Do you have an opinion on the movie Master & Commander? It's another movie inspired by Horatio Hornblower novels, and is very similar to Star Trek. It's full of realistic naval discipline and navy life, and at it's heart is the relationship between an action-minded Captain and a highly likeable, rational ship's doctor and scientist. It's basically The Wrath of Khan set at sea in the early 19th century!
all?? sorry motion pic was very subdued compared to the TV series, 2 was excellent, 3 was a bit understated, 4 was vg good in its own detourish way, motion picture was boring, 5 was awful until the last few mins & 6 was pretty good
I REEALLY appreciate the uniform redesign in this. It made way more sense than the pajamas in TMP and felt more militaristic and ship like. It was nice when the newer star trek (ds9) went more toward this route, only making the undershirts colored, which gave it a nice mix of actually looking like a uniform, while still having the "star trek color scheme'.
It does, but looking at the concept art - I realise just how much of a risk they were taking, it was SO different to the TV series, especially the way there was no real colour coding (except for the turtlenecks), its enitrely reasonable to expect the Trek fans would have hated it. I'm glad they didn't.
What a fascinating documentary! I had never seen this before! Not only do I hold The Wrath of Khan as the greatest science fiction movie of all time, I regard it as one of the best films ever made. A little bit of passion goes a long way. A lot of passion makes for masterpieces. 🖖😀
Yep, and makes me appreciate production design, and especially practical effects as an art form of its own, and I see why it can still rival CGI, or even new-fangled 'virtual backgrounds'.
what i want to see is how they did the effect work on Trek 6 - The Undiscovered Country. how the final space battle was done and the Klingon blood fx are what I really want to see a making of.
Oh my god!!! Joe Jennings is a genius and so right about establishing a framework in science fiction otherwise it stops becoming believable. That's what's happened to the believability of Doctor Who, they took the framework away.
Wow. Seen WoK hundreds of times. Joe Jennings what an amazing guy. I wish they had him on Star wars the force awakens. Somebody needed to hold JJ Abrams to the Framework of star wars. No 2 people in a Tie fighter. Can't fly one without a space suit. etc. ITs amazing how one passionate person can make such a huge difference.
"for science fiction, you establish the framework, you establish the rules.... Now you've got to be honest in those rules. You can't just do anything you want to because it's science fiction, otherwise it doesn't become particularly believable." -Joe Jennings, art director Star Trek the Motion Picture, production designer Wrath of Khan Think about what you've done, JJ Abrams and Star Trek Discovery!
Joe Jennings, Robert Fletcher, Lee Cole and the rest of the production crew kept Nick Meyer and the executives honest. Not taking anything away from the brilliant director and Herve Bennet’s original idea but the talent behind the scenes helped make Wrath the best film in the entire franchise...by a country mile.
4:55 Star Wars had come out in the meantime and it was extremely successful and it was very well done. But they had a very jumbly look to their ships and all of our people then - new people that had come and where now doing the show - said, "Oh, we gotta do that or we can't show scale." "Gotta have that detail so that when we move in on it you can't show it unless something is going by the camera." And I'm having a knock-down, drag-out fight saying, "Look! Star Trek has always been a crisp path of science fiction." If you're gonna tell the story of Little Red Riding Hood she can't be accosted by a goose. It's got to be a wolf and this is what the wolf looks like in Star Trek. So you can't change it now. It's become part of the lexicon. And so you have to keep the slick, streamlined look. SOMEONE PLEASE TELL THE STAR TREK PEOPLE THIS IS WHAT STAR TREK IS ABOUT. IT'S NOT STAR WARS. IT'S STAR TREK. IT HAS A DIFFERENT LEXICON THAT IS NOT STAR WARS.
_"...been a crisp path of science fiction..."_ -- No shade thrown here, but what he said was, _"Chris-Craft"_ -- Chris-Craft was and is one the premier boat builders in the US. They are very well known for producing boats with clean, sleek, streamlined hulls, and are regarded as an industry standard to aspire to.
Funny... when I joined the Army back in the early 80's, One of the VERY FIRST things i got was a Small Note Book and Pen. Both had the Seal of the US Army on them. But on the inside last pages and back cover... It has EVER Branch of the US Military, and ALL of the different rankings! AND we were told to begin to MEMORIZE them When we had free time because we would often be asked about them at random! Sooo I memorized ALL of them in a WEEK! And if ANY Superior asked me ANY Rank for ANY Branch I knew them Frontwards and Backwards and Sideways! :)
It would be great if all these Star Trek TOS people would put up all their personal photo’s like we can see on the wall of their homes. There kids won’t care about us Trekkies and we’d love to see all the behind the scenes photo’s they have. Time never stops so please share the history.
The space battles in TWOK were reminiscent of those epic sea battles of an old Errol Flynn movie. One tall ship shooting at another. That's my opinion.
Thank you for posting, such an interesting documentary into the making of the film. Great to see how passionate these talented guys were about the production and how they stood up for their opinions but weren't afraid to admit when someone had a better idea.
Before I saw this , I remember seeing this film in the theater and a critic said the budget was made with for a third of what the first film . And even the departing scene of the Enterprise as it leaves space dock was a shot from the first film from a negative .
Hardcore Trek fans recognized the design of the Reliant as an updated tug from the Franz Joseph technical manual that came out in the 70's. Probably at some point when people were looking at that they noticed it too, it's very obviously a quite similar design.
Listen to Joe Jennings explaining that science fiction has rules that need to be respected. That is something that JJ Abrams completely ignored when he made the Star Trek reboot and even the Star Wars films. Where he threw the rules from each series out the window. Just to feel like he "re-invented" those franchises. That sure worked well, didn't it? /s
At 11:40, he talks about the sequence in the sandstorm. He says they used tonnes of sand and loads of fans to blow it around. And yet, when you watch the film, the sand blowing across the screen looks like an optical effect to me. Does anyone think that some of this sequence was achieved optically?
There's a continuity error in Space Seed. You'l see it at around :48 in this video. Scotty is at the transporter, with a blue-shirted assistant on his right. Scotty leaves the controls and steps onto the transporter pad. The blue shirt moves over to operate the transporter, then you see a close up of Scotty operating the controls. Oops!
that happens in tv shows when you reuse shots to save money. ST TNG, ds9 etc tried their best to minimize it, but it happens. just ignore it and keep enjoying things.
These guys are somewhat arrogant and dishonest. Roddenberry originally pitched the show as "Hornblower in space". The uniforms had clear rank and division. Starfleet used lots of naval nomenclature and bossun's whistles. See,for example, the docking of sarek's shuttle in the episode, Journey to Babel.
April / Pike / Kirk was pitched as Hornblower, the Series as a whole was pitched as Wagon Train. Your correct in that there were division and rank insignia, but the designs varied some what from Ship to Ship (or Star Base).
Watching this they talk about the streamlined visuals of Star Trek. The new movies were never streamlined but felt as disjointed as Star Wars ever was. F7uK this!!!
Up periscope! What do you see captain. A destroyer, therefore as it looks like a destroyer it must be in the US navy, surface! Er, captain, what does CCCP mean?
I don't care what button's Michelle pushes. As long as she where's that mini skirt. She has always been my girlfriend. And I think she has been every boy's Girlfriend that YES.
Great good cannot exist without great evil. It is these two elements that are critical to all great literature and films, but most especially, in my view, in science fiction. The story is center and key, not how many bodies you can pile up, or how many things you can blow up, in a given amount of time. Far too many films of late which are touted as "great," lose complete sight of this. Studio execs, writers, film makers, all of them take an approach like they're talking down to an audience, which in my opinion, insults their intelligence. True science fiction aficionados enjoy a good story, with great subtleties which can be savored, not a pounding of the head with some kind of blatantly overt message. That's what it's all about. Ricardo Montalban portrays Khan to perfection, even down to, as he says, "His unmasking." I was a fan of Montalban's long before Wrath, so I was especially riveted by his performance. Since I was not there, I can only surmise that both Montalban and Shatner, who portray arguably two of the biggest icons in science fiction history, somehow challenged each other during their performances, much like, dare I say, two equally gifted, dynamic, talented but diametrically opposite athletes? This movie, in my opinion, is not only one of the greatest science fiction films of all time, but one of the best films of all time, period.
This is why the Alex Kurtzman era sucks. STD, STP, Lower Depths, and Same Old Worlds all ignore the canon and the rules of Star Trek and just do whatever
So it seems. I think the problem was, how do you actually organize a giant space fleet? This is why they realized that it had to be more militaristic, it was simply practical from an organizational point of view, and of course the director was asking for it, but honestly it just made more sense that way.
TNG is militaristic, and this featurette explains where the military insignias and military terminology came from that eventually went on to became canon. Both your assumptions seem to be wrong.
@@SkyDarmos Mussolini was militaristic, too. That didn't mean that the Italian military, as a whole, was very militaristic...And TNG is very militaristic.
