Immediate enthusiasm and later reconsideration offer two different ways to approach science fiction as a viewer.
Two specific opinions about films from 1979
In Five Things, the conversation with Lynn Hirschberg published by W in April 2020, Quentin Tarantino recalled Alien as an event that still held its power. About Star Trek: The Motion Picture, he explained a change: several disappointments gave way to a greater appreciation when he revisited it with his wife. These are different assessments, not two identical praises.
The second reference is to the film directed by Robert Wise in 1979. It should not be confused with J. J. Abrams's 2009 feature film or with the entire franchise. An opinion about one specific installment does not automatically let us reconstruct a viewer's preferences regarding all the others. In the same way, praise for Alien by itself does not prove any particular stance on any other work by Ridley Scott.
These two films are enough to organize a screening with clear contrasts. Both take human beings into an experience that exceeds their understanding, but they handle waiting, technology, and contact with the unknown in very different ways. Tarantino's comment serves as an entry point; the comparison that follows focuses on what the films show, without presenting it as his explanation for every formal choice.
Alien: a workplace turned into a threat
The ship in Alien has a recognizable material reality before the main danger appears. Its crew works, argues about conditions, and lives within a space that does not seem designed solely for heroic adventure. That everyday quality makes identification easier: the setting may be extraordinary, but the tensions among coworkers and the differences in responsibility feel familiar.
The sudden arrival of a threat changes the way we look at that same place. A corridor stops being just a route and becomes a possible point of attack. An opening or a dark surface gains importance because we do not know what it may be hiding. The film uses partial information to make a familiar space seem progressively less controllable.
Technology does not guarantee safety either. Having information systems does not mean always getting a sufficient answer or understanding the interests that shape a mission. That gap between technical capacity and trust introduces a different kind of unease from physical pursuit. The characters may depend on instruments whose logic does not fully match their survival needs.
The combination of science fiction and horror works because both elements affect the same problem. The unknown organism threatens bodies, while the conditions of the expedition determine what options exist for confronting it. This is not a matter of placing a monster in an indifferent futuristic set. Isolation, access rules, and power relations give the danger a specific shape.
While watching, it is worth paying attention to how long simple actions take. Walking, waiting for an answer, or checking a location may take more time than we would like. That delay forces us to share the characters' uncertainty. The film builds tension from what it shows and from the interval in which we still do not know what we are going to see.
Star Trek: The Motion Picture and the time of exploration
Robert Wise's film proposes a different rhythm. Approaching an unknown presence and contemplating its scale are central parts of the spectacle. For a viewer expecting a quick succession of incidents, that length may seem like an obstacle. If exploration is accepted as an experience in itself, the time devoted to observation takes on another function.
The Enterprise is also a workplace, but the staging creates a different relationship with its procedures. Crew coordination and the reading of signals make it possible to turn the incomprehensible into a shared problem. The story gives weight to the question of communication: understanding what is in front of you can be more decisive than responding immediately with force.
The encounter also places technology in relation to questions of identity and desire. An intelligence may possess extraordinary capacity and yet not understand the meaning of its own search. That combination shifts the tension away from mere material superiority and toward the limits of experience. Knowing a great deal and understanding what is missing are not necessarily the same thing.
The comparison with Alien makes it possible to see how the value of waiting changes. In one film, prolonging a journey can increase the fear of attack. In the other, prolonging the approach can make a scale perceptible that we still do not know how to interpret. Both require managing the unknown, but one encourages physical vulnerability and the other gives more room to wonder and investigation.
The change of opinion Tarantino described about Star Trek: The Motion Picture also invites us to distinguish a film from the expectations we bring to it. Revisiting a work does not require ending up admiring it, although it may allow us to recognize more clearly the experience it offers. In this double feature, the contrast between the terror of confinement and the contemplation of encounter offers a more precise journey than a generic list of titles supposedly approved by the director.
Check out the selection of Tarantino's recommendations by genre.