Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

In advance of the newest Star Trek film and the current low pricing of Trek Blu-rays at Best Buy during the Upgrade and Save Event, I started to wonder about this.

What are the best Star Trek films? I do not mean which films service the fanboys the best or are the most "accurate" to the show, etc. But, if you were going to show a non-Trekkie that just likes films generally, one of the Trek films, which would you choose?

I've seen some of the original Star Trek episodes and some of the New Generation stuff growing up, but it doesn't do anything for me. I just don't care enough about that universe.

But, I really enjoyed Abram's Star Trek since I thought it worked well as a generic sci-fi action film. I'm sure there were some winks to the Trekkies that went over my head, but overall, it really felt like a movie made for non-Trekkies. The fact that it was an entry into the Star Trek franchise felt pretty beside the point.

Do any of the other films in the series work like this? I've always heard a ton about Wrath of Khan, but is it worth seeing as a stand alone film? I find it hard to parse through the praise for franchise films because generally a lot of the reaction framed by the larger universe of the franchise, be it tv show fans or comic book fans. So, what may be great to a fan ("true to the source" type praise) could very well do nothing to add or subtract from whether or not it is a well-made film.

Discuss.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

You've got an interesting take on Abrams' film and one that might explain its immense popularity among non-Trek fans. I didn't like it myself but then I'm heavily invested in the original series and the first movie to be based on it and went to all sorts of Trek conventions in the '70s, so I'm biased and not one who could easily isolate a film based on the criteria you outline. I picked the first movie for the simple reason that it has a fairly straightforward epic sci-fi plot and it takes enough time to introduce the various characters so that newbies won't feel like they're entering a rarefied world.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

I think you may have answered your own question there.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

Star Trek 2009, of course.

Of the original set of movies I chose Wrath of Khan and The Voyage Home. Both are the most "accessible" of the films. The caveat is that you sort-of need to watch The Search for Spock in-between for it all to make sense. Even that one is fairly straightforward, even with all the mystic mumbo-jumbo.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

Not really. That is the basis for the question. I'm asking about what Star Trek films people feel work as films in a purer sense, which is why I described my reaction to the latest Star Trek film.

The statement you quoted was me just simply saying that I am not a fan of the "franchise." When X-Men came out, I was invested b/c growing up I read X-Men comics. I was invested in that franchise.

Lord of the Rings. I had no investment in that franchise (never read the novels) when I went to see those films. I enjoyed them, but not nearly as much as my friends who went into them already loving the novels. B/c while those films worked as grand scale fantasy epics, their stature was elevated immensely by the many people who loved the novels and gave bonus points to the films for "respecting the source." A criteria, I certainly did not bother considering or give any weight to in terms of how I view those films.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

I'd say Star Trek and Wrath of Khan for sure. Not Wrath of the Titans. Khan. Make sure you look carefully.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

So, Wrath of Khan is not a contained story? I was thinking of blind buying Khan simply because it is the most talked about of the films.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

Khan is self-contained, but if you want to watch the Voyage Home you'll need to watch Search for Spock since the three of them form a trilogy.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

The best? Wrath of Khan, Voyage Home, Undiscovered Country and 2009. I threw in Search for Spock in there because as the middle of that little trilogy it's a fantastic film; it just doesn't stand on its own.

Frankly, I think the Motion Picture is a great film, but definitely not a mainstream entry and Final Frontier has enough that I like it also, but it's deeply flawed.

The Next Generation stuff is garbage, save for First Contact which hardly feels like a Star Trek film and more of a wild sci-fi action film. The script does a great diservice to the established characters though for the sake of the action.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

Ah, well in that case I'd suggest Undiscovered Country and First Contact.

Both have minor callbacks to previous episodes/movies. But you don't need to watch said episodes/movies to understand and enjoy them.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

Although I had seen TMP in theaters and a handful of TV episodes of TOS growing up, TWOK is the movie that made me fall in love with Star Trek. I think you could start there and fill in the gaps later.

Keep in mind, the older Star Trek movies have a more grounded, realistic feel to them. So if STAR TREK (2009) is similar to STAR WARS, STAR TREK II: THE WRATH OF KHAN is more akin to RUN SILENT, RUN DEEP.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

Good question, as someone that never cared for any of the Star Trek series and haven't really seen any of the movies, I always wondered if something like Wrath of Khan was worth watching standalone given the high praise for it. I loved the 2009 reboot.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

I have to defend my favorite ST film, Generations. You're all laughing right now I know.

A little background:

In 1996 I couldn't give two shits about Star Trek. I had seen some of the original cast movies, but I never liked TOS and TNG looked too cheesy to watch when I was first aware it was on TV in my early teens. I was a Star Wars kid, and I thought Star Trek was shit until I was a teenager, at which point I didn't care about either anymore.

So in 1996, I became intrigued by Soran's "They say time is the fire in which we burn" line, which I had heard sampled on a track from a band I was about to join. I wasn't even familiar with Malcolm McDowell but just that made me think "this is not the cheesy Star Trek stuff they did in the past". I liked that it seemed kind of dark and existential in tone.

I caught it on cable and liked it right away. I know the whole Nexus thing is pretty suspect, but in terms of the story of Picard and him wrestling with making his life meaningful as the "last Picard", it really struck a chord with me. I also really loved the score for that one. I liked that it didn't use any of the typical ST themes.

I don't think I could recommend it as the first ST film to a non-fan, but in my case it worked. I wound up seeing First Contact when it hit theaters later that year and thought it was great. After that I started methodically renting all the TNG episodes on VHS(!).

I will always prefer TNG over TOS. I do like the new film, but even as someone who doesn't hold a torch for TOS, it is kind of a bummer that the new direction seems to be less about exploration and more about "blowing stuff up real good". I hope they can pull off another ST series eventually that captures the pioneer spirit again. Enterprise wasn't quite it for me.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

Aside from watching TNG in my younger days, I was never a fan of Star Trek. But I really dug the JJ Abrams one.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

I've seen most of the Trek films sporadically through the years but until someone on this forum mentioned that II, III, IV form their own trilogy I never realized it. I'm not about to go through half a dozen movies to get ready for the new Star Trek film but I may watch this "trilogy" in preparation in the next week or two. I'm curious exactly how complete of a story those three movies will make.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

I'm a Star Trek fan, but not as hardcore as a lot of the Trekkies out there.

Honestly here's my assessment for the casual fan for the original crew series:

TMP: Long, boring and nearly unwatchable for just a casual fan.

TWOK: Probably the best of the original crew films. You definitely don't need to see the 1st one.

TSFS: A very good film, but doesn't standalone very well. You kind of have to see II.

TVH: Probably the most mainstream of the Trek Films since it deals with time travel and a fish out of water storyline with the crew. Like some have said though, II and III tie into this one, so it's a little hard to recommend this as a standalone film.

TFF: Self contained story, but regarded as the worst of the series.

TUC: Excellent film and a good wrap up to the series. I think it does have a good standalone science fiction plot.


If you have absolutely no background or knowledge of Star Trek, the 2009 film is definitely a good standalone film.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

When the JJ Star Trek came out, I took my girlfriend with me. She had never seen a single Trek movie or episode, from any series. She instantly fell in love, and we subsequently watched all the other movies, and lots of TOS and TNG episodes. She now loves Nimoy's Spock more than Quinto's. So the new Trek films CAN be a launching point for making new fans.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

I'd never show anyone Star Trek: The Motion Picture in an attempt to get them into Star Trek. It's visual Ambien.

Might as well start with Wrath of Khan. If you like it, you'll most likely end up liking the rest of the original film series. Once the Next Generation flicks come into play, it's a mixed bag, but I think they're pretty accessible. Generations is fairly lousy, the next two are good, and Nemesis just exists.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

The 6 core original cast films are essential viewing. The quailty is inconsistent but the overall experience is well worth it, for any film fan, not just a sci-fi or Trek fan.

I grew up occasionally watching the original series in syndication and I watched the Next Generation a bit when it was in its first run, but I was not a fan of either. About 5 years ago I decided to watch all the films in order. Here were my findings:

The Motion Picture: Not a great film, but better than you might expect given its reputation. This is a good place to start because it does take the time to introduce everything and everyone even if it is a bit of a dull film.

Wrath of Khan: Every bit as good as its reputation

Search for Spock: Not as good

Voyage Home: Fantastic

Khan, Search, and Voyage form a trilogy, however Khan works as a stand alone and one can understand Voyage without having seen either previous film.

Final Frontier: Flawed, could be better. Has a couple VERY good scenes that no one ever mentions because they mostly just shit on the movie

The Undiscovered Country: Great film. They went out on a high note.

So really just 2,4, and 6 are great essential films, but viewing the whole cycle is an experience I would recomend to anyone.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

So now that she's seen the other stuff, how much does she like JJ Abrams' Star Trek on watching it again?

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

This. The revelation of Spock and McCoy's "pain" is a brilliant scene and Kirk's refusal to share his is great because the audience already knows what it is.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

I agree with that. It may be cheesy, but I always felt the songs at the camp fire also helped book end that. It's probably the only film of the 6 that focus so much on the Kirk/Spock/Bones grouping.

As for OP, it'd agree with 2009, ST II, of ST VI. Personally I enjoy VI more than II, but I think most people point to II or IV (not that they aren't good as well).

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

Still loves it. We always love our first, don't we? But, like I said, both the TOS and TNG gang really sold her on the deal.

I know that some self-appointed masters of Trek poo-poo JJ's film, but I'm a lifelong (age 46) Trekker and I love the Abrams film as well. Hell, I love Nemesis.

The thing most people complain about with regards to the movies is that they're not "true" Trek, because they're action-packed or whatever. Then we get films like The Final Frontier or Insurrection and people bitch about them being like two-hour episodes. There really is no pleasing some people.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

The Wrath Of Khan
The Search for Spock
The Voyage Home
The Undiscovered Country

I picked the even numbered movies, but The Search For Spock is nearly as good and you have to watch it for The Voyage Home to fully make sense.

Re: Star Trek for the Uninitiated
 

Wrath of Khan is the perfect entry point. It's a great sci-fi adventure movie and not just a Trek entry. A few years back I took an SO through the Trek movies for the first time, and I started her on TWOK. She was confused of why I was starting her on Part 2. I explained that The Motion Picture is a very good standalone movie, but it's not representative of the series. While it does stay in tune with the seeking of knowledge and human betterment, the tone is very dark and has a very slow pace. If you start with that one, you might not want to continue. Even if you like the movie, it takes a certain mood to watch that one, and you'd do the same if you were to watch a full series with that tone.

Mostly everything after TWOK followed its lead. And it's an absolute blast to watch.