Immediate enthusiasm and later reconsideration offer two distinct ways of approaching science fiction as a viewer.
Two specific opinions on films from 1979
In Five Things, the conversation with Lynn Hirschberg published by W in April 2020, Quentin Tarantino recalled Alien as a film that still had its power. About Star Trek: The Motion Picture, he explained a change of view: several disappointments gave way to greater appreciation when he revisited it with his wife. These are different judgements, 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 or with the franchise as a whole. An opinion about one specific instalment does not automatically allow us to reconstruct a viewer's preferences about all the others. Likewise, praise for Alien does not in itself prove a particular position on any other Ridley Scott film.
These two films are enough to organise a session with clear contrasts. Both take human beings into an experience that exceeds their understanding, but they handle waiting, technology and encounters 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 his comment as an explanation for every formal decision.
Alien: a workplace turned into a threat
The ship in Alien has a recognisable material presence before the main danger appears. Its occupants work, argue about conditions and live together within a space that does not seem designed solely for heroic adventure. That everyday dimension makes identification easier: the setting may be extraordinary, but the tensions between colleagues and the difference in responsibilities feel familiar.
The arrival of a threat transforms the way we look at that same place. A corridor stops being merely a route and becomes a possible point of attack. An opening or a dark surface takes on importance because we do not know what it might conceal. The film makes use of partial information to make a familiar space seem progressively less controllable.
Technology does not guarantee safety either. Having information systems does not mean always receiving a sufficient answer or understanding the interests that shape a mission. That distance between technical capability and confidence introduces a different kind of unease from physical pursuit. The characters may depend on instruments whose logic does not fully match their need to survive.
The combination of science fiction and horror works because the two components affect the same problem. The unknown organism threatens the bodies, while the conditions of the expedition determine what options exist for confronting it. This is not a case of placing a monster in an indifferent futuristic setting. Isolation, access rules and power relationships give the danger a specific shape.
When watching, it is worth paying attention to the length of simple actions. Walking, waiting for an answer or checking a location may take longer than we would like. That delay forces us to share the characters' uncertainty. The film creates tension both 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. The approach to an unknown presence and the contemplation of its scale are central to the spectacle. For a viewer expecting a rapid succession of incidents, that duration 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. The crew's coordination and the reading of signals make it possible to turn the incomprehensible into a shared problem. The narrative gives weight to the question of communication: understanding what is in front of you may 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 capability and yet not understand the meaning of its own search. That combination shifts the tension away from mere material superiority towards 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 fear of an attack. In the other, prolonging the approach can make tangible a scale we do not yet know how to interpret. Both require the unknown to be managed, but one favours physical vulnerability and the other gives greater 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 us to end up admiring it, although it may allow us to recognise more clearly the experience it proposes. In this double bill, the contrast between the terror of confinement and the contemplation of the encounter offers a more precise journey than a generic list of titles supposedly approved by the director.
See the selection of Tarantino's recommendations by genre.