Would we have seen a Star Trek film in 1979 without Star Wars in '77?
 

As many of you might be aware, after the smash hit success of Star Wars, science fiction films, thought to be a mostly dead genre, suddenly started popping up all over the place. One such film was Star Trek I: The Motion Picture.

What impact did Star Wars have on 80's science fiction in general and the resurrection of Star Trek as a similar franchise?

Or is this a mere coincidence?

Consider that the Star Trek franchise used Industrial Light and Magic for special effects in every film, a studio created by George Lucas.

Use the force.

we probably wouldn't have had the last starfighter

lol, no, in all seriousness, Star Wars opened up the modern Space Fantasy/ Sci Fi Genre.

From what i recall star trek was written before star wars but then when star wars broke loose that broadcast company that had the rights to the "Star trek" dug it out of the cellar because they were looking for a (Space movie)

The only real pertinent question here is:

Who gives a rat's ass?

SoCalBronco.

Star Trek TV came before Star Wars the movie. So don't go there as far as ripping off.

Dude, lighten up. It's the off seasson.

I didn't say anyone ripped anyone off. All I said was the sci-fi well was dry in hollywood and no one was doing shit until star wars came along. Then everyone decided to ride on the coattails of Lucas to make some money. Including Star Trek.

I'm just busting his chops.

It appears that milkman is becoming the new Skip as of late. :p

Oh, man, I haven't thought about that movie in 20 years.... and for good reason I guess.

I think you quoted the wrong post.

Actually both answers are correct. Star Wars certainly fueled the overall interest in science fiction, but Star Trek was popular and already had a core of rabid fans. Fan interest had already led to the creation of an animated series in the early 70's, and would directly lead to the first Star Trek movie (originally, a second TV series with the original cast was envisioned). Even without Star Wars, Star Trek would have come back, in one form or another.

And personally, I was a big fan of Star Trek long before there was a Star Wars.

LOL...

Oops.



Fixed it.

But at the same time? I think Star Trek would have resurfaced around the late 80s, but it's clear they popped out a movie in '79 just to cash in on the craze.

It was already in the works. Star Trek didn't go from nothing to a completed movie in the space of two years.

Obviously, but they weren't putting anything out in '79 without Star Wars.

It didn't.

To bad.

That would have at least have explained why it was so disappointing.

Did you not read my first post? Yes, they were. It might have been a series instead of a movie, but they were developing something. In fact, several scripts originally written for the proposed second series were rewritten for Star Trek The Next Generation.

Yeah, that first movie sucked balls. Great visual effects, but a lame story (ripped off from an old episode) and particularly bad acting from pretty much everybody, especially a scenery-chewing Shatner. Those bell-bottom jumpsuit uniforms were ghastly as well.

They got it right in the Wrath of Khan, though.

in the wake of Star Trek's popularity in the early 1970s as a result of newborn Trek fandom and syndication, there were several failed attempts to produce a Trek feature film, starting in 1974.

Instead, in 1977, attention was turned away from a film and toward a second television series, to be entitled Star Trek: Phase II, as part of a fourth television network to be created by Paramount.

In the midst of preparation for shooting, Michael Eisner, then-head of Paramount, called a landmark studio meeting. Eisner was said to declare regarding the pilot, "we've been looking for a Star Trek motion picture for five years and this is it!" Despite already-existent casting, costuming, set production, and 12 written scripts, the new series, along with the new Paramount network, were both abandoned.

Work commenced on rewriting the Phase II pilot episode In Thy Image as Star Trek: The Motion Picture.

All this couldn't have come at a more opportune moment. By the end of 1977, Star Wars had become a huge box-office success, and Paramount put The Motion Picture into pre-production.

And you have no way of knowing whether or not things would have been revived differently/elsewhere had there been no Star Wars.

What is the point of this crap, anyway?

I'm confident there wouldn't have been a Star Trek film in 1979.

Maybe a TV series. But a movie? No way. It took a groundbreaking, once-in-a-century epic masterpiece like Star Wars to clear the way for Star Trek to rise from the grave.

STAR TREK I: GEORGE DID OUR SPECIAL EFFECTS!

I guess you missed 2001. :shake:

2001 didn't spawn anything. It came out in 1968. It was the exception to the rule - Hollywood wasn't making science fiction for the better part of a decade.

Then Star Wars came along and science fiction returned - thanks to the Messiah.

http://george.lucas.net/George%20Lucas2.jpg

That's capitalism dude, you have to strike while the iron is hot.

And you don't think any FX techniques from 2001 were applied to Star Wars? Give me a break.

I loved Star Wars. It played in the theaters for over a year and a half, and I saw it dozens of times before you were even a gleam (or tear) in anybody's eye. But there was plenty of science fiction before Star Wars, and lots of it was really good.

And there is this:

Star Wars: 6 movies.

Star Trek: 5 TV series and 10 movies, with No. 11 in development.

I agree, Wrath of Khan was the best Star Trek movie in the series.

I just loved that scene where the Monkey picked up the bone, studied for a little while, banged it on some other bones, saw that it was destructive, THEN GOT AN IDEA!!!111.

Then they went out and PILLAGED the other baboons, took their water hole and FEASTED on some MEAT> aaalahhaa.

Wow, out of one cult and into the next.

My personal favorite was First Contact, with Wrath of Khan running a very close second.

Close Encounters of the Third Kind also came out in '77 and was another Sci Fi pic that did well and is mentioned by Shatner as another influence in pushing for a film vs TV version. And Hollywood is just full of people who try to put forth something if it proves to be hot.

But Star Trek was coming back one way or another, and there would have eventually been a motion picture. But no doubt the success of sci fi movies in the late 70's helped the studio jack up the budget to get the film version made...

I fear that even clicking on this thread will mean a girl won't touch my penis for a month.

Doesnt that already happen anyways?? LOL

Actually, without Star Wars, there would have been no "Battle Beyond the Stars" and about 50 other low budget Sci-Fi movies in the late 70's, early 80's.....

I think the more appropriate question is "Would there have ever been a Star Wars if it weren't for the original Star Trek series?".

Growing up watch TOS

Star Wars was the after thought.

Star Trek did it all on it's own
:spock:

http://www.clicksmilies.com/s1106/st...smiley-023.gif

You're missing the point. None of that has anything do with 1979.

Absolutely. George was inspired by the classic serials of his childhood, including Buck Rogers.

Wasn't there plenty of sci fi in the 70s?
-Battlestar Galactica tv series.
-Soylent Green.
-A Clockwork Orange
-Logan's Run

No.

Oh, ok. Thanks for clearing that up.
:rolleyes:

Look, I loved both the Star Trek series/movies and the Star Wars movies. But for anyone to insinuate that the Star Trek movies rode the coat tails of Star Wars is just idiotic. As a sci fi fan, I'm just glad both were allowed to be created. I've enjoyed them all.

Shatner was just waiting for toupee technology to reach a level that fit his needs.

And speaking of the Star Trek movie that's in development, I think it is a mistake to go backwards with the Star Trek myth, and tell a story of how Kirk, Spock, and McCoy all became buds. You'd think they would have caught on to the fact that going backwards in the storyline isn't exactly what the fans want with the quiet cancellation of Enterprise.

The correct answer is "Not that I'm aware of, but I've never adequately researched anything other than Star Wars because that's all that is important to me".

siberian khatru and I share fond recollections of a couple pretty good British sci-fi series, and we still haven't addressed Keir Dullea's "Space Ark" series.

And, in so much as I'm not a huge fan, Dr. Who has been around forever.

UFO
Space:1999
The Starlost
Logan's Run (count Harlan Ellison among the writer's)
A Boy and His Dog (Harlan Ellison once again)
Silent Running (Classic!)
Colossus: The Forbin Project
The Andromeda Strain (another classic)
The Omega Man
THX 1138
Slaughterhouse Five (Reminding us all why we should be grateful for Valerie Perrine before Superman)
Westworld/Futureworld
Rollerball
The Stepford Wives ( a case where the remake did not live up to the original)
The Man Who Fell To Earth (Bowie's landmark )
Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977)
Alien
Mad Max

Y'know, just because you didn't experience an era, doesn't mean you should discount the contributions.

Did I kill this thread or what?

Will you marry me?

No, but I will race you to the 1974 version of Valerie Perrine. Or that chick from Logan's Run. We'll let GoCHiefs choose between Huey, Dewie and Louie.

Jenny Agutter

Great list...I'd almost forgotten about The Starlost. Interesting concept, I thought.

Oh, The Terminal Man and Ark II were also classic 70's. Didn't Le Guin's Lathe of Heaven (PBS version) come out in the 70's as well?

Again, I'm not interested in television shows. This thread is strictly about movies, and the 70s were a dry well for science fiction films before Star Wars. That's why Lucas had such a hard time selling it to anyone. Thankfully John Williams and Alec Guiness lent it some credibility or it would have never seen the light of day.

And he only had the money to make it because of American Graffiti.

456456

In my list, 15 of those were movies. And once again, you're and idiot. CEot3K is a masterpiece, , as is The Andromeda Strain, and Silent Running was wonderful as well. Alien? Fantastic. For indie sci-fi pics, A Boy and His Dog is legendary. You see, young man, before Gerge Lucas took Greek tragedy to the stars, other writers like Harlan Ellison, Ray Bradbury, and Kurt Vonnegut were writing REAL sci-fi. You can tell the story of Star Wars as a knights in shining armor tale, you can tell it as a western. Real sci-fi is dependant upon the technology. Star Wars is a Space Opera.

Another movie made post-Star Wars...

But still in the 70's.

Gochiefs seems to think that every sci-fi film released in 1979 was dreamed up by people immediately after they saw Star Wars. :rolleyes:

Braincase, Frazod > GoChiefs

Only movies that featured Peter Strauss, Molly Ringwald and Robert Urich. If the guy ever actually read a science fiction novel and understood the tenets of the genre he would understand the difference between science fiction and a space opera.

Keep it simple GoChiefs - start with "Ender's Game" by Orson Scott Card. It has lots of simple sentences and one syllable words.

This isn't about science fiction and space opera. I'm fully aware of that. And I've read plenty of "real" science fiction.

How the fuck would you know. You weren't even a gleam in your Daddy's eye.