Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

First one I saw as a child was The Undiscovered Country, and it remains my favorite to this day. I didn't see anything "Star Trek" before seeing it and I understood it. Understanding Kirk's hatred of the Klingons does help though. Still, I'd watch TOS and 1-5 first because TUC is an amazing swan song for the original crew.

The Motion Picture was a failure because it was 'modelled' after the big screen 'scope' of Kubrick's 2001, when movies started taking a turn towards becoming more upbeat/action oriented, ala Jaws, Superman, Star Wars .... The Wrath of Khan was made as a result of the negative reaction.

The safe bets are 2,4, and 6. TNG films are best viewed after watching the series IMO.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

My faves are III, IV, VI, and the TNG films.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

It's hard to try to think of seeing things fresh. II is still my favorite, and I saw it without having seen the original "Space Seed" episode, but had seen many TOS episodes. IV I remember seeing with my family, and I think everyone enjoyed it. I haven't seen it in a while and don't remember the connections with II and III. VI is maybe my second- or third-favorite. FC is a really entertaining action film and I saw before I saw many TNG episodes, but I did have some passing familiarity with the Borg. 2009 is a really good entry point especially for modern audiences.

My vote goes to II and 2009.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

First Contact. It has all the verve and goodwill of II, III, IV, and VI and the character of Lily played by Alfre Woodard. She is sort of a porthole character for people new to Trek who is given a guided tour by Jean-Luc Picard. Beyond that, we see the beginnings of the Star Trek Universe at the end of the film. Sadly, First Contact never truly gets the respect it deserves because it's lumped together with the other clunky TNG movies.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

Although Wrath of Kahn is probably the best movie, I still think much of it's emotional appeal is based on the backstory from the series.

I picked Voyage Home because of the humor and interaction of the crew

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

I disagree. I remember when TWOK was released, I had not seen the original episode at the time (although I grew up watching the show in reruns, I had not seen every episode and that just happened to be one of those that I had not seen when TWOK came out). I thought the movie was great so I then wanted to see the original episode.

When I finally saw the original episode, I was actually disappointed by it. It still amazes me that that episode was what they picked as a good source for a film sequel. Even now, looking at the episode entirely on its own, I still don't think it's one of the better episodes of TOS (it's not bad, it's just one of the somewhat generic "someone tries to take over the ship" episodes) and that its status was mainly elevated by the movie TWOK after the fact.

I'm glad they chose it given how great the movie came out, but if it was me looking through episodes to pick one to make a sequel to, I know I would've chosen something different.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

I don't agree at all.

Bunkaroo did an excellent job defending Generations.

First Contact IMHO is behind only Wrath of Khan for best Star Trek Movies. It goes much more in depth then a simple sci-fi action film. It really shows Picard dealing with his fear and vengeance on the Borg. It also established much more Star Trek lore then any other film. We see Cocharan AND the first warp flight AND first contact? You see the very day the foundation for the federation is laid. How much more Trek can you get? Picard's "smash your little ships" scene is also a prime example of how Patrick Stewart is far and away the best Trek actor. It's one of the finest scenes in all of Star Trek.

Back OT I voted STIV but really by the shear fact that my wife has scene JJ Abrams Star Trek that really should be voted as Trek for the uninitiated.

And isn't funny how STIV is really a period piece now?

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

Just thought I'd circle back here since I decided to blind buy Wrath of Khan on the last day of Upgrade & Save.

I really enjoyed it. I was particularly struck by two things:

1. Kirstie Alley was in a Star Trek movie

2. How they managed to make a personal film about a man dealing with his own mortality and it just happened to be set in the Star Trek universe.

The action conflict between Khan and Kirk was to understated to the point of being beside the point and I really enjoyed that. It was a far subtler film than I ever expected. I'm not entirely sure if I want to venture on b/c Spock's sacrifice in Khan seems too powerful to be undercut by a film (The Search for Spock), whose title implies Spock actually is alive.

So, thanks to everyone who recommended Khan and threw out other suggestions. I'll continue to circle back if/when I see others (I think they're all on Netflix streaming, so I probably will not be blind buying the others).

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

Having just watched the film with only the most recent Star Trek movie informing me, I'm going to disagree here.

The film did an excellent job using other characters to establish Kirk's emotional conflict early through Bones' and Spock's interactions with him about his birthday. It is a very tight film in this regard. They even slowly tease out that Kirk passed the test we see Kirstie Alley failing early on b/c he cheated, which ties into the whole not facing death/mortality conflict.

While the ending might be more powerful for viewers with a pre-established emotional connection to Spock, I think, his sacrifice was given the appropriate emotional weight just in the film alone b/c it is established early that he is a dear friend to Kirk.

I know a lot of the above sounds grossly naive and silly to fans of Star Trek since so much of what I say Khan establishes on its own was also likely a given going in for the fans.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

This is where it benefits to be an old person who saw the movie in theaters and didn't know there'd be a sequel with that title. :)

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

No not at all. I am a firm believer that the best of trek requires no previous knowledge of the characters.

Since you have Netflix I would point you to The Next Generation: The Inner Light S5:E25 and Deep Space 9 The Visitor S4:E3. I would be very interested to see what you think about those.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

^ Bring tissues.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

Good suggestions. City on the Edge of Forever can be thrown in there as well.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

I heard great things about The Wrath of Khan but was slightly disappointed. It wasn't as awesome as the hype would have you believe, but it still felt more exciting and more an actual film than any of the TNG films, even the very good "First Contact."

Anyways, I had no idea the background of Khan, but I enjoyed it just fine.

I don't know how much I would enjoy the TNG films if I hadn't grown up watching the tv series.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

When I was younger, I loved them (First Contact and Insurrection being my favorites). Now? They are torturous to sit through, save First Contact. I revisited them just recently because of this thread and I struggled big time. Data is simply unbearable in the films.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

I always saw the TNG films as made-for-TV movies / extended episodes.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

I think people think too much of Wrath as being good for non trek fans. Really only the 2009 film is a movie for anyone. All the rest seem more involved with the character relationships that are evolved from the tv shows.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

I think part of the reason that Wrath of Khan and First Contact are the best for their respective time periods is that not only are they great movies, but they build on events that happen in the series yet still don't require you to have knowledge of what happened to know what's going on.

But yeah, if you have no desire to get into the actual Trek universe, the 2009 movie is the way to go.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

Star Trek (2009) is a shallow, simplistic "greatest hits" of Star Trek for people who wouldn't ordinarily be caught dead watching Trek. If any other genre property like say Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, The Hunger Games, ect., was treated so shabbily and whored out for the sake of pandering to the lowest common denominator--the fanbase outrage would part the heavens and scorch the Earth. The person in charge of the debasement of their beloved franchise would be publicly excoriated as a schlockmeister and their career would be readily over.

But, Star Trek's origin is not based in a respectable medium like books or even comic books. It's origin is teevee. And as we know, nothing of artistic worth has ever come from teevee. Playhouse 90 or Who's the Boss?: it's all the same. So, Joel Schumacher...er, J.J. Abrams will be rolling around in money like Demi Moore in Indecent Proposal after taking a big foamy piss on Gene Roddenberry's ashes.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

While I agree with you that the movie was shallow and simplistic, as a Trek fan for almost 20 years, I still really liked it. Is it really Star Trek as it was conceived? No. But it can serve as a means of getting more people into checking out the rest of the shows and movies. And one good decision JJ made was that this is an alternate universe, not a reboot of the whole franchise, so if it leads to a new series, it could still take place in the "Prime" universe where the only difference is the destruction of Romulus (which would open up some pretty good plotlines).

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

I think the major demographic JJ's two Trek movies are designed for would pass on the rest of Trek in short order. They'll watch an episode like "The Inner Light" and and be like, "There's too much talking. I want 'splosions!!!"

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

You know, it's elitist attitudes like yours that keep people from engaging with Trek, not the material itself. I know plenty of people who weren't big Trek fans until Abrams film, then went back to TOS, TNG, DS9, etc. because the movie piqued their curiosity. And for the most part, they liked what they saw. But if someone said to me, "Hey, I really like the new Star Trek, what should I check out next?" and my response were, "Well, if you liked the NEW Star Trek, you wouldn't like old Trek at all, because you're too stupid to enjoy it!", then they probably never would have bothered.

So, in other words, let it the fuck go, and appreciate that someone has made Trek relevant to a new audience, and while not every single member of that audience will go back and discover the rich history of Trek prior to 2009, many will, and acknowledge that this is a GOOD thing.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

:thumbsup:

Trek is different things at different times. If anything, Abrams Trek is more in spirit with TOS than any of the spin-off TV shows.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

Actually, Abrams Trek is more in the spirit of Michael Bay's Transformers movies in all its tangible and intangible attributes.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

Both of Abrams' Trek films are better than any of the Transformers movies, and more coherent as well.

But regardless, you dodged my post.