Not every movie is everybodys cup of tea (I really dislike Insurrection), but this one has a soft spot in my heart for the same reasons listed above by others. I was 18, and in the theaters on opening night for this movie, and I'll tell you now; by 1979 standards it was very well receievd by the audience. Down through the years we've been spoiled by TV shows moving on to motion pictures (The Brady Bunch, The X-Files, Wayne and Garth, Lost In Space, etc. etc. etc.) You were in the presence of an awesome event when you saw the TV characters of Kirk, Spock, McCoy and the rest up on the big screen. There was a book out there in the early 80's called 'The Making Of Star Trek-TMP', which detailed in great detail the production, and it only made me appreciate the movie, despite its faults, because it overcame incredible odds just to make it up on the screen.
And as for being a slow-moving movie, it's true, and far too much action took place on the bridge, but can anyone here honestly say that The Next Generation is an action adventure series? Talkabout boring at times! It was alot of talking heads, and not even an exciting climax in many episodes!
It's a shame many of you haven't seen STTMP up on a movie screen where it belongs, now that DS9, Voyager, Babylon 5, and others have such superior special effects, and vastly higher budgets to back them up.

By Rene on Thursday, September 02, 1999 - 09:24 pm:

No matter was standards you use, this movie was
long and boring.

By Nick Angeloni (Nangeloni) on Thursday, September 02, 1999 - 09:51 pm:

The movie was pretty long, I will agree. Some of the V'Ger stuff with them just gaping at the cloud could be cut. But it was a pretty good movie (I personally liked it better than Star Wars). Even though the plot may have been used before, it still kept my interest, and I loved all those shots of the Enterprise! They were so wonderfully done. The music was also great as well.

By Electron on Sunday, September 05, 1999 - 07:45 pm:

Did you know that TMP was the only part of Star Trek which was officially released in Eastern Europe ?

By Steve McKinnon on Tuesday, September 07, 1999 - 08:43 am:

Fascinating! Any reason why, that you know of?

By ScottN on Tuesday, September 07, 1999 - 10:55 am:

Are you sure? In his autobio, Nimoy tells about going to a screening of STIV:TVH in Moscow.

By Electron on Tuesday, September 07, 1999 - 03:20 pm:

WHAT ??? The Russians got ST4 ??? Grrrrr...

By Padawan Nitpicker on Saturday, November 13, 1999 - 08:10 am:

That vaporizes all the Pravda rumors!

By Will Spencer on Monday, December 06, 1999 - 11:32 am:

Can you guys believe that this baby's TWENTY years old, as of this week? Watched it again for the ## th time (don't want to say how many times, because it's pretty high), and still had a good time watching it.
Sometimes I think people have forgotten how the movies really are 'Star Trek-The Next Generation', and the 1987-1994 tv series is really The Next Next Generation.
I've read alot about how much Rick Berman has changed the Trek concept, but it seems to me that Harve Bennennt, the driving force behind 4 our of 6 Trek movies made som e big changes, after Roddennberry changed some things for this movie.
Rene; Long? Yes. That's what most Trek fans want anyways, right? Boring? Nah. Slow-moving in parts, is more like it.

By B.F. on Friday, December 10, 1999 - 04:07 pm:

Out of curiosity, when was the exact release date for this film in the U.S.?

By Charles Cabe (Ccabe) on Saturday, December 11, 1999 - 12:44 pm:

June 4, 1982. I found this at imdb.com

By cableface on Saturday, December 11, 1999 - 04:11 pm:

I thought that was ST2.Wasn't this out in the late 70's?

By ScottN on Saturday, December 11, 1999 - 04:57 pm:

I saw it on a date in December '79 sometime...

By Matthew Patterson (Mpatterson) on Saturday, December 11, 1999 - 10:45 pm:

Release date was December 4, 1979... at least, I think I remember that from somewhere.

By Charles Cabe (Ccabe) on Sunday, December 12, 1999 - 03:43 pm:

Sorry about the mixup. I forgot what board I was posting on.

By Benn Allen on Sunday, December 12, 1999 - 04:27 pm:

ST-TMP was released on Pearl Harbor Day 1979. I always thought the date a bit ironic.

By Will Spencer on Tuesday, December 14, 1999 - 11:12 am:

Anybody here remember standing in line on opening night back in December '79, or am I dating myself here?

By mak on Tuesday, December 14, 1999 - 11:15 am:

Must be lonely, dating yourself.

By Charles Cabe (Ccabe) on Tuesday, December 14, 1999 - 11:16 am:

Ahhh... December of 1979. My parents wouldn't allow me to see Star Trek at the theater until I got older. (I was one year old at the time :-)

By ScottN on Tuesday, December 14, 1999 - 12:03 pm:

I didn't stand in line on opening night, but I did see it a few nights later on a date...

By Chris Booton (Cbooton) on Tuesday, December 14, 1999 - 10:42 pm:

Ahhh... December of 1979. My parents wouldn't allow me to see Star Trek at the
theater until I got older. (I was one year old at the time :-)

Cool , me too.

By Will Spencer on Thursday, December 16, 1999 - 11:03 am:

Young whipper-snappers! You youngin's missed a really big event.

By Benn Allen on Thursday, December 16, 1999 - 03:05 pm:

Wasn't too much of a line when I saw it, that I remember. But I was living in this small Arkansas
town back then (God help me. Never, never again.)
I do remember reading Roddenberry's novelization
while waiting in line. Thought it was a bit of a
mistake that the book had come out a week or two
before the film did. Same thing happened with Trek
IV, I was reading the book while waiting in line.

By Mark Swinton on Tuesday, January 18, 2000 - 07:00 pm:

Talk amongst yourselves. I didn't even exist when it came out...

By Will S. on Thursday, January 20, 2000 - 11:13 am:

Unless you've been reincarnated from somebody that WAS in the line-up in 1979/80...

By Roland Khorshidianzadeh on Tuesday, January 25, 2000 - 04:12 pm:

Benn Allen: When "Star Trek VI" came out I was reading the novel and the comic adaption for it while waiting in line to see it on opening day. I was even wearing my new Star Trek VI t-shirt!

By John A. Lang on Sunday, January 30, 2000 - 01:15 pm:

Persis Khambatta was gorgeous!
Love those legs!
She will be missed!

I liked the new Enterprise too.

By John A. Lang on Sunday, January 30, 2000 - 01:31 pm:

On the planet Vulcan we see Spock meditating
on the ground...he has longer hair than usual
HOWEVER...he is clean shaven....

So, let me get this straight.....

Spock had time to stay shaven but not get his hair cut? (Sorry, I'm ranting)

By Benn Allen on Monday, January 31, 2000 - 03:27 pm:

Roland: A local fan club arranged a midnight show-
ing of TREK VI. It was supposed to be a week in ad
-vance of the national release, but Paramount moved it up a week. At any rate, Nichele Nichol was in the audience with us that night. A very gracious and lovely woman.

By John A. Lang on Thursday, February 03, 2000 - 12:13 pm:

A mysterious shuttle is approaching the Enterprise, no one knows where it comes from
or who's on it....yet...when they show the
ship, you can clearly see the name of the
"mysterious ship"....it's the "SURAK"

Let me see....Surak, where have we heard that name before?

Hey! Wasn't he the founder of the movement
to purge all emotion from the planet VULCAN????

The computers & Chekov must of been napping
on that one.

The AMT model confirms my nit.

By Nick Angeloni (Nangeloni) on Thursday, February 03, 2000 - 08:59 pm:

Even further, that control cab that docked with the Enterprise is the same design as the Enterprise's shuttles! So much for being mysterious.

By John A. Lang on Saturday, February 05, 2000 - 07:30 pm:

That mysterious race from PSI 2000 returns!

The Mannequins! (See "The Naked Time" 1st Season)

You can see them in space suits around the
Epsilon Station...epsecially in the scene where the crew of the Enterprise is watching the destruction of the station...a "man" in a thruster suit is flying toward the audience,
only to drop off to the right at the end...

By John A. Lang on Tuesday, February 08, 2000 - 02:17 pm:

The reason the lights came on the outside of
the Enterprise?????

BILC!!!!!

By mf on Monday, February 14, 2000 - 03:59 pm:

Why wouldn't there be lights illuminating the outside of the ship? It would be just a mass of black in space otherwise. You'll note the lights are over the registry letters.

By Anonymous on Saturday, February 19, 2000 - 12:48 am:

License plate light, maybe?

By Tom Kun on Monday, March 13, 2000 - 09:36 pm:

Anyone read a book called The Making of the Trek Films? Quite informative.

To make a long story short, Gene Roddenberry just
can't write. I was going to go into a little
more detail, but as I was typing it I accidentally hit a button which somehow cleared everything. Oh Well.

Anyway, did you know that when the movie crews dug
out the Klingon uniforms out of storage in '84 for the 3rd movie, they found them all destroyed, because half of the dozen got ruined on publicity tours, and the rest were used on a Mork & Mindy episode(!), the one where Jonathan Winters,
as Mork's son or something like that, comes out of that big egg (never saw it). Seems that, during the hatching scene, if you look closely at all that junk in the egg you can see remnants of Klingon uniforms.

By mf on Tuesday, March 14, 2000 - 11:15 am:

Roddenberry had a few good ideas. He just kept using them over and over again.

And even given that, he had a much firmer grasp of dramatic structure, storytelling, science fiction and military life than anyone associated with modern Trek.

And for the record, I am not a Roddenberry fan.

By Adam Bomb on Friday, July 28, 2000 - 10:08 pm:

Does anyone notice how much the Enterprise-E in "First Contact" and "Insurrection" resembles the Enterprise from the first six films. The design was originally done for the abandoned "Star Trek-Phase II" series from 1978. The model had great detail. Just why, in the sequence when Kirk and the rest are going to meet V'Ger, did they have to use a matte painting? A shot of the set combined with a plate of the hull of the model would have done a better job. We all know that the effects were a rush job, with Trumbull and Dykstra doing two years' work in nine months.By the way, if anyone knows where Douglas Trumbull is now, please post it.

By John A. Lang on Saturday, July 29, 2000 - 01:40 am:

I remember that shot...it was very sloppy.

The hull shot contains a big nit....

When we get a glimpse of the top of the Enterprise during the "Kirk's pod ride" we see the phasor banks just below the letters "NCC-1701"...I know they're the phasor banks they are also on the bottom side of the dish and were used during STII..Anyway...the phasor banks are missing in the hull shot when Kirk, Decker, McCoy, Spock & Ilia go out to see V'Ger.

Plus the perspectives are really screwed up.
It looks like you can run right up to the Bridge bubble and look like a giant to the crew inside!

By B.F. on Monday, July 31, 2000 - 10:31 pm:

That scene will be fixed for the Special Edition of this film on DVD.

By Adam Bomb on Sunday, August 06, 2000 - 11:11 pm:

There will be a Special Edition DVD for ST-TMP? Can't wait. May buy a DVD player finally. I hope they fix the scene where Kirk is outside the ship, and you can see the studio rafters. I did not believe that they put that back when I saw the film upon the first showing on ABC in February 1983. This also spoils the continuity-Kirk leaves the ship in one suit and is seen later in another. Maybe we will see other outtakes, such as the V'ger memory wall with Kirk and Spock.(This was scrapped by Trumbull and turned into a solo for Spock.) The perspective for the shot outside the ship was supposed to be from a wide angle lens, I guess-why else would it look so distorted? P.S. Was this shoot so grueling that it sent Robert Wise into retirement? He only directed one film since "ST-TMP"-the 1989 flopperoo "Rooftops" with the man who would be "Falcone", Jason Gedrick. Mr. Wise is now about 85 years old and I don't think he will direct any more.

By B.F. on Monday, August 07, 2000 - 05:53 pm:

There is a whole bunch of stuff being added for the Special Edition. CGI shots of the Enterprise and V'Ger attacking secutirty guards on the bridge will also be added. The new effects will be done by Foundation Imaging, the same people who do the effects for Voyager. Also the aformentioned memory wall sequence will be redone with CGI and will include V'Ger attacking Kirk and so on...it looks really exciting!

By Adam Bomb on Thursday, August 10, 2000 - 10:41 pm:

In ST-TMP, while the probe is exploring the bridge, a security guard pops up from nowhere. I know that scenes of V'ger and security guards were filmed, but cut. Trumbull scrapped the memory wall, as it was too long (about 12 minutes)and it would take too much time and resources to fix it, neither of which he had. That is why he re-did it as a solo for Spock. Maybe on DVD, it will be the film that was meant to be seen. When is a tentative release date planned?

By Nick Angeloni (Nangeloni) on Sunday, August 27, 2000 - 09:27 pm:

Checking to see if this works--someone said it was acting weird.

By Glenn Butler on Sunday, August 27, 2000 - 11:26 pm:

Does anyone know a release date for TMP on DVD? (I love TLAs). Please e-mail me if you do.

By Adam Bomb on Monday, August 28, 2000 - 04:57 pm:

I must correct myself, for I was wrong about Mr. Wise not directing any more. It seems that last year, he directed an original movie for Showtime called "A Storm in Summer", starring Peter Falk. Just because I have not seen his name in film credits does not mean he is not active. He is entitled to choose smaller projects now. Supervising this DVD upgrading, however, may not be a small undertaking. It pleases me very much that one of the real gentlemen of Hollywood has chosen to remain active.

By Wannabe Trek Writer on Monday, August 28, 2000 - 10:58 pm:

According to Star Trek: The Magazine's October issue, the release date seems to be January 7, 2001... or 1/7/01 (Get it?) But it's unconfirmed.

By Adam Bomb on Tuesday, August 29, 2000 - 04:47 pm:

To Wannabee-Cool Idea. I think special editions of all Trek movies should be released on that date. Gives me time to buy a DVD player, as my 12 year old Denon CD player will probably give up by then. Now I will meet my three criteria for buying one-
1. Prices had to drop (some are <$175 now.)
2. My CD player had to tank.
3. All the Trek movies had to be available.

By Anonymous on Saturday, September 02, 2000 - 01:01 am:

Why not release it before Christmas...so we can gift-wrap it for ourselves? Then we can act surprised and say, "OH! What can this be?"

By Derf on Thursday, September 07, 2000 - 09:16 pm:

It's hard to imagine a DVD version of STTMP being worthy of viewing over and above a VHS verson. It will STILL contain the "director's cut" extra 12 minutes of boring flight through the cloud or flight over the V'ger structure. The only advantage it will allow is a frame-by-frame analysis of how great a movie it was. (In THAT sense, it IS a long awaited thing to own ... no telling what we'll dig up!) In light of my own ruminations, please disregard my last comments!

By Adam Bomb on Saturday, September 09, 2000 - 02:13 pm:

I do not know how the film will be edited for DVD. I believe that Mr. Wise was unhappy with the cut that was released (it was allegedly put together by editor Todd Ramsay and the Paramount brass to highlight the VERY expensive optical effects.) When it was assembled for TV airing in 1983, I believe selected scenes were put back by an ABC or Paramount editor to expand the film to a three hour time slot. This allowed for the infamous "Kirk in the studio rafters" shot. (This is the version now on video, with a running time of two hours, 25 minutes. That is NOT a "director's cut", by no means.) Being that throughout the years there have been many complaints about the length of the effects shots, I would hope that something would be done to trim them down. I don't know how much more outtake remains. The theatrical running time (two hours, 12 minutes) was predetermined prior to release. With the effects taking a great deal of that time, some of the narrative had to go. It is my belief that the missing narrative of the film will be put back, hopefully enhancing character development. Incidentally, 1/7/01 is a Sunday, and videos are traditionally released on Tuesdays.

By John A. Lang on Sunday, September 10, 2000 - 01:24 am:

I HATE when they put something in a movie & they don't explain what it is....

What do I mean?

Those black, retangular thing-a-ma-gigs that's worn at the belt-line.....what are they?
Lint removers for the belly button?

By Chris Thomas on Sunday, September 10, 2000 - 02:42 am:

Maybe they explain why belly button fluff is always blue?

By Adam Bomb on Sunday, September 10, 2000 - 05:38 pm:

Those rectangular thingies were biorhythm monitors. They were supposed to show the crew being monitored by Dr. McCoy. He could even make an adjustment if you were having an off day. Of course, the costumes never got past the first film, so no mention of its attributes was ever given. (Those things would be irritating if you had a navel ring, like my wife. I love her ring, but she irritates me.) I believe there were 600 costumes made. What happened to them?

By John A. Lang on Sunday, September 10, 2000 - 09:58 pm:

I'm glad the idea of biorhythm monitors never caught on...McCoy be going "button happy" in STV!

By Adam Bomb on Friday, September 15, 2000 - 04:31 pm:

Who is that woman who, in the video edition, questions Scotty about Captain Kirk's self-destruct order (Starfleet Order 2005)? Also, I thought starships needed THREE senior officers plus their appropriate codes for self-destruct. This was laid out in "Let that be your last Battlefield" and followed up in "The Search for Spock." The self-destruct in this movie was to be accomplished by bringing a lot of matter and anti-matter together. In "TSFS", it was accomplished by explosives placed throughout the ship's structure. Still though, I would think that you need the concurrence of officers. In "TNG", it was Picard and Riker ordering self-destruct, then in "First Contact", it was three officers again (Picard, Crusher and Worf.)

By Adam Bomb on Friday, September 15, 2000 - 04:44 pm:

Why are the Star Trek DVD's among the most expensive? In New York City, J&R has the movies II thru VI and "Insurrection" for $25 apiece. Except now, they are out of stock of "Generations" and "First Contact" individually. (The three Next Gen films are in a boxed set for $60. At $20 each for a Trek film in this set, that makes this a relative bargain, as Suncoast in our local mall has them for $30 each.) When the DVD of ST-TMP comes out, will it be available in a boxed set with II through VI, maybe calling it "The Kirk Years?" Should I wait?

By Newt on Friday, September 15, 2000 - 07:18 pm:

Trek DVDs are expensive because Paramount and Disney have the highest MSRP (Manufacturer's Suggested Retail Price) among the DVD releasing studios.

As for waiting for a boxed set of the Original Series movies, well, you might have a long wait. Besides you can enjoy all the rest now if you don't wait on the boxed set that may or may not get released.

By Sean Murphy on Saturday, September 16, 2000 - 08:28 pm:

Was Kirk ever promoted to a rank higher then Rear Admiral between this one and Star Trek 2?

By Adam Bomb on Friday, September 22, 2000 - 04:39 pm:

A nit on the 20th Anniversary soundtrack CD-the booklet with the liner notes contains a picture of the Enterprise-A from ST-IV, rather than the ship from this film. (Yes, I know it is the same model used in all six films, but nitpick we must.) By the way, whatever happened to the Enterprise model that was used in the films? PLEASE clue me in!!

By Adam Bomb on Friday, September 22, 2000 - 04:57 pm:

If anyone out there is going to buy a DVD player fot the Special Edition of ST-TMP (or any other reason) please spend the money and get a good one. I bought an off brand from a national department store chain cheap, and regretted it. It did not even have basic CD programming capability that my 12 year old Denon has. The cheapie made my CD's sound scratchy, and was giving me trouble on the audio track of a DVD. Thankfully, the store gave me a refund after a week. Get a good player from a name brand audio company-Sony (the one I have my eyes on now), Pioneer, Onkyo, or any good name brand. I, who subscribed to Stereo Review for 22 years, should have known better. Don't shop for price alone.

By Nick Angeloni (Nangeloni) on Sunday, September 24, 2000 - 09:47 pm:

The large (and I mean large!) model of the Enterprise/-A is still floating around. I'm not sure if it's property of the Smithsonian like the original NCC-1701 is, but it was there for the '92-93 exhibition. The IDIC page has some good pics of it here:

http://members.aol.com/IDICPage/1701A.html

There were also several smaller versions, notably the one that was destroyed in The Search for Spock and the other one that was battle-damaged for The Undiscovered Country.

By Adam Bomb on Thursday, September 28, 2000 - 05:35 pm:

A nit on the 20th Anniversary soundtrack again. Although it had most of the film's music, two of my favorite cuts are missing. They omitted the music used when we first see Spock floating outside the Enterprise, and the music used when Kirk has his argument with the Ilia probe ("V'Ger requires the information.") Howerer, the music in the scene with Decker, McCoy, Chapel and the Ilia probe was included. For the current video edition, that scene was expanded, placed later in the film, and the music in it was eliminated. I have both editions on video; the theatrical edition is never shown anymore.

By Adam Bomb on Saturday, September 30, 2000 - 05:46 pm:

More on the DVD release. According to Trekweb.com, the DVD Director's Cut has been re-rated from G to PG. The release date is still listed as 1/7/01, even though that is a Sunday. There is a still of Spock floating against V'Ger's Memory Wall; the version that was cut from the film. Check out the site for further information. One question remains up in the air-will the Director's Cut be DVD only, or will there be a VHS reissue as well?

By Adam Bomb on Sunday, October 08, 2000 - 02:52 pm:

Rumors at Trekweb.com have it that the confrontation between Kirk and Admiral Nogura will be in the DVD version. I kept close tabs on the production of this picture and nowhere do I remember any shots of the scene published or any actor cast to play Nogura. Of course, they could shoot it now, and digitally alter Bill Shatner to look the way he did in 1978.

By Nick Angeloni (Nangeloni) on Wednesday, October 25, 2000 - 10:11 pm:

About the status of the 8 foot Enterprise from the movies: It along with the Workbee and Klingon K'T'Inga class battlecruiser were at Foundation Imaging about a month ago being used for the TMP DVD. The registry on the model still read NCC-1701-A, so I don't know if it was changed later or will be tweaked by CGI.

By Adam Bomb on Saturday, October 28, 2000 - 02:24 pm:

To anyone who can help: What effects are they redoing? All of them? I heard that the wing walk will be fixed, and the Memory Wall will be what was originally filmed during production (what was used was filmed around July 1979, 11 months after principal photography started.) Also, what is the expected running time of the DVD version? It seems like it just may be longer than the theatrical running time of 2 hrs, 12 mins. I would like to see them do what Anchor Bay did with "Supergirl". That flick has a special 2 DVD set out- one DVD has the foreign version, the second DVD has a directors cut. I would like to see a 2-disc set, packaged with both the original cut and the directors cut.

By John A. Lang on Monday, November 13, 2000 - 11:30 am:

GREAT LINE:

"Out there...thataway!"

Kirk at the end before the Enterprise makes another fantastic leap to warp drive with a flurry of trumpets.

By Derf on Monday, November 13, 2000 - 12:12 pm:

Did TOS EVER show a jump into warp as The Motion Picture showed us? If not, Trek special effecters had only Star Wars to draw upon for a precedent.

By ScottN on Monday, November 13, 2000 - 12:16 pm:

No. The "Rainbow" effect came into being with the refitted Enterprise in ST:TMP. There was no special effect for going to warp in the series.

By Adam Bomb on Saturday, November 18, 2000 - 06:37 pm:

Derf-You seem to forget one thing-TOS was done on a LOW budget. (Mission:Impossible was a bigger hit for Desilu/Paramount and had a bigger budget.) Most of the effects were stock shots. I can think of little more than half a dozen angles of the ship that were used throughout the series. At no time were the warp effects as elaborate as they were in the movies. Interestingly enough, Next Gen, in an effort to ease us viewers into a new situation, duplicated a lot of the familiar Enterprise shots for its 1701-D.

By Stephanie Alles on Tuesday, January 30, 2001 - 06:50 am:

I wasnt alive, when TMP appeared, but I sometimes wish, I was. it surely was fantastic after this long time of waiting.

By Derf on Tuesday, January 30, 2001 - 12:41 pm:

Stephanie -
I can remember my parents allowing me to stay up 'til 10:30 to see Star Trek (in its 2nd or 3rd season - I can't remeber that well). But ST-TMP was actually my first real interest in Trek. Even though I fast-forward through all the everlasting shots of the cloud, the flight over the alien vessel, the tour of the Enterprise, etc. its still a very good story.

By derf on Thursday, February 22, 2001 - 10:09 pm:

In the scene where Sulu is accelerating to warp one for the first time after leaving dry dock, he says "warp point seven ... point eight ...". The scene cuts to Engineering that shows Scotty with an ensign on either side of him working at a station, and at the far left is a person wearing what looks like a motorcycle helmet. At the very end of the scene in Engineering, a person comes running in from the right wearing the same helmet AND what looks like racing gloves. These people must be the workers who control the Andretti drive.

By Adam Bomb on Saturday, March 03, 2001 - 03:52 pm:

In the ep "Man Trap", in a conversation between Uhura and Spock, it is established that Vulcan has no moon. In the wide establishing shot of the Vulcan landscape, what do we get? The biggest moon you can imagine. I hope the DVD version will fix that.
I am hearing ominous rumblings on this DVD. Not much outtake is being restored. It seems to be just a fix job for the optical effects.

By Derf on Sunday, March 04, 2001 - 09:56 pm:

(Scene in sickbay when Chapel is examining Spock who is trance-like on the med table)
Chapel: Now scanning pons area, the spinal nerve fiber connection.
McCoy: Indications of some neurological trauma. The power pouring through that mind-meld must have been staggering.

The neurological trauma could also have been due to McCoy stitching Spock's brain back into his head, and the powerful mind-meld exacerbated the condition.

By Derf on Sunday, March 04, 2001 - 11:09 pm:

In the scene where the 4 officers and Ilia exit the ship onto the hull and begin walking towards the V'ger structure, the outline of the hole in the matt painting of the Enterprise saucer section is clearly visible. It must have been hard to get the lighting just right for that scene.

By Adam Bomb on Monday, March 05, 2001 - 08:51 am:

The seam on the exit portway IS clearly visible. That was not part of the matte painting, however. What was the matte painting is fairly obvious, especially in the side view. I still don't see why they had to do a matte painting. For the scene in "Star Wars" with the Millenium Falcon in the Death Star's hangar, they used the model in combination with some set pieces built.
Look at the console displays of the ship on the bridge. The outline of the ship is different. Principal photography was done while Robert Abel was contracted for the effects. When Abel was fired and replaced by Trumbull, Trumbull slightly changed the ship, particularly the saucer section. He added an indentation to the area tight below the bridge (painted blue) that was not reflected in the outlines of the ship on the bridge displays.
When the V'Ger probe is searching the library computer, the schematics of the ship are taken from the Franz Joseph Blueprints of TOS Enterprise that were published in 1975.

By Derf on Monday, March 05, 2001 - 12:38 pm:

I had trouble with the clearance light in the front. It appears blinking at the end when the Enterprise emerges from the V'ger "joining". This led me to rewind back to where Kirk & Co. exit the ship. That's when I noticed the difference in color of the hull between the matte painting and the live-action shots. The clearance light was not blinking in that scene.

By Adam Bomb on Monday, March 05, 2001 - 05:00 pm:

There were two lights-the clearance light you mentioned (which was steady on and off during the wing walk, but did blink rapidly and brightly after the V'Ger joining.)There was also the light at the edge of the hull, which came on as the walk to V'Ger began.
The lettering on the saucer section, with the name and registry number, was outlined in red on the model. This was missing from the wing walk matte painting. Also, the name "Enterprise" was in a semi-circle to match the registry number. All other Enterprises had the name straight across.

By Derf on Monday, March 05, 2001 - 08:21 pm:

One enlightening question: What the heck does "steady on and off" mean? (the term appears self-denying ... kinda like "legally drunk")

By margie on Tuesday, March 06, 2001 - 12:13 pm:

I believe it means a steady pattern, such as, "on, off, on, off," rather than random, such as, "on on, off, on, off off off, on, off, on."

By Derf on Tuesday, March 06, 2001 - 12:24 pm:

Thank you ... a very logical response. It has quelled the self-denying feeelings gnawing at my katra. (Then again, the term "blinking" suggests a regular pattern ... oh no!! ... I'm in denial again!)

By Adam Bomb on Tuesday, March 06, 2001 - 07:41 pm:

What I meant to say that as our friends were rising up to the hull of the ship, the light was off, then on (for what seemed too long) than slowly faded off again. When we saw supposedly the same light later on the model, it was rapidly blinking.
How they will approach this in the DVD is anyone's guess, but I really don't fault the effects people who originally worked on this film. They had nine months (March-December 1979) to do two years work. Douglas Trumbull worked seven days a week for the last three months of post-production. With a schedule like that, corners were cut, and these guys did the best thay could, under almost impossible circumstances. As a result, there were bound to be some continuity problems. Some of the music was not finished until three days before the premiere. Roddenberry was (very unfairly) blamed for the huge cost overruns, where it was really the fault of the Paramount brass for choosing an optical house with NO motion picture experience, just commercial work. He also wanted the release date moved into the first half of 1980. Paramount had booked the film into theatres a year before the scheduled release date, and could not change it, really painting themselves into a corner. Given Paramount's interference from the time the movie project was first announced in February 1975, through many scripts, then to a new TV series, and finally to a big budget movie, it's a miracle it turned out as well as it did.

By Derf on Tuesday, March 06, 2001 - 09:18 pm:

I was too busy noticing the matte painting seam to see the light come on at all. (time for another viewing)

By John A. Lang on Thursday, March 08, 2001 - 02:09 pm:

Something has always bothered me in this movie.

The transporter malfunctions, Kirk rushes into the transporter room and Janice Rand is at the controls....after the tragedy finishes its course,Kirk says, "There's nothing you could've done Rand, it wasn't your fault." AND THAT'S IT!

Why not..."How have you been?", or "I really missed you. I'm sorry you left after Leonore Karidan came aboard" or "I still care about you" or something like that....I was expecting something more than what Kirk originally said, especially after Kirk's & Rand's conversation in "Miri" ("Look at my legs") It would've been nice to have seen them TRY and patch things up, but nooooooo, the only "love interest" the creators wanted was Decker & Ilia.

By Derf on Thursday, March 08, 2001 - 05:00 pm:

The "Kirk-Rand" connection was thereafter forgotten. They never shared anymore dialogue, and the rest of the ST original cast movies NEVER took it up. (even had Rand on Sulu's ship in ST6)

By John A. Lang on Friday, March 09, 2001 - 11:38 am:

Really? Then 'splain why Rand was crying on the Excelsior Bridge when Kirk was found guilty for the death of Chancellor Gorkon.

I think she still had feelings for Kirk and probably thought she'd never get to see him again.

Rand: (Inner voice while crying) "They're taking my Romeo away! I'll never see him again" Sniff, sniff.

By Adam Bomb on Friday, March 09, 2001 - 07:26 pm:

Where is it canon that Rand left the Enterprise after the Anton & Lenore Karidian incident? Just because she was never seen does not mean that she was not on the ship. Just as the Chief's explanation of Chekov (he was a "Lower Decks"-type crewman when Khan was aboard-an explanation I have always bought, since June, '82) then Rand could have been sent to the bowels of the ship, and never surfaced until this movie.
Rand sounded very happy when McCoy came aboard; I wish we could have seen her face as she gave her one line there ("Permission Granted.")

By John A. Lang on Saturday, March 10, 2001 - 01:03 am:

Touche' Adam Bomb. Valid rebuttal.

My personal feelings are that Kirk told Rand about his rendezvous with Carol Marcus and didn't want anything like that to happen to Rand.
(Ya' know, baby in the bassinet with no father around) In other words, Kirk may have been protecting her from embarrassment.

By ScottN on Saturday, March 10, 2001 - 01:29 pm:

Nope, John. IIRC, in STII, Kirk says something along the lines of "You never told me" (quote is not exact). So if that's true (and it may not be, anyone know for sure?), then the baby argument doesn't fly.

By John A. Lang on Saturday, March 10, 2001 - 02:58 pm:

To ScottN:
I believe Kirk said,"Why didn't you tell HIM?"...referring to David. What Kirk was asking was, "Why didn't you (Carol) tell him (David) that Kirk was David's father?" It's pretty obvious David didn't know Kirk was his father because he trash-talks about Kirk halfway thru the movie.
I believe Kirk knew about David's existence but hadn't seen him in years,which is why he asked Carol "Is that David?"
I might want to add, I think McCoy knew too...otherwise why did he say "When it rains, it pours" in the turbolift? I believe it is VERY possible that McCoy delivered David in the maternity ward at Kirk's request because he knew McCoy would keep quiet about the whole thing.

By Derf on Saturday, March 10, 2001 - 05:48 pm:

OK - I admit Rand is near tears when in ST6 she sees him about to be sent to the "Spice-mines of Kessel" (so-to-speak) or to "mine borite for the rest-of-our-lives", but she could be near tears for him just 'cause he was her captain (and ship's doctor) so long ago, NOT just 'cause he wanted her legs. Loyalty goes farther than sex appeal ... (doesn't it?)

By ScottN on Saturday, March 10, 2001 - 07:14 pm:

John,

You're probably right, as I said, I didn't remember exactly.

By John A. Lang on Saturday, March 10, 2001 - 08:18 pm:

To: Derf--

You're probably right...she was mourning for her friends...the "romance" was over. However, I wish they'd went into a little more detail as to Kirk's feelings for Rand in STTMP and vice-versa.
(Ya' know, Kirk turns to her in the transporter and asks,"We're still friends, right?" With Rand replying, "Yes."

By Derf on Sunday, March 11, 2001 - 05:53 am:

They had to cut that scene for the extra twelve minutes of "passing through the cloud". (nyuk-nyuk)

By Derf on Monday, April 30, 2001 - 01:02 pm:

I think that the �slow� pace of this movie was intentional. First of all, it had to compliment the existing �Trek� universe, and managed to get ALL the old main TV characters to perform in this movie. (no small feat) And as such, needed to tell the story of what happened to each of the main characters in the interposing 10 years since the original TV show�s end. That takes considerable time. Also, the recent �Star Wars� phenomenon caused the Enterprise to have to be seen �going to warp�, which added to the scenes necessary for visual gratification, but not actually move the plot forward. Then, in order to emulate the advance of technology (moving VERY fast in the late �70�s), the Enterprise required a �refit�, and that necessitated the endless minutes of footage showing the rebuilt Enterprise. The ONLY gripe I find that might have actually slowed the movie down was the endless footage of �passing through the cloud� and �passing over the intruder�. But, then again, if it only took 5 seconds to pass through the cloud and 5 seconds to pass over the intruder, V�ger would not seem so immense.

By Brian Fitzgerald on Monday, April 30, 2001 - 06:26 pm:

I think that the whole reason for those long endless shots of the enterprise was because setting up such a shot like that takes so much and money that they didn't want to put so much time, money, and effort into a shot that would last 5 seconds. In fact I've always though that what gave Star Wars its timeless quality was the fact that most of the special effects shots were quick cuts. Now that everyone does special effects shots of that quality it does not date the movie by drawing so much attention to the shots now that the novelty factor has worn off.

By Adam Bomb on Tuesday, May 08, 2001 - 08:19 pm:

There is one thing about this film I wanted to note that I have seen in very few films. It seems that in some shots, there is focus on two different planes. In other words, both the foreground and the background are in focus, with a visible line between. This probably will be visible with the DVD (whenever it comes out) but can be seen in the pan-and scan VHS too. The rec room scene with Decker and Ilia is one place where the dual-focus lens was used.

By Richard Davies on Wednesday, May 09, 2001 - 10:52 am:

It could be possible to release the DVD so the additional scenes can be switched on & off, I'm sure some other releases have had this feature. Another thing they could sort out are the reflections on Spock's helmet, which are the wrong way round.

By Andreas Schindel on Friday, May 11, 2001 - 03:14 am:

Some nits:

1.) In DS9 (Don't remember, which episode) they tried to create the first artificial wormhole. Nit. The wormhole in ST1 was caused by a malfunction of the warp engine, so it was of corse artificial.

2.) The seize of V'ger is mentioned to be several (don't remember the exact number, but I used my pocket calculater when I remembered) AU. That's about the diameter of Plutos Orbit! WOW!!

By Derf on Friday, May 11, 2001 - 06:37 am:

The exact number was over 82 A.U.'s in diameter. Of course, an A.U. is the distance from the Earth to the Sun, or 92,995,933 miles (149,598,073 kilometers). That makes the V'ger cloud enormous indeed.

By Derf on Friday, May 11, 2001 - 12:21 pm:

Decker was also amazed at the "twelfth power" energy field that V'ger was generating. However, I don't have a notion as to how much energy that is, so I'm only amazed because they are. (If it is a genuine term of measurement, then I can probably look it up.) However, it sounds like "some measure of energy" taken to the twelfth power.

By Rene on Friday, May 11, 2001 - 12:56 pm:

"1.) In DS9 (Don't remember, which episode) they tried to create the first artificial wormhole. Nit. The wormhole in ST1 was caused by a malfunction of the warp engine, so it was of corse artificial."

I believe they were trying to create a STABLE artificial wormhole.

By LUIGI NOVI on Friday, May 11, 2001 - 02:19 pm:

The DS9 episode in question was the third-season "Destiny."

By Derf on Friday, May 11, 2001 - 10:53 pm:

>>I believe they were trying to create a STABLE artificial wormhole.<<

I believe they were trying to go to warp speed in order to intercept the "intruder" as soon as possible. They were NOT engaged in some unrelated "warp" experiement when the wormhole happened. Scotty himself said, "Cap'n, it was the engine imbalance that created the wormhole in the first place. It'll hap'n again if we don't correct it."

By ScottN on Friday, May 11, 2001 - 11:03 pm:

Sorry, Luigi, but it was "Rejoined". Destiny was where they were trying to create a permanent comm-link through the wormhole.

By LUIGI NOVI on Saturday, May 12, 2001 - 12:00 am:

Oops!

By Rene on Saturday, May 12, 2001 - 07:00 am:

"I believe they were trying to go to warp speed in order to intercept the "intruder" as soon as possible. They were NOT engaged in some unrelated "warp" experiement when the wormhole happened"

Okay...but it was not stable artificial wormhole, which is what the DS9 crew were trying to create. So it's not a nit.

By Kim on Wednesday, May 16, 2001 - 10:31 am:

Here is an interesting question in the History of all things Star Trek since 1966 when it first came on Tv,counting all the Movies, Novels, Tv Series, including the animated series, and All things Star Trek. How many continuity errors do you think have been made, how many contradictions, 1,000, 10,000 , 100,000
1 million. Please consider both canon and non-canon, I always thought the continuity people who work for the Star Trek Franchise Never made mistakes or very rarely.

By Rene on Wednesday, May 16, 2001 - 05:20 pm:

"I always thought the continuity people who work for the Star Trek Franchise Never made mistakes or very rarely."

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH