Why Star Trek: The Motion Picture Is Terrible, According To Patton Oswalt
Comedian Patton Oswalt explains why 1979’s Star Trek: The Motion Picture is a terrible science fiction film. Gene Roddenberry’s original groundbreaking Star Trek disappeared from TV screens in 1969. But ten years later the sci-fi franchise would get new life with the release of a feature film appropriately entitled Star Trek: The Motion Picture.
Production on this first Star Trek big-screen endeavor famously ran into multiple roadblocks, including huge problems with its special effects. The resulting film did well enough at the box office, grossing $139 million on a budget of $44 million, but nevertheless disappointed a lot of fans with its super-serious take on Trek. The movie has undergone reappraisal in recent years however, and now has many defenders who claim its deliberate pace and heavy tone are actually virtues rather than mistakes.
Related: Star Trek's Original Movie Plans Would Have Been Better Than The Motion Picture
One person not buying this Star Trek: The Motion Picture upward reappraisal however is comedian Oswalt. In a video piece for GQ breaking down his personal five best and worst sci-fi films, the Eternals star took a phaser to the 1979 big-screen Star Trek effort, slamming it for failing to capture the spirit of the Star Trek TV show. He said:
Star Trek: The Motion Picture is oatmeal-colored uniforms on a gun-metal colored ship. Everyone's in a bad mood. Nothing really happens. They get to this thing at the end where it's a Voyager spacecraft but it thinks it's God and you're like, «I've seen this plot a million times.» In fact, I think that was a plot of the Star Trek show. I'm glad that Star Trek: The Motion Picture exists though, because it is such an absolute failure in adapting the source
Read more on screenrant.com
