Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979) - Adventure, Mystery, Sci-Fi

Hohum Score



When an alien spacecraft of enormous power is spotted approaching Earth, Admiral James T. Kirk resumes command of the overhauled USS Enterprise in order to intercept it.

IMDB: 6.4
Director: Robert Wise
Stars: William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy
Length: 132 Minutes
PG Rating: G
Reviews: 170 out of 475 found boring (35.78%)

One-line Reviews (549)

Plus there's the intriguing V'ger plot that makes us ponder the unintended consequences of our technological hubris.

A mundane film bereft of the anticipated energy and verve .

Prolonged scenes of people looking at ships, clouds, man it was quite non-entertaining.

This film suffers from lingering shots of space that are pointless.

So even the most fascinating science fiction concept within the movie doesn't really work out, which is a shame.

Its a shame that the commentary seems to have been wrote down and recorded separately instead of together as it seemed informative but was a tad boring.

It was so *slow* a ride that I felt really sick by the time Spock was trying to mind-meld with V'Ger.

And what was with Decker and Ilia, they got more screen time than Sulu, Checkov, Uhura and Scotty combined, and their sub-plot felt tacked on and pointless.

In fact you could even use the words awful and boring to describe it.

Whereas if you are a fan of slow-burning (and dare I say it?

Protracted: drawn out or lengthened in time; prolonged.

The new effects are breathtaking AND seamless with the original version.

Boring doesn't necessarily mean bad, the story is salvagable and the visuals are brilliant, regardless if the best parts are a shameless rip-off of 2001: A Space Odyssey.

Boring, shallow and poorly plotted.

The opening sequences were good and lull you into a false sense of security that this is going to be an exciting ride.

As the true main character, Stephen Collins comes off as rather dull.

The wormhole effect just gets weird and the trip through V'ger is just dull.

How can a film of space popcorn be so slow?

So as a whole, Star Trek: The Motion Picture, while being a slow paced and sometimes dragging film, is still a good work of art.

"The Motion Picture", however, is frankly just dull in the extreme.

The visual effects are impressive, though do look a little dated in places but they must have been stunning in their day and aren't distracting.

Perhaps the closest any sci-fi film has come to approaching the sheer visual spectacle and audience-intelligence-interraction quotient of 2001: A Space Odyssey, "ST:TMP DE" should at long last close the books of even the harshest detractors who have over the years claimed the original studio version to be slow, overly-drawn-out and long winded.

Watching this film was perhaps the most excruciatingly boring experience in my life.

It's like you walking at a brisk pace, you see someone walking slowly, yet you find that person so intriguing, you slow down at the same speed as that person.

" And "slow" this motion picture indeed is for large chunks.

While it might be tediously paced for many fans used to the more action driven films of the series, if you want a film that is both entertaining and awe-inspiring, then this is the film to see.

So sometimes really slow, as said the captain watching Enterprise and especially the Enterprise discovering the other space ship.

The writing is bland.

On the part of 'way too long' I can agree that the beginning was way too long.

If you're used to the TV show, then you will find this movie frightfully boring.

I was lucky enough to see it at the theater, and thoroughly enjoyed it.

The movie, after all that anticipation, turned out to be incredibly slow and ponderous.

That idea is both terrifying and awe inspiring at the same time.

Way too many slow, lonely scenes of outer space or the ship.

The story itself is pretty flaky and mundane.

At the time of it's release I thought it was pretty good, if slow.

However, Jerry Goldsmith delivers a fantastic score which makes the slow moments slightly bearable.

Imagine if Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman had walked into the Paramount offices and slammed THIS script on the table: A slow, solemn, philosophically dense adventure into a cloud of gas, with barely an action scene in sight and no conventional enemy.

Visually stunning, yet slow Star Trek film debut .

However, there are some good aspects such as the sumptuous score by Jerry Goldsmith, a quite stunning looking cloud and alien ship entity, and an ending that although is not as deeply profound as `2001', is clever.

What they got instead was a slow-moving, occasionally thought-provoking, visually impressive science fiction yarn.

It's both a visually stunning and an emotionally moving spectacle when the magnificent, newly refurbished USS Enterprise emerges from dry dock to boldly go forth into space once again.

The "staring" scenes (worst offenders - Enterprise & V'Ger) are frankly boring.

I was about 7 years old when I first saw this movie, and I was bored out of my mind.

I have tried to watch this movie several times, and I always fall asleep.

We get a long long sequence of the Enterprise going through a worm hole early on, that is neither intense or exciting, just hazy.

But when audiences watched it in the theater for the first time, it didn't seem thin, or slow, at all, and the ending was a kick in the butt!

Boring .

Pretty but plodding .

(The odd-numbered curse) It seems that most of the movie is stunning visual and special effects (made by George Lucas's Industrial Light & Magic) of the Enterprise, and V'Ger.

Criticized as the Motionless Picture, Star Trek: The Motions Picture's slowness is greatly exaggerated.

I appreciate this movie was trying to be different and intelligent, like "2001: A Space Odyssey" but what they missed was "2001" wasn't genius because it was slow and had lots or artsy pictures, it was because it was Symbolic and it was one of the first movies to show that cinema could be art.

Trekkers had been on the edge of their seats for 10 years, waiting for some new adventure of Star Trek, and THIS is what we get?!

" This movie suffers from $10 million worth of stunning special effects (produced at genuine warp speed to meet an insane deadline by Douglas Trumbull of "2001" and "Bladerunner" fame, after the original effects house was photon-torpedoed), mated to a $10 script, essentially a warmed-over version of one of the TV episodes.

Instead the effects look somewhat soft, even bland.

Goldsmith does a brilliant job of bringing the music to the forefront with strong melodies when the action is slow, and going more abstract to avoid distracting from the action.

Those 45 minutes were creepier and more entertaining than TMP.

The story though fitting perfectly within the mythos of the original series, some have criticized as being slow and with very little action.

But this is what makes the film so uniquely enjoyable, we have far too much of the crew staring at arguably drug induced effects, that it almost becomes part of the narrative.

Despite the slow pacing, the script has the various contending forces up the ante on each other at critical moments.

While I liked the exterior design of the refitted Enterprise, the interiors were bland as were the thankfully one-off uniform designs and, unfortunately, most of the dialogue and a fair bit of the acting on display.

I Can see why this movie angered a lot of Star Trek fans,It's downright dull,nothing ever really happens,and it gave us non interesting characters.

Feels a whole lot like you're watching a very artistic and visually stunning episode of The Original Series.

The other was my reaction when I first saw the stunning Persis Khambatta (plus, I believe her baldness added even more to her exotic beauty).

Some of the acting was wooden, some of the directing was shaky (particularly for a talent like Wise), and a lot of the script was dull or even stupid.

In my honest opinion, this is the least good of all 12 Star Trek movies (I haven't seen Beyond yet), for even The Final Frontier and Nemesis, generally considered to be the worst of the bunch, were more enjoyable experiences for me.

Even then, those are seemingly just bits of minutes and scenes that don't really dominate the film, but are among the most sluggish and pointless that bring the film's already slow pacing to a grinding halt for an entire period.


What appeals to me most about it is the evocative nature of the galactic environments - like the best escapist movies, after watching this you really feel like you've been in outer space; a two-hour holiday in the future.

The plot is as mind numbingly boring as everything else.

Yet the eventual Lost in Translation (2003) approach to immersing into the alien landscape can be both plodding or meditatively pure depending on one's perspective.

Worst Movie Ever .

The story of The plot, while a probably a good TV episode,(in fact, the story was to have been a pilot episode for an aborted 70's Star Trek TV show which was dropped in favor of the movie) was dragged out for SO long that it made the movie really dull to watch.

Spock finally integrating his human and Vulcan half was, well, fascinating.

The model is truly breathtaking, as is the set design.

Unfortunately, the same colors were chosen for many of the crew uniforms, which turn the bland into the downright boring.

I remember the first time I watched this movie, I did hide my opinion that was a slow, "no action" movie, the kind of "2001: A Space Odyssey" with more dialogue.

Look, I know that the original multicolored uniforms were too garish, but the new costumes for this film are really bland and ugly looking with Dr. Leonard 'Bones' McCoy (DeForest Kelley) looking the worst.

I'm not saying the story is poor, just very drawn out and lacking in any real action sequences to jolt the pace every once in a while.

I'll admit that you can get a little drowsy when watching it, probably because they sort of made the Enterprise interior a little too bland, and I have to admit the uniforms are like pajamas, and were rather pale looking compared to TOS uniforms.

A clever plot, superb special effects ( Star Wars never tried to light the miniatures like the Enterprise), a truly stunning score by Jerry Goldsmith.

This meant that it followed 2001's slow pacing and it seemed like the filmmakers had to show off the model work in laborious shots as Jerry Goldsmith's fantastic score played in the background.

Yes its Slow and Long, It's still one of the best Treks.

Originally I watched this on release and as a 9 year old found it boring , upon watching this several times since , it is a lot better than first thought and has some very interesting scenes and a decent plot , still fairly slow going though .

The first 40 minutes or so of this movie runs very slow, mostly, development of the mysterious "cloud" as a threat.

I think that unless you like to watch the camera linger on the Starship Enterprise for a long time at the start of the movie, or you quite like seeing characters acting in a way that's completely out of character for what's already established as normal behavior for them, you'll find this movie to be a bit boring.

In today's eyes, the pace is too slow.

But the deep, intriguing internal struggles that the characters battle throughout the movie, and the human insight that we get through the analysis of the journey and desires of the huge alien that the Enterprise faces here is the kind of stuff that only "Star Trek" gives, and it is a highly commendable rarity in cinema and television.

The first Star Trek film of 1979 is an exciting, expansive and rather tense first foray into feature length filmmaking for the popular franchise - a bold going where very few, if any, television shows had gone before.

It creates confusion.

Star Trek - The Boring Picture .

This movie moved at such a slow pace that I always would get bored with it and quit watching it.

The archive of TV spots and trailers is my favorite aspect of the DVD's features disc: it is fascinating to compare conventions of 70's movie advertising to those of today.

I was rather bored and confused at the goings-on, I'm afraid, and I really didn't care for it.

If you think the original series is slow, then avoid this film.

But, the special effects were excellent, the music was absorbing and the story was very good.

As it was going it seemed like it was going to be a dull affair with a lot of space jargon.

There is not much action such as in Star Trek II, but the movie is very cerebral and is really entertaining.

OMG, one of the most boring Sci Fi Movies ever .

This film is a crashing bore, exacerbated by a tedious, plodding fly-around of the new Enterprise in spacedock, endless shots of crewmembers staring, goggle-eyed, at the bridge viewscreen, including Sulu (really, George, we KNOW you are better than this), and pompous, hammy, stilted acting.

After that is when it gets the most boring, as the movie lumbers to a stop.

Yes this movie moves at a very slow pace, it's not an action packed thrill ride.

And there's far too many long shots of going through V'Ger where nothing happens except the ship moving.

The sets are unattractive;the bridge looks dull and boring.

Boring, the only thing that keep me awake was this stupid kid who went to the bathroom 6 times and another 2 to the snack bar.

thankfully, some of the later Trek films were far more entertaining.

This is the dullest of all the Trek movies, and driest, there is no humor, drama or even emotion in this movie, and it plays like it feels, slow and painful.

The movie moves at a slow pace, gradually getting into the intricacies of the alien menace.

The pacing though a bit slow builds in its registered characters brilliantly.

Quite possibly the dullest of the "Star Trek" films .

Obviously a lot of time was given into making a stunning visual display of what an intergalactic traveling space probe would look like after it has continuously picked up life from throughout the universe, and the filmmakers sure took their time showing it off to you.

In short, the machine, although completely perfect in science and logic, is lonely and empty.

On the plus side, the film did get off to a rousing start both visually and sonically (Jerry Goldsmith's score is stellar) and the special effects were good for their time.

The plot was compelling and interesting, and it felt right for something with the Star Trek name on it.

The opening sequences are far too drawn out, and feel like the CGI guys were tasked with just showing what they could do in that era.

Once you get past the reintroduction of the original series characters (and some new ones), the updated Enterprise, and the plot premise, this film is hella boring.

Plus, you get to kick off your marathon with the excellent Wrath of Khan, instead of this snooze fest.

The beginning is weak but the ending is great and in between is interesting plus stunning especially when Spock enters into the heart of the ship.

They need to be better drawn out for being so central to the story.

I still consider this worth watching.

It has its rough bits and drags in parts, but the amazing special effects and race to encounter an unknown enity are exciting.

Combine this with an entertaining script and you have a blockbuster formula.

a bit too slow at moments .

it's definitely worth the watch.

The visuals of this film, and the V'ger sequences in particular are still stunning some 30 years after they first appeared on the big screen.

What results is a bloated, over-long, and relatively pointless movie.

Easily one of the most fascinating scenes in the film.

); my first concern was seeing the faces of the first audience as they exited - flat, dull, vaguely sad.

The special effects sequences were way too long and confusing.

In fact, there is no such thing as a good, slow movie.

The iconic cast is fine, given the constraint that they daren't deviate from their 'original series' characters, and honorary 'red shirts' Decker (Stephen Collins) and exotic Deltan Ilia (Persis Khambatta) are OK (Khambatta's scope is greatly diminished when she becomes a monotone voice-box for V'Ger).

Very slow and boring.

The first half hour is the reintroduction of Kirk and then the slow sweeping shots of the Enterprise that last forever and pan over every single nook and cranny of that ship.

Ho-hum rehash .

It's drawn out, and I felt that a lot of the scenes could have been cut down to about half their length, and they still would have gotten their points across.

But the beat of the film is plodding; unlike the slick lightning bolt action of Star Wars two years earlier, Star Trek: The Motion Picture flows like forty-weight motor oil.

At 136min of runtime this send-off Star Trek into cinema suffers terribly from overlong, drawn out pacing and some dated music.

And finally Spock, duller than even a Vulcan should be...

"2001" lacks characters to care about; it's also cold and overly artsy, with way too many unnecessarily boring sequences.

My theory is that they were pretentious attempts to emulate Kubrick's 2001.

Even though this movies has several short comings, dullness and boredom are the main ones.

I can't even bring myself to call the ending a climax because nothing happened in it.

In the end, the movie is just like the people, bland and devoid of enough character to make it really interesting.

A problematic mess but still enjoyable .

As he does of his stunning visual effects which gave the science-fiction movie genre (just shook up by the success and style of Star Wars) back a more composed and respectful stance.

After screening this effort, you'll need to apply an entire box of Bland-aids.

that it is boring...

But if you can stand staying awake through the slow part, then it makes it worth the wait.

Anyway, I guess I would recommend this movie to any and all Star Trek fans…it is a filler…or maybe more of a continuation, intended as an introduction to more worthy and exciting journeys.

Well, first, instead of focusing on the "Big Three" (Spock, Kirk and McCoy), the film brought in new and amazingly dull characters to spice things up!

Afterwards, I told the first person who asked me - how was it, that I nearly fell asleep in my seat.

The pacing of the movie is also off, as we spend several minutes with boring visual effect show-off scenes that do nothing to further the plot, as well as many conversations so forgettable that it's hard to remember what happened the moment the dialogue is over.

It had some long unnecessary drawn out space seens going back and forth for 15 min showing space ships in space from different angles and reaction shots.

Combine that with one of Jerry Goldsmith's best musical scores, and you have a movie going experience that I find very engrossing, if a healthy couple of steps from great.

Like Forbidden Planet (1956), this original Star Trek has as its core a solid, inspiring sci fi revelation of the mysterious unknown and established like Alien (1979) released the same year, a fascinating and involving movie experience in the sci fi genre though the latter has held up better.

)I was left with the sick feeling that the quality of the original series was largely due to its budget limitations, and that what I had just seen was the sort of boring tripe that would have been routine if only they'd had the money for it.

Boring: Uninteresting and tiresome; dull.

The reason the movie was a little slow was to re-familiarize the audience with the ship and crew - and to effectively introduce them to a new generation of viewers who were getting their first view of this magnificent show.

When it was over, and I left the theater, I have to admit it was nice seeing the old Star Trek gang back together again, for one last time as I was sure that after this Galaxian Slide Show, it would be their last appearance.

I had to watch this movie three times before I could stay awake through the whole thing.

I'm sure most people who criticized this movie also consider Blade Runner and 2001 boring.

The first time I saw this film I was 18, I thought it was interesting but too long and a little boring.

Fell asleep 30 minutes into it .

There is an obvious over-reliance on (very poor) visual effects throughout the film, which manages to bore rather than engage the viewer.

They are little more than boring intruders stealing screen time from the people we really want to see in action.

Film quickly bogs down into a slow journey to the climax, stretching out 10 minutes of plot into a two hour movie.

To counter this threat, Admiral Kirk takes command of the Enterprise and leads the Enterprise in an intriguing battle with this alien entity.

I remember watching this movie when I was a kid and thought it was utterly boring, much like Space Odyssey 2001.

Kirk is like a bossy brat, trying to wrest control of the Enterprise from Decker - who is himself a truly bland personality, distracting from all the characters we know and like better.

I will say that the movie works in a slow, methodical 2001: A Space Odyssey way.

shred lots of lettuce; of course everyone knows toast is better than plain bread (so what if your toaster is slow, it won't matter).

When I first saw this as a kid it bored the hell out of me so I often dismissed this and went straight to Wrath of Khan.

Ilia's slow transformation to "human" is gone.

It takes way too long to get all the characters together and even longer to actually get the main plot together.

The space snooze cruise to meet the misunderstood "V'ger" is unbelievably dragged out for the sake of showing off all those expensive optical special effects.

Despite this, I highly recommend it.

But the film is highly confusing,with a story that often seems all over the place.

Only fans will tolerate the unbelievably slow pace and forgive the excesses this film has an abundance of.

I recommend getting the Director's Cut, which i have, and makes it infiantely more enjoyable.

The movie's unnecessarily long run time due to its drawn out scenes of ships, clouds and space, and a boring substandard plot which makes use of none of its strong characters, makes me wonder why I even bothered to write this review.

But the primary focus, the experience of first contact is intense and riveting as any in sci fi movie history.

This movie had me bored beyond belief in that whole middle section.

Not only is the plot at least a partial rehash of one of the episodes, the pacing is incredibly slow.

The plot is plodding and not in the least memorable.

As stated before, The Enterprise is simply stunning.

Star Trek: The Motion Picture is a very entertaining movie for Science Fiction and or Star Trek fans.

Boring beyond belief.

I went to the cinema to see Star Trek: The Motion Picture when I was eleven, expecting a Star Wars-style space fantasy full of bizarre aliens, exotic planets and cool space battles; what I got was a dreadfully dull dollop of cerebral, existential sci-fi.

It is just shame that it loses something in the plodding storyline.

It come across, as hilarious to watch, rather than compelling.

The sequence with the Klingons was remarkable, and the opening sequence was really exciting.

Also, it gets downright boring for long stretches.

And their were some exciting moments.

But much of the portion set in the cloud is rather tedious.

The film is widely regarded as "bad" whereas it is not bad, merely slow moving.

A good film, but a tad pretentious .

The story itself is a bit boring.

It's grandiose stuff, worthy of discussion, but why did it have to be so painfully slow?

The special effects are a particularly stunning element of TMP which is now all to easy to gloss over.

The film takes some of the way-out there ideas of the New Age and puts them into something that is both entertaining and thought provoking.

The characters are bland, the effects, while okay, are nothing "special", the running time is padded out with a plodding tour of the redesigned Enterprise in spacedock, and that scene with a pop-eyed Sulu apparently staring, mouth agape, at the interior of the colossal V'Ger probe is absolutely hysterical.

It's slow moving, gets too long and doesn't have the fast pace of the original show.

The sense of scale in this movie is breathtaking.

Example of slow, the second Kirk scene is him beaming up into a space station and then a 5 minute ride from the station to the Enterprise.


A very good but somewhat slow start to a uber-cool Star Trek film series which is based on the classic sci-fi TV show.

To sum, ST: TMP has it's up and down points, more the latter, and if you can tolerate slowness and some bad acting, then this the film for you.

What a waste of time and money .

Compared with Star Trek II, it, of course, comes off as slow for an action movie, which it is not.

Spectacular, exciting , fast-paced , thrilling this is the description of this new outing of Star Trek , film that reinvents the saga through a perfect pulse narrative that does not give a second of rest to the spectator who is trapped for two hours approx.

This prime-numbered edition features bland hunk Stephen Collins sporting a Dick Tracy two-way wrist radio, Phersis Khambatta as the bald chick (long before the grunge look was pop), and the rest of the lethargic crew mailing in their performances.

This film is long and boring.

A (literally) star trek in the opening (still not sure what the screen saver was all about prior to the credits rolling) followed by 45 minutes until the Enterprise actually leaves space dock, the movie is so incredibly slow.

Anyone who thinks that TMP is too slow really expects that all science-fiction is Star Wars with lasers blasting and WWII-style dogfights.

Overall, I think I can say I enjoyed watching Star Trek: The Motion Picture as it brings back all of the same characters and dynamics from the original series, but the story dragged and I don't feel like this was the particular plot they should have revolved the first feature film around.

I thought the film was finally going somewhere with the growing tension between,Captain Kirk and Decker,but it all just seemed to stop after that,by growing more and more boring by the second.

Each episode treated the viewer to a fascinating science fiction adventure story that had a very relevant undertone of social commentary.

The pacing for this movie is unbelievably slow as most of the runtime is spent with spacemen gawking over the view of a ship or a space cloud that looks like a giant vagina, then follow by a lot of space jargon about trying to mind meld with a living machine.

I thought the new Enterprise looked fantastic, and the effects with the "Cloud" the team is investigating were beautiful and stunning.

It's just a shame that the story itself is tired, slow and relatively dull.

Well worth watching and unquestionably a significant film.

Its was certainly the worst of the Star Trek films - a very slow, plodding film, probably done (unfortunately) in the vein of 2001 - everything is shown in minute detail, and whilst may be accurate, it is not at all needed.

In fact, it has no script, it has an idea for a script that did not find any happy development.

There isn't enough plot, there isn't much action, the film is too long and the tedium really stretches.

It's a entertaining movie that you'll find yourself watching over again, and in there is the magic of this movie.

To Boldly Snore Where No Man Had Snored Before .

It's all special effects and little story, with the climax having Kirk and company find out V'Ger is the space probe Voyager 6, which drifted into this cloud and immersed itself with great energy.

In conclusion, the film's special effects, Goldsmith's music, and the presence of Nimoy were definitely great, but the film as a whole was a lot more dull than fun.

The last half-hour finally gets to the speculation and theories we expect, so it makes for a thoroughly entertaining climax.

When they chose Robert Wise to produce this he created tremendous special effects but all of them are over-produced & so long that they make the viewer bored & interrupt the plot flow of the movie.

Despite A-list director Robert Wise, the film lacks any real drive and ends up simply being an overly serious, lengthy, vaguely pretentious, and simplistically delivered episode of the original T.

The main title theme is a loud, bombastic, and exciting piece of music to say the least.

Anyway, that's my only major complaint about Star Trek The Motion Picture, long and slow.

It makes it boring.

This is a Star Travesty, giving space exploration all the excitement of a long dull bus ride.

It's well made,it looks great visually,the special effects as I said,are decent,even breathtaking for that time,but at 136 minutes it's unbearable at times.

It's depth is evidenced by the emotional wallop experienced when Spock grasps Kirk's hand in Sickbay, truly revealing emotion despite his conflicting desire to attain a consciousness of pure logic; or later when Spock weeps for V'ger and comments on its personal dilemma, which perfectly coincides with Spock's own search for fulfillment: "As I was when I came aboard, so is V'ger now: empty, incomplete and searching.

Star Trek: The Boring Picture .

The uniforms were dull and not flattering.

Even the drab grey/white uniforms conveyed a serious, non-fun feel to the entire picture.

It was a compelling story with a mystery aspect to it.

So boring in fact I honestly cannot remember the majority of what actually happened.

The plot was also dull, and very pretentious.

Sadly, at the end of the day this film's plot is about 45 minutes worth stretched out to a little over two hours making it very dull and boring.

I mean I like a good sci-fi flick, but star trek for me has always been kinda boring (not pt 2.

Good concept, rushed production, slow plot .

Then we have the really long boring footage of the ships.

Initially, I agreed with many sentiments that ST:TMP was overly long, ponderous, and dull.

however, the rather dry, bland uniforms, slow pace, and even some of the cast seemed embarrassed to be there.

Oddly enough, as interesting as the story is, the pacing is very slow and the movie is often rather tedious.

1st watched 6/3/2001- 4 out of 10 (Dir-Robert Wise): Slow-moving and heavy-handed original entry in Star Trek movies tries to become too much and therefore doesn't work in very many levels.

I happen to be a fan of this film and while I understand its detraction's, overall find it to be an enjoyable film.

Lacks fun and emotion, but it's a spectacular and often intriguing space saga.

Spock and McCoy rejoin the ship and proceed to a stunning confrontation with V-ger.

The new cast members, Stephen Collins and Persis Khambatta, are bland and unimpressive.

There are some fascinating visuals in this film.

It's easy to see why Star Trek: The Motion Picture never set the box office alight, it's slow, very talky-talky, with lingering shots of things that you don't really know what they are and absolutely no action.

Yes, it is boring and pedantic yet visually stunning.

As such I think that only the Star Trek films that include the original cast are worth watching more than once.

But when you just have long shots and boring dialogue, it doesn't make it artsy.

Slow-moving and heavy-handed original entry in Star Trek movies...

Arguably as impressive is Jerry Goldsmith's rousing score, a memorable theme which outdoes even John Williams' work in Star Wars.

The special effects, though very slow moving and primitive by today's standards, still look good for their time.

It's dull, long, and boring because of its pacing.

The original cast always had great chemistry and the special effects combined with the orchestral music is relaxing to watch, even if it does drag the movie on far too long.

But for all that, the director's cut still casts an enchanting spell, because it retains the character-rich feel of the ABC broadcast and avoids the plodding emptiness of the theatrical cut.

People claim,that the result is a very boring and slow moving film.

Absolutely beautiful to look at,but the film's pacing is unbearable,I honestly think i'd rather watch Paint dry.

Star Trek:The Motion Picture is a boring movie.

Every performance is incredibly bland and uninteresting.

The studio production costs was spent in the millions to bring this extraordinary film to the big screen in a way Star Trek was never seen before,and it was just that,breathtaking special effects and high adventure as the crew of the U.

) Most enjoyable on disc, as the viewer can create an "intermission".

The special effects were indeed stunning and I enjoyed Jerry Goldsmith's Music along with the updated technology it was indeed a site to behold.

People enjoyed it a bit more, back then.

But instead of treating us with space battles and phaser shootouts, it gives us long, loving shots of the newly revamped starship Enterprise, and instead of rather tawdry plots grounded in mundane reality, it takes us on a metaphysical voyage into an unknown, bizarre, and palpably huge alien device.

If you don't mind the slowness, it is enjoyable.

Excellent intriguing Sci-Fi, great character synergy and I liked the slow down in pacing when it came to observing all of the huge set pieces.

In late fall of 1979, I saw this long awaited epic with the intense anxiety of a kindergartner waiting for Christmas.

Overlong, slow and worthy but interesting and engaging .

Strong Film Containing Boring Sequences .

I just read up on this movie, and saw that the director was falling asleep during filming.

Really, really boring.

Many long scenes with very slow camera movement and music playing trying to build intensity when little to nothing is happening.

In today's eyes, the pace is too slow .

For years I called it "Star Trek--The Motion Boredom.

No; Long, slow, boring movie, with an obscene amount of loud and annoying special effects.

The only scenes of its more than two hour running time that I found in any way compelling were the scene where the V'Ger probe first boards the Enterprise and absorbs / kills Ilia, the scene where Kirk, Spock, Dr. McCoy and Decker learn the true nature of V'Ger and where Decker merges with it and the final scene where we finally get a sense of the camaraderie between the Big Three (namely Captain Kirk, Spock and Dr. McCoy) which could be found in abundance in TOS.

WHile some people claim that the film was too slow, or too boring, I look at it like this.

The Story of the Ship That Flew Really Slow .

This was one of those painfully dull movies that you just want to end.

) It is something called Vejur, and, as the movie progresses, the slowness of the plot is worth the wait once you find out what Vejur is.

And it has some of the most breathtaking special effects you're ever likely to see in a Star Trek film.

Visually spectacular but boring, slow and could have been so much better .

Exciting and spectacular movie that originates the continued series cinema .

The human journey combined with the exciting, intriguing stories is what makes "Star Trek" great.

As another reviewer at the time observed, unlike Star Wars, where the spaceships zip across the screen, in this Canis Magnus of a film, the spaceships take forever to get somewhere, and, when they get there, nothing happens.

The most boring part of the movie was when the Enterprise started touring inside of V'ger as if doing window shopping.

Followed by far more entertaining "The Wrath of Khan" (1982), which jump-started the franchise and extended the original NCC-1701 crew's mission by another decade before they were finally put out to pasture in 1994's "Star Trek: Generations".

It's well worth watching; you'll forget the previous version and come away thinking, "dang; that was good!

It's complex plot and story are somewhat difficult to follow, unless you are a child genius or just the offspring of a hard core Trekker/Trekkie.

Also, the scenes involving the "Enterprise" being caught in a wormhole and the probe from V'ger terrorizing the bridge are intense assaults of light and sound that, when over, cause sighs of relief.

emotion card has been played out so many times in the TV series that at this point its simply a tired cliche in desperate need of retirement.

Although is title to be a adventure and action film ,about seventy five percent of the flick, is some guys wearing stylized pyjamas talking for scientific theories, which would be fine with a kid friendly documentary about science, but in a movie it comes out as boring.

Only Goldsmith apparently knew how dull this movie was to begin with, that and he was scoring 'Alien' at the same time.

The film is ultra boring, we wait ages for anything to happen.

Any sense of awe is soon replaced by total boredom as it slowly floats by, shot from a dozen different angles.

Star Trek: The Motion Picture arrived in the wake of Star Wars and, with Paramount's publicity department in high gear, the general public was expecting something as big, loud, and exciting as George Lucas' 1977 adventure.

It is sad that such a good story is buried in protracted and boring narration.

This has the distinction of being one of the most boring movies ever made.

Every stereotype about Shatner is completely true, and I found myself in hysterics after some of his totally monotone delivery.

Of course, they had great ideas written into the plots, but it was those moments of tension and action during each act which made them so exciting.

The story is solid, the visual effects are stunning, the score is incredible, and all the elements that made Star Trek a hit are there.

Or maybe explain why it's going so slow.

The theme of logic versus emotion should be engaging, though the plot is so slow, it's hard to become truly involved with any of it.

Slow and dated .

A bit difficult to follow (considering that they only had a few months to film the movie AND do the special effects!

Who else but the pretentious Star Trek folks could take themselves so seriously that they re-tread one of the more mundane and forgettable plots from their 1960s TV show and turn it into a TWO-hour star bore.

Unfortunately, all that money seems wasted on a story that's kind of a snoozer.

It was slow, ponderous, and just barely watchable.

Boring .

Very slow and boring .

I truly don't know why I waited 37 years to watch the movie, but if I knew how slow and boring it was, I would have waited another 37 years.

And while that was enjoyable fun, that WASN'T why we waited in line!

I found those questions to be intriguing.

The original tv series was oddly fascinating and the main characters on the series, Captain Kirk and Dr. Spock, became household names.

What a boring plot-way too infantile and profoundly philosophical!

If youre only looking for the stereotypical captain against an enemy with a bunch of action to distract the viewer from the fact that theres not much substance to the movie, then this one is going to bore you.

I know that this review may angry some trekkies, but lets be honest here, the Motion Picture does not hold up, sorry but despite that it isn't for any reason a bad film, the fact remains that is boring and dated.

It's not a masterpiece, but I enjoyed it.

As one reviewer once put it, unlike "Star Wars", where the spaceships zip across the screen, in this film the spaceships take forever to get somewhere, and when they get there, nothing happens.

I still recommend The Motion Picture, but at least five of the sequels would turn out to be better (or at least more enjoyable) films (First Contact, The Undiscovered Country, The Voyage Home, The Wrath of Khan, and Generations).

And in that regard I think even a lot of ST fans are going to find it difficult to sit through, and simply too long and uneventful.

Despite the gorgeous model work and special effects, there really isn't much action to this, and the pacing overall is rather slow.

The film is at least profoundly boring.

Some scenes simply take FAR too long...

To all who mentioned that this is a slow movie has missed the full scope of this film.

Even so the unknown menace in this movie remains one of the most intriguing in sci fi movie history in appearance and overall immensity of the threat.

I'm sure 40 years ago these scenes were stunning, but now they are just long, drawn-out, hum drum affairs.

But the main thing bogging the movie down is the pace - it is incredibly slow.

Whilst not entirely suited to trek fans, (I agree with 'rlopes2905' comment on that point) with its slower pace, and long running time, it is in keeping with the original vision of the whole concept.

Stiff, rigid, slow...

When people call the Motion Picture "slow," what they really mean is that they don't care about the plot.

Agonizingly slow and duller than a stale pretzel.

Seems straight forward enough as the team are sent to intercept a mysterious alien phenomena heading towards earth, but I liked how the plot has its intriguing twist at the end.

In the scene where Scotty takes Kirk out the enterprise and they do a slow pan around it, many of us including me were in tears.

The music by Jerry Goldsmith adds hugely, it's rousing stuff and the main theme is iconic.

To be replaced by endless boring pans through scenery so dark and meaningless as to make the green end-of-reel-umpteen interesting!

But, too many long shots of the viewscreen followed by close-ups of each crewmember's reaction begin to grow repetitive, and there seems to be a certain lack of motivation in the film.

You could think of it as some sort of sexual function, but I think rather it was two beings, one a machine, another, a human, who felt empty and unfulfilled.

And as our heroes gather together to go off into the unknown I was on the edge of my seat despite having seen this at least half a dozen times before.

but its still very enjoyable sci-fi.

First of all, there is way too much special effects footage, most of which is drawn out and boring.

It was very compelling.

If the movie seems slow, then it is incapable of keeping your attention for very long.

Many people say that it is a boring film, that nothing happens.

Non-fans were bored, and even fans recognized that something was missing.

It's slow moving and asks for more cerebral involvement.

The cast sit there starry eyed looking bored whilst the optical effects try to emulate 2001 A Space Odyssey.

Slow & Intriguing Space Mission .

Star Trek still needs it moments of action, humor, and camp, like the Original Series, to really remind one of why Trek can be so enjoyable.

Fascinating premise, disappointingly executed .

Some of the interior details don't really work, especially the bland and implausible uniforms (Kirk gets to wear an official Star Fleet T-shirt, perhaps to reward William Shatner for the crash diet he put himself on to diminish the captain's middle-age paunch).

It's so grandiose that alone is worth watching.

This movie is mostly for fans of the classic tv show, but non-fans might find it enjoyable.

Sure, there were some great scenes and good character moments, but the thing was so slow and serious!

William Shatner describes the film as "molasses slow and yawn inducing" in his book "Star Trek: Movie Memories (which I highly recommend) Robert Wise, the director, has always felt that the film was ruined by rushed editing and poor special effects.

Fast beats, slow beats, high beats, low beats.

But it's also really, really slow, constantly bringing the story to a halt for another effects sequence.

Beautiful, but as dull as watching paint dry .

Sure, the characters are dull, the humor is almost gone and the pacing is a bit sluggish.

Some really nice set design on that ship (drab palette notwithstanding), and even her captain is sportin' a new set of guns.

It's slow, often painful pace will drive most viewers to go refill drinks during takes.

A lot of the effects shots can drag out for quite a while, and some things can even get confusing as a result of that.

That said the movie has interesting visuals, great music, an engaging cast, a touching love story, and one of the most eerie and mysterious adversaries ever.

That said, the pluses are the visual effects, which are occasionally tremendous and the score, Jerry Goldsmith at the top of his game - in either respect it can't be faulted but its an unforgivably boring two hours - humourless, slow and characterless so that Shatner, Nimoy and co. look and sound awkward, like a bunch of workers trying to stay civil following a massive argument.

The film is engaging and workmanlike enough in equal measure to work as both decent escapism and as smart, brooding science fiction.

" However, I must confess that "slow" is an imprecise criticism.

Those found the film boring simply failed to penetrate beyond the surface.

It's this initial sequence which immediately sets the tone and, unfortunately, the slow pace for the rest of the film.

Yes this movie moves at a very slow pace, it's not an action packed thrill ride.

The film takes a philosophical approach to "Star Trek", making a slow furthering of the plot appropriate, since it gives you time to reflect on the information you're given.

Trust me I know I have been watching Trek since I was in diapers during the original run (and I've seen every film opening day first show) and this is possibly the dullest two hours in the entire 40 plus year history of Star Trek.

Has some interesting elements but it's mostly being a bit of a bore.

The entire film is very slow paced as compared to the original series.

" While I can see the point of that (this movie is rather slow and has very little action), it really isn't (and wasn't) fair to the movie, as a whole.

' In order to give this picture a fair ado, I opted to sit through this bore-a-thon one more time.

Instead, it seems to take an eternity for the crew to become assembled aboard the Enterprise, and seemingly half the film's running time has elapsed before Kirk, Spock and McCoy are actually in a scene together, which is a major misstep considering that their relationship is what made the original show so entertaining in the first place.

In this movie everything is going slow.

Combine this with great modeling and special effects work, a score which is divine and a lovely slow pacing and you've got a philosophical, exciting, adventurous and above all, a true "Star Trek" film.

There are beautiful sequences reminiscent of 2001: A Space Oddessey, another painfully slow moving film and one which I personally disliked.

So, what else did I find dull about the film?

The major "villain" in the film is a piece of intriguing Sci-Fi, and not necessarily an enemy.

From there, they get sucked into the cloud and embark on a dark, atmospheric, visually stunning and psychologically gut wrenching adventure of Paramount proportions.

The Slow ponderous special effects were magnificent on the big screen.

Every shot of the Enterprise is drawn out to a painful length: a shuttle journey past the docked ship takes almost six minutes and is excruciatingly tedious, while the journey into the heart of V-GER is at least three times that, giving FX guy Douglas Trumball and his crew plenty of time to experiment with colourful visuals.

I've read many reviews on TMP and many of them say that it was slow, "2001: A space odyssey" style and I agree it was kinda slow.

A Little Slow .

When this film came out all the Star Trek fans rushed to see it and even though they may have hated it and found the story boring and lifeless they forced themselves not to admit it.

I'm more bored now when I try to sit trough this mess.

Story-line => 3/5 (Pretty straightforward); Acting => 3/5 (Forceful acting noticed many times); Directing => 4/5 (First half was a bit boring, later part seemed nice); Visual Effects/Animation => 4/5 (Considering 1979 it's pretty good.

For the rest of you, who want a GOOD script, good acting, decent effects, and a soundtrack that isn't anemic, save your money.

That's right, as you've no doubt often heard, this movie is "slow.

I do admit however that these scenes go on way too long in places.

Its quest on "searching for its creator" seemed to be more ridiculous than intriguing, and that's not even considering the fact that it felt like it was making fun of humanity's need for our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

Plus, three documentaries, including one that sounded a bit ironic: They were in a rush to have the movie out in December, 1979; you'd wonder if they would have made the film's action (or lack of action) any slower if they could have taken their time.

There is however one major thing wrong with this film in that the script is a little boring with nothing going on, it takes almost 45 minutes for anything major to happen, and even then it doesn't really pick up.

Just be ready for something slow and atmospheric.

proved to largely be a waste of time.

One of the dullest entries in the "Star Trek" canon and that is coming from someone who has been a dyed in the wool "Star Trek" fan since 1995 and has seen every "Star Trek" production from the first TOS pilot "The Cage" to the most recent film.

But even on DVD, all polished up and spit-shined and simonized, this is still kind of a boring movie.

The regular cast from the TV show are all enjoyable here, though most are in the background with little to do.

I honestly tried to find one good thing about this movie, other than the cast, and the only thing I can think of are the visuals, which are impressive, but they show those visuals for far too long.

I like me, you've disregarded this film, give it a chance, it's very enjoyable.

Extremely slow and very light on dialogue.

Boring, emotionless, and with only a few bright spots .

Some of the criticisms of the film that I have heard in my discussions with people include phrases such as "frightfully boring," "way too long," and "chronically lacking in action.

THE MOTION PICTURE was criticized as boring, the acting wooden and uncharacteristic, and while I admit that THE MOTION PICTURE is not my favorite of the six films (that honor goes to THE WRATH OF KHAN) it is my SECOND FAVORITE.

And finally Spock - duller than even a Vulcan should be...

The rest is silly bickering and drawn out dialogue.

After that, the movie gets incredibly slow and boring.

It was so well written and deep that I could imagine Stanley Kubrick behind it and also the slowness of the movie was a reminder of Kubrick's 2001 although the scenes were not as polished.

This has to do with the fact that the movie has very little plot and takes a long time to get there.

Action: While this film contains some spectacular special effects, it ultimately is bogged down by long, and rather boring, periods of pure dialogue.

Slow pacing.

As a Trek film, this first feature can be a rather dry and bewildering experience, especially if you're looking to see the original Enterprise crew in action.

The 'yes' – some studio powerhouse wisely overlooked this obvious failure, and signed off on some really entertaining successors - brilliant move and thanks for that.

The special effects were mind blowing when I first saw it and, I suppose, still are (The little kid in me still thrills when he sees them!

The main characters are all cleverly reintroduced here in ways that play on and expand upon what was established during the show's run: Spock's planet of Vulcan is shown in greater detail than ever before, and his experience there puts his compelling fish-out-of-water nature front and center.

But it is kind of long and slow, one of the slowest movies in a long time, as slow as 2001.

A boring side-story involves the new young Enterprise commander (whom Kirk must replace), portrayed by the milky Steven Collins, and a very sexy bald chick who's as grumpy as the rest of the cast...

Drawn-out visuals; sluggish script and an overall slow pace makes a 'Fast Forward Button' a necessary.

I know that sound silly, but it isn't, for some reason you n ever get bored at that scene.

An interesting concept is bogged down by ponderous pacing resulting from production troubles that prevented director Robert Wise from having time to edit the feature.

The problem with the film was that it was excruciatingly slow.

While this may have been seen as necessary for new viewers or those that needed re-acquaintance it resulted in a very slow start to the movie.

As a kid, I found Star Trek: TNG boring and never took the time to watch the Star Trek films.

Leonard Nimoy seems bored.

However, despite the film being able to retain the original cast and characters from the show, and having some impressive new characters and cast members, every performer featured seemed rather bored with the material they were given.

I do like the way Wise gave the film a slow pace.

V'ger was intriguing, and I'm sure it and Nomad would've gotten along had the ever had the chance to meet...

As a result, and with the measured pace at which the story was laid out, many audiences thought it very tedious.

However, in addition to the slowness in this film, not much really happens in it at all.

Watching it today on Netflix streaming movies I am struck by how well this movie has held up over the years and is still entertaining.

Boring, bland, with no special moments that come to mind.

The acting is good enough with William Shatner leading the way in terms of any sign of emotion and while the ending is actually very exciting and surprisingly interesting, 'Star Trek: The Motion Picture' is nothing more than a decent sci-fi film.

He talked about how the pacing of the first Star Wars film was considered rapid at the time but by today's standards, pretty slow.

Boring you say?

The interviews with script doctor Jon Povill, Livingston, Stephen Collins (who played Will Decker), and others are fascinating.

Instead of showing us the updated interior of the ship, we get many, many slow-moving exterior shots of the ship.

Coherent story lines can be sacrificed for fast paced, exhilarating storytelling, or a dull, seemingly endless narrative can be the result of a big story being fully fleshed out.

The movie is really slow, kind of eerie, and almost no character work.

This film is boring, joyless, bland, tiresome, tedious, passionless, and amazingly unengaging.

The plot has all the vibrancy of watching paint dry.

The slow approach to the Enterprise will probably bore general audiences to tears nowadays; I find it not a second too long.


For a "bad movie" I really enjoyed it - might be my favorite of the series.

Theirs one more thing that is most confusing.

Too slow, boring.

Kline's Panavision photography is great to look at as are the effects (the bulk of which is handled by Douglas Trumbull, who did "2001" and "Blade Runner")are often stunning, although they are weak by the standards set by later entries.

On disc, it is possible to "edit" overlong or tedious chapters.

Where the film falls down is that there are just too many long, boring special effects sequences.

This made an already boring movie nearly unbearable.

The newly constructed Enterprise, refit and remodeled from the old ship Kirk used to captain for five years, 2 ½ years absent from the center chair (and obsessively desiring to captain the new one, given his position back after some intense needling of Starfleet, using Earth's current predicament as a means to do so), will intercept V'Ger and try to stop it from destroying Earth, its next stop, on a course for the planet.

This film splices these themes with returning characters and new disposable additions to the cast and cements them into an achingly protracted run time with precious little suspense, thrill or thrust from the drawn out narrative.

Then there was the directing which seemed to be made up of too many repetitive shots of the crew looking agape at the satellite, Veeger thing as they stared into the bridge viewer.

While nostalgic they were disappointed by its slow pace.

I often here people use words like boring, too long etc. Well yes, if we are expecting a quick-hit, film that can be digested in 90 minutes like a TV show, this is not that type of film.

" While those questions are explored in a meaningful way, it takes far, far too long.

Avoid "The Special Longer Version" on video, which some claim improves the film, but actually makes it even slower and features embarrassing footage better left where it was--on the cutting room floor.

But the story here is confusing, drawn out, and not very satisfying.

There were constant long, drawn out shots of the same thing.

Instead, the focus is on the star-cross'd relationship between the Deltan Ilia (a chilling Persis Khambatta) and acting-captain Decker (Stephen Collins), which is sadly rather drab and unconvincing.

After that it's about 1/2 hour of dazzling, dizzying special effects which leads up to a ho hum finale.

Pretentous, overwrought, and simply way too long considering the story, this was not the way to start off, and even many trekkies lament that this was without a doubt the worst of the Star Trek movies, an as time goes on, the movie has almost become unwatchable.

Where are the entertaining and well-written character interactions of the original TV series?

Think beige, boring cardboard and you pretty much have "Star Trek The Motion Picture.

While TMP features some sensational scoring, including the new Star Trek theme (which will eventually become the Next Generation theme), and a stunning love theme, both themes are reused ad nauseum, especially when the love theme pops up while Kirk leaves the enterprise in a space suit, looking for Spock.

Despite some might think of it as boring or too-long movie, this movie had the ability to keep me awaiting to know who/what was Vjur !

Despite the return of the original cast and a storyline not entirely dissimilar to the 'Nomad' storyline in the show, this film is let down by a very dull script and pedestrian editing that takes away what we loved about the original.

Perhaps lack of silly fighting makes (all too) many people to say that this film was too long and slow paced.

Shortly before that was when I officially got bored.

All of the characters, even Kirk, play second banana to the sets and special effects, which I found to be rather boring.

its for lack of a better phrase (you guessed it) boring.

This is mind blowing stuff!

Way Too Slow and Boring .

The plot is a non starter so i wont bore you with a breakdown here, needless to say its a side dish to the main feast which are the visual effects.

For the life of me I couldn't understand why such a weak story was used here and even more shocking is that the filmmakers were able to drag it out to a whopping 131-minutes, which was simply way too long.

Then there's pointless things like the wormhole sequence.

Its story is kinda smart, but parts of it, are indeed dull.

I read somewhere that by the time the Motion Picture came along, Roddenberry (the creator) no longer had control over his creation, which is so wrong; this is total disrespect of the one who contrived the whole thing.

Visually its the most stunning (of the Star Trek series any many others).

She is a Deltan navigator who has taken an oath of celibacy before working with other species, rather an entertaining little character twist.

The pacing of the film is incredibly slow, especially during the aforementioned visual effects laden scenes.

By now I was on the edge of my seat.

Sadly, the film is known to many people, Star Trek fans and neophytes to the series alike, for it's uneven script, it's slow pacing and some odd production decisions and character inclusions.


A lot of screen time is devoted to endless beauty shots of the Enterprise, there's a weird and silly scene where everybody's trapped in a wormhole for some odd reason, and there's a seemingly-pointless scene involving a transporter accident.

It is very slow – at times painfully slow and unfortunately this does mean that many viewers will have seen and understood the "twist" long before the film actually gets there.

Beam me out of here Scottie, this one is boring me to death.

The ship and costumes are too dull and lifeless, especially compared to the colorful uniforms and ship decor of the follow-ups.

It's still worth watching, though.


I thought it was fascinating that Kirk was there for the deaths of both Matt Decker in "The Domesday Machine" and Will Decker in this movie.

It is also, as others have noted, stunning visually.

The film series got off to a decidedly rocky start with this very slow-moving, ponderous affair that feels like a first act drawn out over 136 minutes.

Really boring film...

This movie was such a bore!!

A relentlessly boring bomb of a film.

I know that sound silly, but it isn't, for some reason you n ever get bored at that scene.

After all, Sergio Leone movies are slow, and people love them...

Unfortunately, the pace of the story is extremely slow.

This movie has a bad rap and while the theatrical version is too long and in need of some trimming, the movie is actually quite good, with great effects and an interesting story.

Doug Trumbull's work in creating the visuals is wondrous and at times breathtaking.

Alas, as much as I, a die-hard Star Trek fan, enjoy looking at the expensive new model Starship Enterprise, this is one of the most boring films ever made!

The uniforms are also bland, colourless and horrible looking.

Pacing: Slow and intellectual, pays homage to the best of the original series.

There is a thrown in and underwritten subplot, but there is an astonishingly clever and shocking subplot and a suspenseful climax There is a '2001' grandeur to Robert Wise's directing.

The soundtrack is beautiful but the overture with the star scape soon gets tiresome.

The main problem is that it is so boring.

The frequent shots of the Enterprise slowly moving along to Jerry Goldsmith's rousing score is just poor filmmaking not up to director Robert Wise's usual standard.

The story preempting the figures that make Star Trek what it is is poorly balanced in this film, and as a result just makes it a dry, uninteresting exercise in sci-fi and visual effects.

Also, the movie is too long, and I was bored at times.

V show as a kid, the original that is, and watching The Wrath Of Khan quite a bit, however the Original is just a big bore.

Breathtaking new CGI's that show the away-team walk from the hull to the V'Ger stage, some using the original live action shots.

Like First Spaceship on Venus (1960), there is a new level of sensory experience, perhaps even more thrilling than 2001: A Space Odyssey's psychedelic stargate sequence.

I had tried to see this movie again for years, remove it out of boredom.

As for Shatner, Nimoy and the others--they were about as bland and uninteresting as you'll ever see them.

In another way, it only makes an already slow film even slower.

" In a hopeless attempt to arrest "V'ger" as it is called, the crew stumbles through dry jokes and drawn out scenes, finally confronting and convincing the damaged probe that it has rejoined its creator once and for all.

Psychedelic boredom .

The shuttle goes slowly up the length of one side, then slowly down the other.

Way too long and rather boring.

original and good yet somewhat slow .

Arguably even more impressive is Jerry Goldsmith's rousing score, a memorable theme which outdoes even John Williams' work in Star Wars.

The plot, long-winded and rather mediocre, just doesn't cut the mustard for me personally, but it does service us with lots of Douglas Trumball visual magic, as we go inside the cloud and witness all sorts of unique imagery, stylistically colored, with fascinating patterns, most of which looks as if we were inside a computer.

The plot is intriguing.

Whether the purportedly emotional divisions scenes are compelling or simply tokenism can be debated (that between Stephen Collins and Williams Shatner and Shatner's exposure to weakness or the romance angle and the distinctly different form of its resolution).

Not bad by a long shot, but too disjointed to be great.

Believe me, I am the first person who'll admit that the flyover of the Enterprise in the spacedock drags on for far too long, and Jim seems out of character (until Spock shows up, and then it's all better) in the beginning.

Gives you an idea of what space travel would really be like: slow and dull.

Director Robert Wise has effectively blended a slow-burning approach to telling a space adventure with an overall narrative framework of race-against-time.

Boring .

This movie moved at such a slow pace that I always would get bored with it and quit watching it.

Equally i find the first 30 minutes in general a bit slow.

It's a rather boring film.

Star Trek: The Motion Picture often gets a lot of flack from Trekkies and non-trekkies alike for being slow-moving, awkward, and unlike the television show it was expected to follow.

About the only one who looked good in this drab getup was Nichelle Nichols.

Even the action scenes tended to be bland.

The storyline moves way too slow- BORING STUFF!