Star Trek: The Motion Picture [novelization]

I went for the book of the film after reading terrible reviews of Star Trek: The Motion Picture, only to find that Roddenberry has translated perfectly into prose the out of character tedium of the big screen experience. Kirk is having a mid-life crisis, Bones and Spock have to be practically forced back on board the pimped-up Enterprise, and there is some golden-haired pretender (son of Commodore 'Ahab' Decker, no less, the one who went bonkers and fired himself into the doomsday machine) already installed in the captain's chair. At least I was spared the figure-hugging, neutral-tone uniforms. And the plot was a strange mish-mash of two episodes from the original series - Obsession and The Changeling. Someone should have reminded Gene that you can never go home again, even when recycling old plots: the magic of the series is missing from the 'motion picture', and nobody cares about the new crew members. (Saying that, I have downloaded The Search for Spock, just in case!)

What really baited me into buying the novelisation was this quote, however - Jim! Goodbye, my ... my t'hy'la! - and the supporting footnotes about the nature of Spock and Kirk's relationship, from Roddenberry himself. The promise of some weighty introspection is not followed through, though, barring those words from Spock and the sickbay scene, where Spock finally comes around and clasps Kirk's hand. So overall a forgettable translation of the film from 'the Creator' himself. ( )

This is better than the movie. Since the movie was absolutely awful, that's faint praise. At least one review here claims it was actually written by Alan Dean Foster. Really? Yes, I know Foster came up with the story on which the the script was based, but I doubt he wrote the novelization. First of all, because Roddenberry was the creator and producer of Star Trek, not just say, an actor, and part of his skill set was blocking out stories for episodes, even if others then filled them out into the scripts. So I see no reason to believe he wouldn't be capable of writing this. The other reason is that I think Foster would have done better--and this didn't strike me as in his style. I have read Foster's novelizations of episodes of the animated series. This novel has a very different voice (and alas a lot more fondness for italics and the exclamation point.)

So this isn't the kind of book that stands on its own merits, even by the standards of a work-for-hire product of a media franchise. Why rate it then as high as I do? Because I am a Star Trek fan and as a fan it is a must-read. It makes sense of parts of the film that make you go huh??? It gives you the thoughts of Kirk and Spock and thus gives them more dimension, and from the man that created the characters. It has background that never made it into the film such as Kirk's brief marriage to Admiral Lori Ciani, and that she was one of the people on the transporter platform killed in that grotesque accident and such Vulcan concepts as T'hy'la. So, if you're not a fan, why in the world would you buy this? If you are, then I can't understand why you wouldn't. ( )

I had to drag my way through this novelisation of the first Star Trek film. To my surprise, I found that Gene Roddenberry likes his prose purple and his naked Deltan breasts pointy. I mean, it is interesting to get a more comprehensive look into the minds of the characters. And few can deny that the book really *is* better than the movie. But that hardly makes up for the mediocre writing, dragging pace, or cringeworthy finale. ( )

ONDSKAPENS HOTELL by Stephen King, ISBN 8201010117;
STAR TREK, by Gene Roddenberry, ISBN 8204008505;
[Oslo] Fredhøi [1980], pages 600 ( )

Much better reading than some of the other early Star Trek books! It does have the occasional problem that the movie had - that is, an enemy that is not entirely compelling to watch and a plot that is mostly filler - but it expands on the characterizations and the backgrounds so well that it works better overall. ( )