Star Trek: The Original Motion Picture Collection (1979-1991)

[Moe UK]

I honestly don't believe what I am reading here, that people are suggesting IV doesn't continue from where III ended and ties up lose ends? If McCoy was to comment on this I am sure there would be something about people being out of their damn Vulcan minds.

[Hasslein Curve]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Yep, 4 is very much the capper to the ‘Genesis Trilogy’

Right? Weird post that was.


Filed under: common knowledge

[david_blu]

I can't believe all this talk about whether 4 is part of the trilogy, sounds like a god damn Spanish Inquisition!
....bad day.

[RegressiveScan]

Originally Posted by Spud_Almighty

Wait, so it isn't a trilogy? We've been calling it one since we were kids. If it isn't a proper trilogy of films story wise, what is it? I'm totally puzzled here. It's clear all three films are one continuous story and it's VERY evident. Why are people suddenly looking to find the lamest excuse to say otherwise?

Hey call ’em whatever you want, is all I’m saying. There’s no right or wrong terminology.

[RegressiveScan]

… folks, I think Maghen is trolling us.

[drb999]

I’ve never heard anyone say that 2, 3 and 4 were not a trilogy before.

[eastx]

Several people were facetiously teasing Drake. And even Darke was probably trolling for negative attention.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Lava_Lander

Are you sure it isn't time for a colorful metaphor?

I think he did a little too much LDS

[KC-Technerd]

Originally Posted by Spud_Almighty

That's not a trilogy. There's no overlapping story whatsoever.

Someone is taking my joke way too seriously.

[Spud_Almighty]

Originally Posted by KC-Technerd

Someone is taking my joke way too seriously.

Was it suppose to be funny? Might want to type better jokes.

[Hasslein Curve]

The more i look at the cover art for the standalone blu's the more i need to have them.

[ShellBeacher]

Originally Posted by Hasslein Curve

The more i look at the cover art for the standalone blu's the more i need to have them.

This is a dastardly trick Paramount has pulled...worthy of Khan...or at least General Chang!

[deadwalker]

I know the price will go down and it went up 3 different time for Amazon to make money.

[Hasslein Curve]

I have pre-orders already in for The Thing 4K and Dune 4K and i want the Dead Zone remaster too. I may wait on the Trek 4K set to drop in price and piece together the standalone Trek blu's in the mean time. [posting my thoughts out loud] Sorry.

[KC-Technerd]

Originally Posted by Spud_Almighty

Was it suppose to be funny? Might want to type better jokes.

I guess hoping that I could lighten the mood a bit was hoping for too much.

[AdmiralNoodles]

So I take it https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki..._Silver_Screen will still be exclusive to the 50th Anniversary set? I know the section regarding STAR TREK II: The Wrath of Khan was featured in the most recent Director's Cut release but I can't tell if it'll also be included in the remastered stand-alone Blu-ray disc and obviously as part of the 4K+BD set. Wasn't sure if it were even listed in the press release. Bit lost here...
Would be nice if all the parts from the documentary would be on each of the respective film discs. If it's still an exclusive to the aforementioned set, well then that's just absurd.
It's more than obvious to sell the BDs of The Motion Picture, The Wrath of Khan (Theatrical BD), The Search for Spock, and The Voyage Home for the remastered versions. Still haven't a clue to sell the Director's Cut BD of TWOK yet, because of that bonus feature which was included.
As I've already stated when the 4K+BD, I'm not counting the digital copies since I sell those, arrives to me from Bullmoose.com in September in the 4K side of this forum, I'll still be keeping the fanmade DVDs I have of TMP Special Longer Version and TWOK ABC TV Cut.

[Geoff D]

The Khan DC re-issue Blu cost me three quid so I’m not gonna sell it, it’s worth that much just for that ‘Genesis Effect’ documentary (which I watched last night, oddly enough). But yeah, it looks like the full version of that documentary is still exclusive to that other Anniversary set.

Watching some of the 2009 special features reminded me why the Blus were such a kick in the balls: for the clips of the films in the extras they used the untouched transfers minus all that dreadfully tacky DNR. It’s like they’re going neener neener neener, this is what it could’ve been. Bastards.

[kirkman1987]

The Journey To The Silver Screen documentary is excellent. Very detailed and candid. Maybe they are saving it for the eventual 6 or 10 film set….much as it was/is exclusive to the big 50th set.

[alexdg1]

Originally Posted by Spud_Almighty

Wait, so it isn't a trilogy? We've been calling it one since we were kids. If it isn't a proper trilogy of films story wise, what is it? I'm totally puzzled here. It's clear all three films are one continuous story and it's VERY evident. Why are people suddenly looking to find the lamest excuse to say otherwise?

Although when Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan was conceived the overall feeling among the cast (certainly Nimoy felt this way), writing staff, producers, and director was that II would be the last film in the franchise, it ended up being the first installment of a three-film arc with one overall story.

Star Trek:The Motion Picture was, for all practical purposes, ignored as far as the plot of The Wrath of Khan was concerned. Some footage from it was recycled as a money-saving device, but none of its events are mentioned. (Curiously, Vonda N. McIntyre's novelization does refer to it obliquely when she has McCoy mention the "Vejur Crisis" and Kirk's return to flag rank immediately afterward.) Nicholas Meyer, especially, wanted to get away as far from TMP as possible. That's why none of Jerry Goldsmith's score was used and Robert Fletcher designed more military-looking Starfleet uniforms.

So, yes. Even though Paramount tagged each of the five films that followed TMP with Roman numerals and kept the film as canon, the Spock Trilogy of II, III. IV was set many years afterwards (12 years is my guess, because TMP was set 2.5 years after the end of the original five-year mission and The Wrath of Khan takes place 15 years after its source The Original Series episode "Space Seed."

One could argue that II-VI is a loose quintet, with VI having a stronger connection to the Spock Trilogy than The Final Frontier (aka "Shatner's Folly"). But II, III, and IV are definitely a trilogy.

[chriszilla]

Originally Posted by alexdg1

So, yes. Even though Paramount tagged each of the five films that followed TMP with Roman numerals and kept the film as canon, the Spock Trilogy of II, III. IV was set many years afterwards (12 years is my guess, because TMP was set 2.5 years after the end of the original five-year mission and The Wrath of Khan takes place 15 years after its source The Original Series episode "Space Seed."

The original prints of II were simply titled Star Trek: The Wrath Of Khan. It wasn't changed to Star Trek II until a little while later.

Does anyone here know why Paramount felt compelled to change the title? (And did so rather quickly, if I remember correctly.)