Why did they make such a boring ass movie it defies all rules of pacing
>>223232087it was clearly influenced by 2001. They were trying to make a kubrick star trek film without kubrick.
>>223232087Stick to capeshit kid
>>223232087I agree with >>223232128... going for the Kubrick dollar makes sense for the time.Also starting competition with "Star Wars: A New Hope", released two years earlier too... using that infant ILM tech to see Star Trek in a new aesthetic too.Hence, "the motion picture".... a picture-qsue movie.... turning art into movie.It was the 70s... a different time, po-mo BS idealism....
>>223232128This. It's so obvious.
>>2232321282001 is the one with the monkeys, right?
>>223232128That and Roddenberry had full control. He hated the network made OS a space western. He wanted this liberal hippie utopia where money wasn’t needed and human conflict didn’t exist blah. mah. Nice except its boring as fuck
>>223232087The late 70s were big for both sci films and special effects filmsStar Wars in 77Superman in 78and then Star Trek in 79.I've never seen 2001 so I cant speak on that point, but my main gripe with this film is that they take the three amigos trio that everyone loves, and instead making them bicker and fight with each other for the first hour of the filmkirk is demanding and pushy, mccoy cant stop bitching, and spock has no emotions at all. Truly a bizarre move
>>223232087Your phone has fried your brain.
