Left Field Cinema

WARNING: Contains Spoilers for both films

Since it first aired in 1966 Star Trek has been re-vamped, re-evaluated and re-invigorated through several differing incarnations. The first of these reincarnations came in 1979 in the form of Robert Wise’s feature film Star Trek: The Motion Picture which began a lucrative sub-franchise of blockbuster movies. Eleven films and thirty years on and in 2009 J.J. Abrams directed the latest in the series which changes the direction of the franchise by going back to the beginning of the series and creating the new early adventures of the crew of the Star ship Enterprise. In this edition we will examine the first and the last of the Star Trek films, although in many respects both films are wildly different, they do share a lot of common ground both in terms of the function they serve for the franchise they share and the story arcs of the central characters.

First a little context for the uninitiated; Star Trek began as a TV series in the 1960’s, it ran for three seasons before being cancelled by the network in 1969. In the ten years that followed only a briefly running animated series would return from 1973-1975, otherwise the growing numbers of Star Trek fans were starved of the content they so adored. The original series had become tremendously popular through reruns and so a feature film version was planned which then went through a turbulent development period and at several points it was almost dropped by Paramount Pictures, even the films director Robert Wise requested the project be cancelled at one point. But persevere they did and the eventual out come was Star Trek: The Motion Picture a film which saw the entire original cast reunited for a new mission. It’s the 23rd Century and a deadly gigantic cloud approaches earth, destroying anything in its path. James T. Kirk has been promoted to admiral, Doctor McCoy has retired and Mr. Spock is on the planet Vulcan trying to purge himself of all remaining emotion. The USS Enterprise has been refitted and redesigned with new systems and a new look (improved through a feature film budget from the clunky 1960’s designs). Captain Willard Decker is in command of the vessel, but Kirk pulls rank on him to lead the mission as the Enterprise is the only ship in range of the cloud before it arrives at Earth. Collecting McCoy and Spock on the way the Enterprise heads into the cloud to discover what is controlling this deadly gaseous force. After The Motion Picture came, Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, III: The Search For Spock, IV: The Voyage Home, V: Final Frontier, VI: The Undiscovered Country, VII: Generations, VIII: First Contact, IX: Insurrection, X: Nemesis, the TV series Star Trek: The Next Generation, Deep Space Nine, Voyager and Enterprise. It can not be underestimated how successful this franchise was in the 1990’s in particular 1994 and 1995 which saw three television series and a feature film in production at the same time. But Star Trek’s popularity waned in the years that followed with Nemesis and Enterprise being less successful ventures, not taking enough money at the box office and being prematurely cancelled after four seasons respectively. Four Years after the end of Enterprise and seven years since the last film, Abrams and company have re-booted the franchise in a spectacular fashion with a new prequel which in a remarkable twist is actually a sequel as well. Following from Kirk and Spock’s childhood and onto their years at the Academy the “Primary” Star Trek timeline is interrupted by a Romulan mining ship travelling back in time to the day of Kirk’s birth and destroying the USS Kalvin (the ship his family were serving on), his father perishes but Kirk survives, his life continues but in a slightly different direction, in this “secondary” Star Trek timeline Kirk rises through the ranks quicker and is present on the Enterprise for its maiden voyage to Vulcan on a rescue mission. All of the original crew are re-cast with younger actors but all of the characters return and we find out how they in the “secondary” timeline all met. The Vulcan home world is destroyed by the Romulan Nero who then sets his course for earth to repeat the same devastating trick. With the Captain of the Enterprise (Christopher Pike) being held hostage by Nero, the young Spock takes control of the ship and heads to reunite with the rest of the fleet to mount another assault, the young Kirk thinks this is a mistake and wants them to chase the Romulan ship and attempt to stop it by themselves - as time is very much of the essence.

Although the plots for Star Trek: The Motion Picture and Star Trek may sound radically different and although the style and pace of both films are definitely at odds. They are in fact crucially alike in terms of both what is at stake and the primary conflict between the central characters. In both films it is Earth that is under threat, something which is done rarely within the Star Trek franchise as a whole (but has been done in four films now) of course the motives of Vger (the entity in control of the cloud) and Nero are completely different, one is seeking answers the other is seeking revenge; but this doesn’t stop their desired outcome being in unison. So what of the internal conflicts, the truer conflicts within both films which really drive the narratives, in Star Trek: The Motion Picture it is the conflict between Kirk and Decker, at almost all points Decker is correct in his assertions that Kirk is no longer qualified to command the Enterprise, Kirk makes several blatant errors along the way and has taken command of the Enterprise not because he doesn’t believe in Decker’s ability but because Kirk selfishly desires his old job. Kirk doesn’t think about what’s best for the crew or even Earth, all he thinks about is himself. The final solution to the problem of Vger is actually discovered by Decker, not Kirk. Kirk is effectively the antagonist of the film and Decker is the protagonist (a point rarely praised in this most maligned of Star Trek films). Continuing this comparison with the new Star Trek movie and we can see a similar relationship between the young Kirk and Spock, only this time it is Spock who is the antagonist and Kirk the protagonist. Antagonist is not to be confused with villain, clearly Vger and Nero are the villains of their respective films - the antagonists are a lot closer to home. Both older Kirk and younger Spock are detriments to the mission and let their emotions dictate their actions, it’s interesting as in both films it is the antagonist who is truly the main character, Kirk and young Spock respectively lead the films by their flaws and Decker and young Kirk are supporting the narrative by fighting against them. Decker may have the romantic relationship with Lt. Illia, he might be correct on almost all occasions and he might be the rightful Captain of the Enterprise but he is still a supporting character. Young Kirk maybe the centre of attention most of the time, but Star Trek it is still young Spock’s film when the end credits roll. The actions of old Kirk and young Kirk are in parallel, both desire the control of the Enterprise for different reasons but subvert or mutiny, manipulate or abuse the chain of command and take command of the Enterprise from the ships rightful commanders, Decker and Young Spock. Spock must also follow a similar development in both films, in The Motion Picture he has gone through the process of purging all emotions although this has not yet been completed, through his encounter with Vger he will understand the value of his emotions. In Star Trek young Spock has also resisted purging all emotions and joining the Vulcan science academy, he is later compromised by his emotions after the destruction of his home world and the death of his mother; he must control his emotions and put them in check. Although coming from opposite directions both old and young Spock arrive in the same place.

Of course there are huge differences in terms of style within the films, Wise directed The Motion Picture to a meticulously slow pace, I realise that “meticulous” is a rather generous adjective, but from the editor of Citizen Kane you have to appreciate that Robert Wise understands something of pace that most of us will never grasp. Wise is the most revered of directors to tackle the Star Trek Movie franchise. A director of every genre, a craftsman in the truest sense - Wise tackled musicals, romantic dramas, horror movies, thrillers, historical pictures, and science fiction (to name but some). His most famous works being The Sound of Music and West Side Story, but Wise’s career would come to an end with Star Trek: The Motion Picture, this was his last major production. Wise had clearly taken influence from the more meditative science fiction films of the past, the producers had decided to distance themselves from the Star Wars franchise and make a film that was completely the opposite of George Lucas’ saga in tone, pace and pitch. This chimed well with Wise’s 2001: A Space Odyssey and Solaris influenced approach; The Motion Picture is as close as Star Trek would ever get to the Science Fiction Art House. A great amount of time is taken to re-establish the world of Star Trek after a ten year hiatus from live action, the extended first and second acts would take exceptionally long time for the action to begin (despite opening with an impressive battle sequence as three Klingon War Ships attack Vger’s cloud only to be vaporised without a trace), the pace was knowingly slow, it takes a long time to gather up the crew, a long time to fly around the newly refitted Enterprise (which thirty-years on and the model work still looks more realistic and tangible than any of Abrams also rather impressive CGI ships), we then take a good period of time before the Enterprise even arrives at the cloud and then even more time as the Enterprise travels to the centre of the cloud (passing Darth Vader and Miss Piggy on the way – seriously). What Wise achieves with these sequences is a sense of scale and time that is lost on all subsequent incarnations of Star Trek, by taking great portions of the films duration to clearly establish the size of the Enterprise we can then all the more clearly see the size of the cloud as we watch the minuscule Enterprise travelling through it, tiny and barely visible on the screen. Although the film could have done with at least half an hour cut out (it is still the longest Star Trek movie at 136 minutes) the slower pace allows The Motion Picture to carve out its own unique place within the Star Trek cannon.

Abrams film by comparison is at the other end of the scale, it is the fastest, sexiest, most pumped up, high octane; high adrenalin Star Trek there has ever been in either series or film. Like The Motion Picture, Star Trek also opens with an impressive battle sequence, unlike The Motion Picture the pace doesn’t let up from here on in, to it’s detriment at times as some of the action sequences feel forced - the old producers concept of an “action beat” every ten pages of the script seems not to have alluded the producers of Star Trek, and in particular young Kirk escaping from monsters on an ice planet and Scotty being beaming into a water tube that leads to a canister of rotating blades, are two of the more tedious set pieces which seem to scream at the audience “what ever you do don’t stop watching!” Abrams clearly has a short attention span, but this is not necessarily a negative, as his Star Trek film has already carved its place within the franchise as the most accessible Star Trek film to date. Abram’s Star Trek is now described as the Star Trek film that anyone can watch and enjoy - of course this is not strictly true - the Star Trek purist amongst us would have a field day the films numerous continuity errors, but being a Star Trek purist is folly, the series has been rebooted and reinvigorated and redesigned so many times at that “purity” as a concept is absent from the series. The franchise is riddled with contradictions and areas of its made-up history which make no sense. At least by changing altering the timeline, Abrams and company have avoided a complete dismissal of the franchise to date, although similar to Batman Begins or Casino Royale in the way the film effectively starts again from scratch, it does so within the logic of Science Fiction and within Star Trek’s own logic (parallel universes have been explored since the days of the original series). Star Trek has always suffered continuity errors and mainly as a result of the advances in special effects, for instance the going to warp effect for the space ships, from the colourful rainbow of colours that appear in Star Trek: The Motion Picture, to the latest effect of having the ships disappear like bullets shot from a gun in Abrams Star Trek film.

One area where Star Trek is truer to the original series is in its humour which is strikingly present throughout with the character of Scotty in particular (played by Simon Pegg now) providing light relief in the second half, but also Kirk’s exploits are also amusing, his brash cockiness getting him into trouble in a more light hearted fashion, as he boards a recruitment shuttle cock-sure after riding up on a souped-up 23rd Centaury motor cycle and then proceeds to bang his head on a low metallic clearing. The Motion Picture by comparison is a fairly humourless affair, with only Bones providing the very occasional instance of sardonic wit. The Motion Picture takes itself deadly serious, and although this was a trait of two subsequent films The Wrath of Khan and The Search For Spock, both of said films had strong streaks of humour to balance out the misery.

Performance-wise Chris Pine as the young Captain Kirk seems to be more Kirk than Shatner ever was, but at least he’s not more Shatner than Kirk – if you catch my drift. Shatner in The Motion Picture is particularly awful; Shatner is only as good as the director who guides him it would seem. Shatner’s particular brand of intense face acting appears to have been taught at the Joey Tribbiani rather than Lee Strasburg acting school. Zachary Quinto as the young Spock is so good in the role that in the scene he shares with older Spock as played by Leonard Nimoy there is no doubt that they are in fact the same person. Only the character of Uhura is terribly inconsistent from previous to modern incarnation, now promoted from a general secretary to a linguistic expert, instead of submissive and bland she’s now forceful and in control and has a peculiar relationship with the young Spock. Of course the character of Uhura has been re-written as the original was a terribly sexist cipher, a “receptionist in space” and to keep Uhura in such a pathetic role in this day and age would be quite frankly outmoded. Of all the cast of characters hers was the only one that needed to change for political and commercial reasons. This is the first time the character of Uhura has appeared on a Star Trek movie poster (an honour usually reserved only for Kirk, Spock and occasionally Bones) this is probably the most dialogue Uhura has had in any of the Star Trek films (although I admit I’ve not personally counted her lines to be sure).

One area where both films are unique within the franchise is their lighting design. Wise opts for an abrasive use of light in The Motion Picture, something which had not been done in any of the other Star Trek films, be it Vger’s probe, the harsh vertical band of blue light which hurts the eyes to look at, or the strobing effect in the worm hole which also causes time to fractionally slow, or Spock’s mind meld with Vger which is also blindingly abrasive, a series of single frame images accompanied by harsh orange light and psychedelic colours. Abram’s Star Trek is different, in an attempt to return to the lighter optimism of the earlier series, the look and feel of the new film is bright and shiny, but not cheap. The films director of photography Dan Mindel has used particular filters and lights to create almost constant lens flare, his reasoning being that the organic and unpredictable flares contrast with the slick and predictable technology, they literally and figuratively add light to the cold detachedness of the Star Trek look. Mindel is quite right and once again both The Motion Picture and Star Trek retain a unique look, quite apart from the fairly standard lighting and camera work of all other Star Trek incarnations.

Both films have strengths and weaknesses and whilst I would argue that Abram’s Star Trek is the superior of the two films, I also feel that The Motion Picture has been unfairly maligned over the years and is not nearly as dreadful a film as many perceive it to be. Personally I’ve only recently reassessed The Motion Picture which I have previously referred to as “two-hours of driving”. Of course the figure hugging uniforms were a mistake, no one particularly wanted to see the outline of William Shatner’s penis on the big screen - but there it is. Abram’s Star Trek also made an error in regards to uniforms, taking time to redesign the ship and its interiors and yet leaving in place the massive bands of colour everyone wears in the Original Series. But more than the lighting, costume, the performances, or even the music; despite the claims of “rebooting” or “reinvigorating” or “restarting” the franchise - both films have at their hearts retain something older than themselves, something which the old guard can cling to. The Motion Picture at its core has a good old fashioned Science Fiction idea; proper old school SiFi, Vger is in fact Voyager 6 a NASA satellite which travelling through a black hole and “learned all that could be learned” and through this amassed information it became sentient and returned to find the “creator” who is of course mankind. This is as solid a concept as Star Trek has ever known, most of the Star Trek films forget about the “exploring new worlds and new civilisations” aspect of the franchise rhetoric let alone “boldly going where no man has gone before”. But Vger’s origin is a revelation truer to the Star Trek mandate than even the original series ever managed, it is a perfect twist which makes entire sense and breaks the doors of the film open to philosophical questioning, Vger is asking the big questions, why am I here? What is my purpose? Vger’s search for answers has lead to destruction, but Vger’s quest was mankind’s quest, the “creators” quest which means ultimately it is man’s curiosity which brings mankind to the edge of destruction. Nothing in Abrams’ Star Trek is this intelligent, however at its centre is something arguably even more important. The film could have just of easily not been part of the Star Trek franchise, it could be any Science Fiction film, were it not for the presence of the Kirk/Spock relationship. Kirk and Spock have been at the centre of Star Trek since the nearly very beginning, they are two sides of the coin and they are both as important to their particular incarnation of Star Trek as the other. Their relationship goes beyond friendship, beyond loyalty, beyond love, and now for the first time we see how that relationship begins (at least within this new timeline). Abram’s and company got the Spock and Kirk relationship right, and because of this everything else falls perfectly into place.

M.Dawson