Star Trek 1-Motion Picture (Director's Edition) (1980)

ReelViews 7 of 10
It has been called everything from Star Trek - The Motion Sickness to Where Nomad Has Gone Before, but the theatrical arrival of The Motion Picture was without a doubt the most heralded event in the history of the Star Trek phenomenon, and the first time that a new adventure had been produced in a decade. As such, the late months of 1979 were heady times for Trek fans, and there was enough media exposure to pique the casual viewers' interest...Star Trek: The Motion Picture arrived in the wake of Star Wars and, with Paramount's publicity department in high gear, the general public was expecting something as big, loud, and exciting as George Lucas' 1977 adventure. What they got instead was a slow-moving, occasionally thought-provoking, visually impressive science fiction yarn. Non-fans were bored, and even fans recognized that something was missing...That "something" was the warm, lighthearted character interaction which had been the best part of the television series. While the rapport is still there, it isn't until late in the movie when Kirk (William Shatner), Spock (Leonard Nimoy), and McCoy (DeForest Kelley) start relating to each other with the same mix of wit, sarcasm, and friendship that characterized their relationship on the small screen. The familiar confines of the Enterprise have changed as well, becoming cold and harsh, primarily as the result of garish lighting and pastel costumes...Perhaps the greatest strength of Star Trek: The Motion Picture is that, despite a badly-paced middle, it boasts a strong beginning and end. The movie is more enjoyable on video than in the theater (a few character-building sequences have been added) since the special effects are less dominating. After all, beneath all the glitz, there is a legitimate Star Trek story struggling to escape. - James Berardinelli
 
Apollo Movie Guide 7 of 10
After a moderately successful three-year run on television from 1966 to 1969, the original Star Trek series was cancelled. For the next ten years, series creator Gene Roddenberry tried to bring it back without much luck. Following a number of red lights and green lights, Star Trek finally made its return in 1979, only this time as Star Trek: The Motion Picture. The result is intriguing as far as the sci-fi genre goes, but not exactly something I'd consider to be "Star Trek"...I've seen only a limited number of episodes from the original series and remember only one in particular. Kirk was stuck alone on a foreign planet battling some hulking lizard-like alien. The beast took the good captain to the limits, roaring and tossing papier-mache boulders. As hokey as it might have looked, cheap props were a big part of Star Trek's personality. But with the big screen treatment comes a big-time budget. And with a big-time budget comes a bombardment of spectacular special effects. This presents a major shift in tone for the franchise. On the one hand, the film looks great, comparable to the likes of 2001: A Space Odyssey and Star Wars. Even by the standards of two decades later -- computer-generated graphics and all -- the old-fashioned small-scale models still hold up from a technical perspective. On the other hand, with the focus shifted to the visuals, it takes away some of the television series' original appeal and personality. Suddenly Star Trek becomes just another sci-fi movie...While the movie's visuals are beautiful and the story reasonably solid, other than Kirk's signature marathon speech pauses, Star Trek: The Motion Picture is not Trek as usual. And at least for those of us who've never been Trekkies, that might actually be a good thing. - Ryan Cracknell