like the series -- like one of the trash heavy episodes that are so bad they're good. There are times when I really enjoy these episodes, and it's the same for me with V. Also, V was the first Star Trek movie I ever saw in a theatre, and I was still young enough not to notice much of the trash, and still have fond memories.
I also have fond memories of GEN: It was the first new Star Trek after the Trek-overload of 1994 (in Germany, TNG from "The Loss" to "All Good Things", as well as DS9 seasons 1 and 2 aired for the first time -- which means we got 141 new Star Trek episodes in just one year alone!) ... so I was really looking forward to GEN for months. I had also bought the soundtrack CD before the movie came out and loved it. When I finally saw the movie, it maybe wasn't spectacular, but I really enjoyed it.
Tl;dr:
I enjoy both, but despite some flaws, GEN doesn't display the same trash level as V, imo.
There were some parts of Generations that I really liked, but there really wasn't much besides some fun character interaction in Star Trek V: The Wrath of God, so I have to go with Generations all the way.
My only real beef with Generations is that when Picard was in the Nexus and was told he could exit it at any time in the past, you would have thought he might go back a week or so (instead of right before Soran blew up that last star) and give old Rowbear a call and say: "Hey bro! You should replace that power cord on the grape robopress. It's getting a bit frayed."
My only real beef with Generations is that when Picard was in the Nexus and was told he could exit it at any time in the past, you would have thought he might go back a week or so (instead of right before Soran blew up that last star) and give old Rowbear a call and say: "Hey bro! You should replace that power cord on the grape robopress. It's getting a bit frayed."
In GEN's (meager) defense, I'd say one problem is that, generally, the farther back in time Picard goes, the greater the chance he has of fucking things up.
However, I fail to see how trying to prevent Robert and Rene from dying could have any negative repercussions...at least, not without knowing that they'd somehow go on to do terrible things.
However, I fail to see how trying to prevent Robert and Rene from dying could have any negative repercussions...at least, not without knowing that they'd somehow go on to do terrible things.
Both films are really quite underrated.
GEN has some good, traditional TNG stuff with themes of time and mortality. It’s got a cool “anomaly” concept with the nexus that unfortunately was not served well by the writing. Stewart and Shatner have great chemistry. The cinematography and soundtracks are gorgeous. And, the crash of the Enterprise saucer is a great set piece.
TFF is very similar. It has the traditional TOS themes of false gods, and friendship/loyalty. It expands on Spock’s backstory. Sybok is perfectly cast and is a compelling antagonist. The main characters have some great moments together. Cinematography is very nice, and much more kinetic than the other films. The soundtrack is awesome.
Both films have some misplaced or badly executed humor. TFF has legendarily poor visual effects, and GEN relies too much on stock footage in key parts. Both films have somewhat choppy plots that could have used some subsequent script drafts to clean up.
Ultimately, I give the edge to TFF because the original cast always played better on the big screen, and I liked what they were going for even though it didn’t quite come together. GEN seems to only exist to find a convoluted way to bring the two captains together.
Plot: TFF
Characters: TFF
Direction: Tie
Visual Effects: GEN
Antagonist: TFF
Cinematography: GEN
Pacing: Tie
Sound Design: GEN
Soundtrack: TFF
Advantage: TFF
GEN has some good, traditional TNG stuff with themes of time and mortality. It’s got a cool “anomaly” concept with the nexus that unfortunately was not served well by the writing. Stewart and Shatner have great chemistry. The cinematography and soundtracks are gorgeous. And, the crash of the Enterprise saucer is a great set piece.
TFF is very similar. It has the traditional TOS themes of false gods, and friendship/loyalty. It expands on Spock’s backstory. Sybok is perfectly cast and is a compelling antagonist. The main characters have some great moments together. Cinematography is very nice, and much more kinetic than the other films. The soundtrack is awesome.
Both films have some misplaced or badly executed humor. TFF has legendarily poor visual effects, and GEN relies too much on stock footage in key parts. Both films have somewhat choppy plots that could have used some subsequent script drafts to clean up.
Ultimately, I give the edge to TFF because the original cast always played better on the big screen, and I liked what they were going for even though it didn’t quite come together. GEN seems to only exist to find a convoluted way to bring the two captains together.
Plot: TFF
Characters: TFF
Direction: Tie
Visual Effects: GEN
Antagonist: TFF
Cinematography: GEN
Pacing: Tie
Sound Design: GEN
Soundtrack: TFF
Advantage: TFF
The Enterprise saucer crash is definitely one of the highlights of the film and one of the last great examples of amazing motion control miniature work in Trek before the switch to all CGI. However, I still think destroying the D was a bad decision overall.
The cinematography in TFF is gorgeous. For all the grief Shatner gets, I think he was far and away a better film director than Nimoy. He shot TFF like a movie. TSFS and TVH feel too much like TV episodes to me in the way they are shot. Even the supporting cast members, never known to have an abundance of nice things to say about Shatner, have commented on what a good director he was.
You know, this is an interesting point. I think most people would say that the TNG cast is made up of better actors than the TOS cast overall. Yet, I agree with your assessment. The TOS cast had a special magic on the big screen that just worked. For as legendary as the TNG cast became on TV, and in spite of the fact that they are all good friends in real life, they just didn't translate as well to the big screen. Not bad, just lacking the magic that the TOS cast had.
I wonder how differently we might view the TNG cast with regard to the films (or, indeed, the films themselves), if we'd had more time to allow TNG to permeate our culture the way TOS did before we ever got TMP and TWOK.
Or would the reverse have happened, and TNG wouldn't have held up as TOS did and we would have missed the window entirely?
Or would the reverse have happened, and TNG wouldn't have held up as TOS did and we would have missed the window entirely?
I don't know. TOS was never a big hit when it originally aired in primetime. It took the years of syndication to build up the cultural cachet that it had. However, that was not the case with TNG. People today often forget just how popular TNG was. It was regularly pulling in ratings -- as a syndicated scifi show -- that matched Monday Night Football. Regardless of what one thinks of TNG quality-wise in comparison to the other series, there is simply no question that it represented the pinnacle of Trek's success on TV. And yet, they only managed one bona fide knock-it-out-of-the-park success in the features. I'm not sure that waiting before going on to feature films would have changed the calculus much.
Yeah, no.
I knew of TNG and the crew because of friends, watching random episodes, the Star Trek encyclopedia, reading any Trek books at the library, and rewatching VHS episodes of TNG if I could. I had action figures of Picard, Yar, and the like.
I still didn't care for most of the TNG films.
Maybe I should've waited until I rewatched "Generations" before voting. But while "Generations" is almost certainly a better movie, I just enjoy "Final Frontier" and all it's zaininess more.
I think there wouldn't be much difference in reaction to the first two, especially First Contact, if it had been released, if they had instead come out between 1999 and 2004, there would be slightly more nostalgia-excitement but a big hit just intentionally taking a big break is just really rare, not expected, pretty expected to hit with more while hot especially as hot as TNG and especially with the Borg were in mid-'90s. And if by 2004, post-Lord of the Rings, the films would probably be different enough including in part the cast looking pretty significantly older that a lot of big fans of the series would say that isn't really what I liked, wanted to see more of (unless from the original cast films they kind of expected pretty big difference but still probably wouldn't like much big change). So I think they could still be made but wouldn't be much more liked or embraced.
I voted for Generations and have always held it in warm regard. It's one of the two GOOD TNG movies. I was a TNG fan before I became a TOS fan and I loved seeing a cinematic rendition of TNG. It's got a wonderful opening sequence, a good story, a very strong villain with a unique motivation, some excellent action sequences, hilarious moments with Data and a fantastic soundtrack.
The Final Frontier also boasts a nice soundtrack, some great character interaction and an interesting premise, but the execution leaves a lot to be desired. The props and models look cheap and unconvincing, the ultimate resolution of the plot is underwhelming, the jokes are overdone and the Klingons felt out of place. It's easily the worst of the movies up until Nemesis - and even Nemesis actually surpasses it in certain respects.
The Final Frontier also boasts a nice soundtrack, some great character interaction and an interesting premise, but the execution leaves a lot to be desired. The props and models look cheap and unconvincing, the ultimate resolution of the plot is underwhelming, the jokes are overdone and the Klingons felt out of place. It's easily the worst of the movies up until Nemesis - and even Nemesis actually surpasses it in certain respects.
I'm not sure I get it. It's not like Kirk somehow "resisted" Sybok's mind meld. He just outright refused to participate. That doesn't make him magically strong or unrealistically resistant...it just means he saw what Sybok did to McCoy and Spock and he told Sybok to stick it.
But, that's not what Kirk says. He tells McCoy the purpose of his pain and unwillingness to just give it up. It's not just Sybok he's resisting.
Similar threads
