All Things Star Trek

Hey CivCube, any chance you are going to continue your review series into TNG or the TOS movies? I've really enjoyed it so far, but I know far more about TNG than TOS and I'd appreciate being able to participate in the discussion more. Even though the first season of TNG is mostly poop. :p
 
There were a few not very good episodes in Series 1, I agree. :p
 
The Paradise Syndrome - The last episode shot outdoors, and it's gorgeous. It feels more like a movie than a TV episode. We also get Shatner at the peak of his scene-chewing powers ("I AM KIROK!!") and marrying a Native American refugee on an alien world. TNG later remade this episode, and it's easy to see why--the concept is a cool one.
I meant to ask, which TNG episode do you mean? I'm trying to remember which one had anyone marrying a Native American on an alien world and can't think of any. The only episode I can recall that had to do with Native Americans was in the final season, when Wesley's last appearance happened.
 
NinjaCow64 said:
Hey CivCube, any chance you are going to continue your review series into TNG or the TOS movies? I've really enjoyed it so far, but I know far more about TNG than TOS and I'd appreciate being able to participate in the discussion more. Even though the first season of TNG is mostly poop. :p

Thanks! I'm going for the mother of all binges and plan to take notes on all the shows and movies.

Valka D'Ur said:
I meant to ask, which TNG episode do you mean? I'm trying to remember which one had anyone marrying a Native American on an alien world and can't think of any. The only episode I can recall that had to do with Native Americans was in the final season, when Wesley's last appearance happened.

"The Inner Light", where Picard lives an entire separate life as an alien named Kamin. Sorry I wasn't clear on that!
 
Last edited:
Star Trek: The Motion Picture, 1979

I hated this movie when I first saw it. Too slow, too ponderous, and the crew gape like idiots at a viewing screen for fifteen minutes! What is this poor man's 2001 I am watching? This time, I tried to approach it this time as a 1979 fan who might been there from the beginning, or got into it in the early 70s. It's for that reason that it's called "The Motion Picture", even after George Lucas conquered movies forever two years earlier. The experience is akin to the Doctor Who 50th Anniversary Special, an event made for the hardcore fans who watched reruns endlessly, not the general public. It would be like finally watching the Community movie in theaters today, highly specific and unique (no wonder Dan Harmon is not keen on making it any time soon).

The film's tone acknowledges that fans have been waiting over ten years for more live-action Trek – it feels like a film for a TV show that lasted twenty seasons, not three. When you think about it being in syndication since 1969, it kinda was. Everything plays out like a stage production, gently introducing old favorites to take a bow in the silver spotlight, including the Enterprise. You get the sense that this is a big deal for everyone involved, including Shatner, who was actually unemployed for a while after the Original Series wrapped. The pacing will feel slower to modern audiences, and it's a far cry from the whiplash of Orci and Kurtzman's reboots. An audience full of Trekkies is allowed to bask in the glow of a dream finally realized: Star Trek! On the big screen! But it's also more Star Trek! We finally have this!

Bob Wise goes all in on the visuals, an up-to-now impossible task for Star Trek's NBC iteration. Long tracking space shots establish a powerful sense of scale, first with Kirk and Scotty's Enterprise flyby, then to the jaw-dropping sight of the Enterprise against V'Ger's horizon-eating spacecraft. Highly detailed models and matte paintings combine to give us a most impressive display of abstract machinery and fractal art. The larger budget allows us to see sights not previously seen in the show: massive, un-donut space stations and San Francisco, a stark Vulcan landscape at night, people co-existing with ships in the same frame, alien energy suddenly appearing on the bridge and interacting with the controls (a far cry from "Day of the Dove"'s kaleidoscope entity). The deflector dish glows blue when the warp drive is fully charged, a nice touch.

The vast Enterprise crew is finally seen all at once, and it's a wondrous display of humanity in all its diversity, a visual attempt to realize IDIC: Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations. They look like normal people this time and not just goofball redshirts. When they watch helplessly as V'Ger removes an entire space station, you feel for them. They're definitely not expendable, this vulnerable mass. You also feel a sense of nerd pride there in the theater as Captain Kirk asserts his authority, a sternness that has been there from the show's beginning. The ship and its crew. Come. First. There's come great acting from Shatner throughout this movie, from his first view of the refitted Enterprise to the classic Kirk monologuing that appears again at the climax.

A few quirks pop up here and there, as is bound to happen when a project shifts identity from film to TV show to film again. There are some unexplained artifacts left over from "In Thy Image" and production squabbles, including Ilia's oath of Deltan celibacy and the, let's face it, egregious transporter scene, however entertaining it is. Leonard Nimoy is also noticeably older here. It's weird how much of a difference five years makes between his voice in the Animated Series and this film, where he sounds about twenty years older than he should.

But the film is excellently structured and paced for its needs throughout. Yes, Star Trek is back, and we'll let you bask in it for half an hour with Kirk, who joins us to greet the old crew. Classic bridge hijinks follow as the ship dives into a self-made wormhole, much to Scotty's virtual I-told-you-so. At the hour mark, the tone and genre shift into arthouse, as the old is overpowered by the stylistic unknown. The show's camp gives way to something the show's third season tried its best to convey: sheer awe of the universe.

This could easily have been a Force Awakens-like screenplay where the theme is merely, "Ain't Star Trek great?" Instead we get the ultimate Original Series episode, featuring the best of broadcast episodes gone by, their high-minded writing finally given their due on the big screen, in one big thematic synthesis. Loneliness, alienation, empathy, it's all here, along with encountering the Cosmic Other and celebrating present day space efforts. Persis Khambatta and Stephen Collins recall Pike and Vina's relationship found in "The Cage", elevated here to devastating stakes and consequences.

Spock undergoes a fantastic personal journey, transcending both Vulcan and human cultures to address his understated dissatisfaction. He ends his arc with a deeper understanding of himself and for the first time, he embraces both sides of himself, human and Vulcan, emotional and logical. This ends up being the most cinematic, yet subtle character arc in the film, expressed and echoed by V'Ger's longing for something more than a logical existence. The show's best character carries the Enterprise within himself, boldly going forward into a universe equally fraught and compelling.

In a reversal of Gary Mitchell's arc into madness from "Where No Man Has Gone Before", Ilia and Decker's encounter with cosmos uplift them into a new existence. It may not necessarily be higher, but it is a more expansive joy at realizing, accepting, touching, and completing the unknown all around us and within us. Humanity doesn't need to deny itself to evolve, says this movie, it's already great and inspiring. It's a hell of a message even for Star Trek, which has several times spat in the eye of contemporary politics, insisting there's something better for everyone. Here is why at last.

Holy God-Thing. This movie is like night and day after watching the Original Series. I loved this. "Star Trek: The Motion Picture" is a perfect coda to the TV show, with a final title card that would have worked just as well if the film was the final outing for Trek:

"The human adventure is just beginning."

How far we've come, and how far we are promised we will go.
 
Last edited:
Star Trek: The Motion Picture, 1979

I hated this movie when I first saw it. Too slow, too ponderous, and the crew gape like idiots at a viewing screen for fifteen minutes! What is this poor man's 2001 I am watching? This time, I tried to approach it this time as a 1979 fan who might been there from the beginning, or got into it in the early 70s.

The film's tone acknowledges that fans have been waiting over ten years for more live-action Trek – it feels like a film for a TV show that lasted twenty seasons, not three. When you think about it being in syndication since 1969, it kinda was. Everything plays out like a stage production, gently introducing old favorites to take a bow in the silver spotlight, including the Enterprise. You get the sense that this is a big deal for everyone involved, including Shatner, who was actually unemployed for a while after the Original Series wrapped. The pacing will feel slower to modern audiences, and it's a far cry from the whiplash of Orci and Kurtzman's reboots. An audience full of Trekkies is allowed to bask in the glow of a dream finally realized: Star Trek! On the big screen! But it's also more Star Trek! We finally have this!
When did you first see it? Was it on TV, or in the theatre?

It makes a difference. Like the original Star Wars movie, STTMP was intended for the big screen. I was 16 when it was released, and even though I'd only been a Trekker for 4 years, it felt like a lot longer. Back in those days it was possible to track down every commercial Star Trek book ever published (though I still don't have some of them). I'd eagerly read my monthly issues of Starlog to get more information about the movie. And when my dad came home from working up north (gas wells), he brought me a present: the novelization of Star Trek: The Motion Picture. Damn, it was hard to leave that alone until I'd seen the movie (I prefer my movies as spoiler-free as possible, so I won't be reading your review of the third nuTrek movie until I've seen it for myself).

I saw STTMP five times in the theatre, nagging my family to come with me, and other times I'd go by myself. It's the last movie I saw in the theatre that was eventually torn down to make room for other buildings.

What modern fans can't really connect to is that in those days, we were dependent on what was on TV. There was no internet. There weren't even any VCRs then. Some people had audio recordings they made by hooking up cassette players to the TVs, or holding the microphone up to the TVs and demanding that everyone else be absolutely quiet (that's how I got some of my Doctor Who recordings). So any time there was anything new, fans pounced on it, were enthusiastic, and overjoyed about it. Nowadays there's such a blase attitude to it, an inability to understand how it was to experience this era of fandom in real-time. Discussions like this one would have been impossible back then, since fans kept in touch either at conventions, in clubs, via newsletters, or by writing letters. Real letters, sent by snailmail. It's even more so for those who first saw the show in the '60s.

I'll be honest, the reactions to this movie were mixed. There was a major WTF? reaction to the new type of Klingons. I loved the music, and was enthralled by the scene when Scotty and Kirk took the shuttle trip around the Enterprise and docked. The scenes on Vulcan, with shaggy-haired Spock and Vulcans speaking much more of their language than we heard in "Amok Time" were... fascinating.

Some people hated the slow pacing, but I didn't mind it. I was awed by the scope of V'Ger, and how tiny the Enterprise was by comparison.

Fast-forward 35+ years, and I concede that there were some problems with that movie, and some stuff that was just ludicrous. I've read both the official "Making of" book and also Walter Koenig's book Chekov's Enterprise, which was Koenig's take on making the movie. It's really interesting to see how everything played out, from the pov of one of the minor cast members.

The scene where the entire crew was assembled had a lot of well-known Star Trek fans in it. Bjo Trimble and David Gerrold are in that scene, for example.

Spock undergoes a fantastic personal journey, transcending both Vulcan and human cultures to address his understated dissatisfaction. He ends his arc with a deeper understanding of himself and for the first time, he embraces both sides of himself, human and Vulcan, emotional and logical. This ends up being the most cinematic, yet subtle character arc in the film, expressed and echoed by V'Ger's longing for something more than a logical existence. The show's best character carries the Enterprise within himself, boldly going forward into a universe equally fraught and compelling.
Absolutely. It's a shame that some of the scene in Sickbay and a couple of others were initially deleted from the movie in favor of more special effects, because they really added to the movie - explained more of what was happening, added to characterization, and so on.

Holy God-Thing. This movie is like night and day after watching the Original Series. I loved this. "Star Trek: The Motion Picture" is a perfect coda to the TV show, with a final title card that would have worked just as well if the film was the final outing for Trek:

"The human adventure is just beginning."

How far we've come, and how far we are promised we will go.
:thumbsup:
 
I hated this movie when I first saw it. Too slow, too ponderous, and the crew gape like idiots at a viewing screen for fifteen minutes! What is this poor man's 2001 I am watching?

Honestly this was the feeling I had when watching this film for the first time. Granted, I had only really watched TNG and Voyager at this point with Star Trek, so the difference in tone was jarring. Your glowing review of the film as "a send-off to TOS" makes me want to re-watch it when I finally get around to finishing TOS (I found TOS extremely difficult to get into tbh, I felt it aged really badly, although I won't deny the huge impact it had on Star Trek and science fiction as a whole. And there are some really good episodes. This is a completely different discussion however).
 
(I found TOS extremely difficult to get into tbh, I felt it aged really badly, although I won't deny the huge impact it had on Star Trek and science fiction as a whole. And there are some really good episodes. This is a completely different discussion however
:confused:

If not for TOS, there wouldn't have been any Star Trek.
 
:confused:

If not for TOS, there wouldn't have been any Star Trek.

Well that's what I'm saying. Although I didn't enjoy large portions of it when I tried to watch it and found a lot of things extremely dated within it (especially the sexism), I am still acknowledging its importance. It was extremely progressive for the time and without TOS there would have been no Star Trek in general.

Interestingly I enjoyed the TOS movies a lot more than TOS itself. Well, minus the few stinker TOS movies like V.

EDIT: Admittedly I worded that idea a bit strangely. Sorry for any confusion.
 
Last edited:
Valka D'Ur said:
When did you first see it? Was it on TV, or in the theatre?

It makes a difference. Like the original Star Wars movie, STTMP was intended for the big screen.

Oh, the worst way possible: on my "widescreen" Asus gaming laptop while I was in grad school! Halfway through watching it now, I realized that sitting on the floor in front of my bigger widescreen TV makes for a halfway acceptable substitute for the theater. But this film is definitely going on my list of "See the real deal sometime". I know 2001 was a conscious influence, but hey, that actually would make a good double feature in this case.

Valka D'Ur said:
I was 16 when it was released, and even though I'd only been a Trekker for 4 years, it felt like a lot longer. Back in those days it was possible to track down every commercial Star Trek book ever published (though I still don't have some of them). I'd eagerly read my monthly issues of Starlog to get more information about the movie. And when my dad came home from working up north (gas wells), he brought me a present: the novelization of Star Trek: The Motion Picture. Damn, it was hard to leave that alone until I'd seen the movie (I prefer my movies as spoiler-free as possible, so I won't be reading your review of the third nuTrek movie until I've seen it for myself).

I saw STTMP five times in the theatre, nagging my family to come with me, and other times I'd go by myself. It's the last movie I saw in the theatre that was eventually torn down to make room for other buildings.

What modern fans can't really connect to is that in those days, we were dependent on what was on TV. There was no internet. There weren't even any VCRs then. Some people had audio recordings they made by hooking up cassette players to the TVs, or holding the microphone up to the TVs and demanding that everyone else be absolutely quiet (that's how I got some of my Doctor Who recordings). So any time there was anything new, fans pounced on it, were enthusiastic, and overjoyed about it. Nowadays there's such a blase attitude to it, an inability to understand how it was to experience this era of fandom in real-time. Discussions like this one would have been impossible back then, since fans kept in touch either at conventions, in clubs, via newsletters, or by writing letters. Real letters, sent by snailmail. It's even more so for those who first saw the show in the '60s.

I was born in the late 80s but I remember a small glimpse of what you're describing. Garage sales were my access point to geekery--I loved watching old He-Man cartoons on videotape (not VHS!), so we trawled the town for Masters of the Universe toys. We ended up with quite a few, including two Castle Greyskull sets! I remember feeling that that was a pretty big deal to be able to pull that off. My parents were pretty cool to help out with that and surprise my brothers and me. Likewise for all the old 1980s comic books we collected. I still have the big plastic tub of them. No way am I getting rid of those.

My closest experience to the TV thing was when Enterprise was premiering and I wanted to watch it live. I almost succeeded, but it required playing Twister with the bunny ear antennae in the kitchen while family members were moving around the house. Thank god for modern streaming and DVD sets.

I missed out on the analog communication. There seems to be something just fun about that era in geekdom. Someone else on a private forum once described this as a time when geeks were much more involved in their hobbies, how much more effort went into enjoying things like Star Trek. To be a fan was to be forced to a scholar and meet everything halfway.

To be a geek today is to be a consumer. Stream it, play it, move on to the next meal. The conversations are probably not nearly as interesting as a result, with the trade-off of much more access to information to watch things in context.

Valka D'Ur said:
I'll be honest, the reactions to this movie were mixed. There was a major WTF? reaction to the new type of Klingons

I saw a scan of a fan pamphlet passed around at a 1970s convention that was complaining about just that. :D

Valka D'Ur said:
Some people hated the slow pacing, but I didn't mind it. I was awed by the scope of V'Ger, and how tiny the Enterprise was by comparison.

Fast-forward 35+ years, and I concede that there were some problems with that movie, and some stuff that was just ludicrous. I've read both the official "Making of" book and also Walter Koenig's book Chekov's Enterprise, which was Koenig's take on making the movie. It's really interesting to see how everything played out, from the pov of one of the minor cast members.

I think the biggest issue is the fan service in the first half. It was necessary and cathartic for folks at the time, but it's a harder sell for people today who weren't on the frontlines of fandom.

I'd like to hear more from Koenig. He does a great job of being upfront with stuff on the Blu Rays--I think he'd probably be a more reliable living subject than Shatner or Takei.

Valka D'Ur said:
The scene where the entire crew was assembled had a lot of well-known Star Trek fans in it. Bjo Trimble and David Gerrold are in that scene, for example.

Oh, of course. :D I've been wondering now if DS9's Bajor has any nominal relation to Bjo...
 
Last edited:
NinjaCow64 said:
Honestly this was the feeling I had when watching this film for the first time. Granted, I had only really watched TNG and Voyager at this point with Star Trek, so the difference in tone was jarring. Your glowing review of the film as "a send-off to TOS" makes me want to re-watch it when I finally get around to finishing TOS (I found TOS extremely difficult to get into tbh, I felt it aged really badly, although I won't deny the huge impact it had on Star Trek and science fiction as a whole. And there are some really good episodes. This is a completely different discussion however).

Uhura's going to be your favorite character. :culture:Just sayin':culture:

Summerswerd said:
I agree... except that I also enjoyed the "stinker movies"... stink and all.

There's always something worthwhile to found.
 
Last edited:
Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, 1982

How do you follow up on the last word for the Original Series? How do you release a sequel to a film that was received rapturously by a few, with confusion by everyone else? When the public wants Star Wars, how do you give them Star Trek?

You give them Master and Commander with photon torpedoes, that's how. Nicholas Meyer quietly locked his targets on a different story, one that he rewrote uncredited mere months before the film's release in June 1982, on a low-budget production channeled through Paramount's TV division. One can see all the hallmarks of a proper sea dog tale. The pirate taking the ship, the first encounter with the pirate, an adventure where secrets are shared while the hero licks his wounds, the triumphant, rousing battle on the hero's clever terms. A double feature with a certain Russell Crowe film and a bottle of shiraz would make a fine Saturday afternoon.

More character development is seen here than any previous Star Trek episode or installment. Kirk is a bored old admiral willing to pass the mantle to the next generation (much to Shatner's chagrin). And yet, he is not entirely wise. He repeatedly owns up to past mistakes made in the Original Series that Meyer, a non-fan with no romanticizations of the past fifteen years, is all too keen on exposing: Kirk's womanizing catches up with him, and he has to deal with having a son (deflector shields are always down in nebulous affairs, you know). He's never encountered death personally. Many of his grand speeches have turned out to be "just words" after all, however they complemented this captain's uncanny ability for improvisation at the time.

And Kirk never really revisited any of the planets on his list of noble promises...including one occupied by Khan Noonien Singh, nemesis of "Space Seed" and played with iconic aplomb by the legendary Ricardo Montalban. For many film lovers, Montalban is Star Trek, and that is more than fine. The grace and calculated menace he brings to his performance single-handedly communicate just how entertaining the Original Series was as a TV show—and he manages to make the blockbuster masses enjoy Shakespeare! The game is afoot as the two men—the experienced captain who is just as naive as his Academy ensigns in much of life, the bloodlusting genius with amazing pecs who knows Kirk is naive—tangle over the Genesis Project, an anti-Death Star that kills with life if you're in the way.

Meyer isn't interested in Roddenberry's high-minded future but he does paint little touches that show a care for the setting and the characters. Spock's IDIC mosaic, Kirk's Hornblower-like apartment, the ruins of the SS Botany Bay, Chekov's promotion to Commander, the aliens similar to those from "Operation: Annihilate!". All provide not just a winking reference for the fans, but colorful texture that deepens the world and imbues it with atmosphere.

If there's one niggle of mine, it's perhaps that the film is too taut. I would have loved to see a few more minutes of the stand-off in the nebula, or a little more purchase on the thematic surface regarding Genesis. Spock's death is emotional and even powerful, but it's handled a little abruptly for my taste. Running time is running time, however, and Meyer is the kind of director who doesn't go over, which I respect.

"Wrath of Khan" was released in a packed schedule of some of the 20th century's most memorable genre films: Blade Runner, E.T., The Thing, Poltergeist, and more. It shares their shelf, to be sure: a tight, clever little movie that sneaks up on you from behind in the fog...

Firing gif! :viking:

 
Last edited:
If there's one niggle of mine, it's perhaps that the film is too taut. I would have loved to see a few more minutes of the stand-off in the nebula, or a little more purchase on the thematic surface regarding Genesis. Spock's death is emotional and even powerful, but it's handled a little abruptly for my taste. Running time is running time, however, and Meyer is the kind of director who doesn't go over, which I respect.
Have you read the novelization? There's a lot more material in there that never made it on-screen.

And I remember sitting in the theatre and thinking, "Wow, Kirk's got one hell of a set of lungs, to be able to shout through solid rock, all the way into the vacuum of space and we can still hear him!" :lol:

Yeah, now that I've reached the age Kirk supposedly was in that movie, I can understand why Shatner would be annoyed. Half a century isn't as old as it used to be.
 
Valka D'Ur said:
Have you read the novelization? There's a lot more material in there that never made it on-screen.

Another one for the to-read list! The other day I got through Redshirts by John Scalzi...rather funny Trek spoof that peters off toward the end. It's a quick read, though.

Valka D'Ur said:
And I remember sitting in the theatre and thinking, "Wow, Kirk's got one hell of a set of lungs, to be able to shout through solid rock, all the way into the vacuum of space and we can still hear him!" :lol:

That's no moon...that's a sound studio.

Valka D'Ur said:
Yeah, now that I've reached the age Kirk supposedly was in that movie, I can understand why Shatner would be annoyed. Half a century isn't as old as it used to be.

Hehe, it really isn't. :D I'd say even 70 is the new 50...and Shatner is doing extremely well for 85.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, the Wrath of Khan is fantastic. Definitely my favourite amongst the TOS films.

You give them Master and Commander with photon torpedoes, that's how. Nicholas Meyer quietly locked his targets on a different story, one that he rewrote uncredited mere months before the film's release in June 1982, on a low-budget production channeled through Paramount's TV division. One can see all the hallmarks of a proper sea dog tale. The pirate taking the ship, the first encounter with the pirate, an adventure where secrets are shared while the hero licks his wounds, the triumphant, rousing battle on the hero's clever terms. A double feature with a certain Russell Crowe film and a bottle of shiraz would make a fine Saturday afternoon.

...

Meyer isn't interested in Roddenberry's high-minded future but he does paint little touches that show a care for the setting and the characters. Spock's IDIC mosaic, Kirk's Hornblower-like apartment, the ruins of the SS Botany Bay, Chekov's promotion to Commander, the aliens similar to those from "Operation: Annihilate!". All provide not just a winking reference for the fans, but colorful texture that deepens the world and imbues it with atmosphere.

Huh, I never knew about that. Interestingly Meyer seems to somehow nail the optimistic future despite some of the darkness associated with the film and with his apparent disinterest in the show. While the Federation did build a superweapon, it was a side effect of a much more peaceful project and many of the characters recoiled in disgust at it. And the little details like that showed that while he might of not been a fan, he and others working on the project cared enough about the franchise to give it the respect it deserves (unlike certain other Star Trek film makers). This deep level of respect helps make the film the masterpiece it is.
 
NinjaCow64 said:
Interestingly Meyer seems to somehow nail the optimistic future despite some of the darkness associated with the film and with his apparent disinterest in the show. While the Federation did build a superweapon, it was a side effect of a much more peaceful project and many of the characters recoiled in disgust at it.

For sure. The whole Genesis subplot could have been a TOS episode by itself. Bones' dismay is both very in-character for him and on point for the franchise's message. All the characters are in full form here--you'd think Meyer had been a fan forever. But nope, he's an artist who just really cares about how things work. I'm not too worried about Discovery with him on board.

NinjaCow64 said:
And the little details like that showed that while he might of not been a fan, he and others working on the project cared enough about the franchise to give it the respect it deserves (unlike certain other Star Trek film makers). This deep level of respect helps make the film the masterpiece it is.

It really is a great movie. Like other 1980s gems, it's so rewatchable in the way later movies aren't. The script is so damn functional and makes full use of every concept and character. I find myself thinking about potential holes and realize they were already filled at some point in the running time.

There's also a surprising amount of continuity from TMP with Scotty's engineering suit and the reused Enterprise flyby, and both end up playing their own roles at some point. Detail is function with Meyer.
 
Last edited:
Star Trek: The Motion Picture, 1979 I hated this movie when I first saw it. Too slow, too ponderous... Holy God-Thing. This movie is like night and day after watching the Original Series. I loved this. "Star Trek: The Motion Picture" is a perfect coda to the TV show, with a final title card that would have worked just as well if the film was the final outing for Trek: "The human adventure is just beginning." How far we've come, and how far we are promised we will go.
My experience was exactly the same. This film was unwatchable when I was a kid... "Poor mans 2001:A Space Odyssey" was exactly on-point :goodjob: So.freaking.boring.

But seeing it as an adult after being a lifelong TNG fan... totally different experience. Love at first second sight :love:
 
Star Trek III: The Search for Spock, 1984

There's plenty of material here for writer Harve Bennett and Leonard Nimoy to work with. On one Vulcan gesturing hand, there's the fascinating mystical journey of reuniting Spock's katra with his physical body, and what that might mean for Spock's personal path. On the other, the life-giving Genesis Project and how it relates to future human plans for terraforming, or its destructive capability as a reflection on humanity's worst colonial urges. On Lt. Arex's borrowed third hand, the thematically rich friendship between Bones and Spock, and potential character development for our favorite spacefaring physician.

What a movie that would have been. There are bits and pieces of such stories floating around in the screenplay's numbing ether. Nimoy does the best he can with what he's been given and hands in a decent enough job for his first theatrical feature; his scene with Saavik assuaging an adolescent Spock's pon farr with hand contact is quite nice and reflects how much of Vulcan culture was created by him. Unfortunately, nothing really coheres into big enough thoughts to say something. Like Spock's rapidly growing body, the movie advances with nothing of substance on its mind. The plot takes way too long to get started, instead contenting itself to feed the audience non-exposition that seems to only pad the running time for thirty minutes. For instance, why show the Enterprise docking the (great-looking) Federation starbase only to repeat the same sequence in reverse when the heist happens? It's filler that does nothing for the story except to maybe show a little more of NCC-1701 in its last moments. Indeed, the film itself is about ten minutes shorter than "Wrath of Khan", suggesting either a lack of ideas or an exceedingly short production schedule. Knowing Paramount's penchant for saving money, the latter is more likely. It doesn't help that Nicholas Meyer was not around this time to polish things off.

The Klingon unit, led by a Christopher Lloyd having fun with the ridged head, is a bust as an antagonist. Kruge has bought information about Genesis from...whom, exactly? Carol Marcus? She's nowhere to be found in this movie, even though it begins shortly after "Wrath of Khan". Maybe she had enough of Kirk, enough to potentially kill off her son in the process? Although it makes sense for the Klingon Empire to want to use such a device, they're completely unnecessary except to put a couple phaser battles in the movie.

There are a few good moments, though. The heist of the Enterprise is fun and Scotty's rivalry with the Excelsior, particularly its transwarp engine, could have been a long-running subplot. Come of think of it, the Excelsior's experimental engine is a rather big deal that could have equaled Zefram Cochrane's original device. The power of warp combined with the transporter? That would have been an interesting parallel to the dual journeys of Spock's spirit and his body. Sulu shows that he's kind of a badass with the moves and rocks a 23rd century leather jacket. The hijacked, bright green Klingon bird of prey is still what I think of when I think of Star Trek movies. Mark Lenard is majestic as usual as the wisened Sarek, even letting anger escape when he confronts Kirk about his son. There's a good starting point for a great movie here that is unfortunately never consistently followed, because it doesn't begin with it in the first place.

But the real dagger in the movie's side is choosing to plot out Saavik and David on their own branch as they first look for animal life on Genesis, then for Spock's body. This makes for a sludge of pacing; the story stalls every scene for the faintest bit of relevant information to pass along to the audience. It's time wasted for the real stars, who don't even catch up with their own movie until an hour in. By that time, there's no need to search for Spock, since he's already there. More like a carpool for Spock, a walk for Spock, a hamfisted crayon A to B for Spock, the toddler pressing down on the page as hard as he can. There's no journey except for the running time.

What could have been a very interesting look at Star Trek's views on spirituality and a prime story for Bones and Spock became a feature length version of "Spock's Brain".
 
Last edited:
Star Trek III: The Search for Spock, 1984

The Klingon unit, led by a Christopher Lloyd having fun with the ridged head, is a bust as an antagonist. Kruge has bought information about Genesis from...whom, exactly? Carol Marcus? She's nowhere to be found in this movie, even though it begins shortly after "Wrath of Khan". Maybe she had enough of Kirk, enough to potentially kill off her son in the process? Although it makes sense for the Klingon Empire to want to use such a device, they're completely unnecessary except to put a couple phaser battles in the movie.
I can't emphasize this enough: Read the novel! It answers the questions that crop up during the movie, such as "where's Carol?". The answer is that she's busy attending to Regula personnel matters - such as notifying the murdered scientists' next of kin. At the time of the voyage back to Genesis, she's on Delta IV, attending a funeral for one of her colleagues.

There's an excellent, albeit brief, subplot in the novel involving Scotty. Depending on which version of the movie you saw, you may not know that Midshipman Peter Preston (the cadet who was killed) was Scotty's nephew. In the novel, Scotty goes home to Edinburgh to be with Peter's family - and they basically blame Scotty for Peter's death (since it's apparently Scotty's fault that his nephew adored him and everything about starship engineering and wanted to follow in his uncle's footsteps).

But the real dagger in the movie's side is choosing to plot out Saavik and David on their own branch as they first look for animal life on Genesis, then for Spock's body. This makes for a sludge of pacing; the story stalls every scene for the faintest bit of relevant information to pass along to the audience. It's time wasted for the real stars, who don't even catch up with their own movie until an hour in. By that time, there's no need to search for Spock, since he's already there. More like a carpool for Spock, a walk for Spock, a hamfisted crayon A to B for Spock, the toddler pressing down on the page as hard as he can. There's no journey except for the running time.
Okay, this is a controversy that's been going on for decades in fandom: Which Saavik was better?

The main reason I dislike much of this movie is due to the actress who plays Saavik. WTF was Nimoy thinking, to tell her to play Saavik with no emotion at all, and with the personality of a piece of stiff cardboard?

Of course Nimoy's view was that Saavik was fully Vulcan, when the novels and unofficial backstory are that Saavik was half-Vulcan, half-Romulan, and that Spock found her on a barbaric backwater world called Hellguard, realized she was part-Vulcan, and decided to adopt her as a protegee. The novel goes into this in greater detail, and it's how Kirstie Alley played her - a hybrid, trained in Vulcan disciplines by that point, but still occasionally expressing anger or frustration as a Romulan woman would.

As for the movie's plot, I loved the 23rd century touches - McCoy trying to hire a shady pilot, the odd fashions, and seeing how Starfleet operates on Earth. However, it does drag a bit in some places, mostly on Genesis. I found the novel version of Saavik and David interesting; the movie versions are just ho-hum, kinda boring.

There was a fanzine that ran a contest prior to ST III's release, in which people would write their version of how they thought the movie would go. The winning entry was like this (paraphrased, as it's been a long time since I last read it):


Grandiose Music
Opening Credits


EXT. GENESIS PLANET
(Kirk and McCoy beam down, and see a tall, humanoid male walking toward them. He is dressed in a Vulcan burial shroud)

SPOCK

Captain, what took you so long?


Closing Credits
Grandiose Music
 
Top Bottom