Happy Star Trek VI Day December 6, 2006
by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Feature Films (TMP-NEM) , trackbackToday is the 15th anniversary of the release of Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country. STVI is in my top 3, and some days is my favorite Trek film. At a recent event I attended, director Nicholas Meyer said of the three Trek films he worked on (II, IV and VI) Star Trek VI was also his favorite. The site with the best Trek artwork, TrekCore.com has put up a nice gallery of rare images to honor the last film for the original crew.
Click here to see the TrekCore STVI Gallery
If you don’t own Star Trek VI…BUY IT!!
Loading ...
Comments»
I really find Trek 6 overrated. It just feels like a step backward in a lot of ways technologically (a galley? Making bread by hand? Vacuum cleaners?) and a lot of things in it don’t make sense (why exactly does a klingon moon exploding mean “the depletion of their ozone layer”? Why is klingon blood pink here, but never anywhere else? Why the hell does Chang say “in the original Klingon”? What’s with the giant digital clock on the ENT’s bridge? Etc, etc, etc.).
It’s fine, and it has some great moments for most of the characters, but…it just isn’t that great.
And don’t get me started on the music. If he’d wanted Holst, he should’ve just used it. The Eidelman score is seriously lame.
I didn’t get the galley thing either.All along the food was cooked in a galley?I seem to recall crew members pushing a a button and presto instant play dough food!I think you just introduced another rabbit trail for canon freaks.Well it’s better than nacelle caps!
I very much like this film. There are a few flaws, but they don’t bother me really.
As for the ‘issues’ posted . . . what’s the biggie?! I like the realistic elements of a galley (there’s one in TOS and in Voyager!) rather than a communist gruel dispenser/replicator. I hope people always enjoy cooked food over something dished out by a non-sentient machine.
Whatever caused the Klingon moon to explode had an effect on the ozone layer: an excess of CFCs perhaps!! ;)
Maybe some Klingons have pink blood, just as, at one time, they lost their bumpy foreheads! Maybe a certain amount of time in space makes it go pink. The MPAA wouldn’t allow red blood, in reality, of course! NB the Romulan didn’t have a TNG bumpy forehead either.
Chang was speaking a foreign language, or maybe the universal translator wasn’t perfect!
It’s easy to knock Meyer’s films, especially if you prefer Roddenberry’s version of Trek. Personally, barring a little too much ‘actorly’ self-indulgence, I think this film is an enjoyable coda to the original crew’s adventures. It reminds me of why I liked this crew better than the others.
I agree that the Eidelman score was a little too subdued though!
End of the day, inevitably, the main TOS films belong in a slightly different universe from the TV shows. Certainly they are a far cry from the cold TMP/TNG Treks…
I remember seeing this film and thinking that it was a marvellous way to lay to rest the era of Kirk and co. Sadly, Generations dug up the grave and pee-ed on it, shortly after, meaning JJ Abrams has to hire a new cast to restore dignity to the characters and to Star Trek itself!
Praxis exploding didn’t deplete the Klingon ozone.EVERYONE knows it was the aerosol in their hairspay cans.I mean have you ever seen those crazy Klingon hairdoos.That’s not just klingon magic!
Guys… “in the original Klingon” was
A JOKE.
You know, that Shaekspeare was *really* a Klingon??? HA HA! (also reminiscent of Chekov’s endless claims that Russia invented everything…)
Jeeze… lighten up already!
Anyway, we had a real blast watching Trek VI, especially the galley scene. My father was a chief commissaryman (i.e., he supervised one shift each day) on USS Independence on one of her early cruises, among other ships. He laughed at it, too, as it reminded him of his Navy days feeding more than 5,000 men 7×24. When you’re stuck at sea for six months at a whack, fresh cooked food makes all the difference.
Cheng was just trying to ruffle some feathers and provoke a fighting spirit in what He suspected were his enemies.He could barely restrain himself despite chancellor Gorkon’s presence.I thought THAT worked well as an antagonistic device.
How about this…was it a galley or a rec deck? Maybe the folks in there were doing it for fun, not as an on duty job. Yes they had uniforms but if I had one that looked as cool as those I might never change out of it either.
A better question is why was there a rack of working phasers in the food preparation area? In case a picky Klingon wanted his Gagghhhk (however it is spelled) killed before eating it?
Personally, I loved VI overall. I just wish TNG could have had that great a sendoff.
#7… Phasers in the kitchen? Easily answered…. maybe Cookie was a bad cookie. More than one mutiny started in the galley.
I’ve always disliked VI… mostly for the reason that all the characters are not played as “real”… they’re still playing them in the stereotype mode that started in Trek III and reached its ultimate self-parodying fullness in Trek IV. I really feel as if everyone… especially Shatner and Nimoy are “acting”… and I believe they don’t really understand the lines they’re delivering. “Only Nixon could go to China” is hilarious… to someone in the 70s. No one even uses that phrase here in today’s world… so it’s very dubious to think that it would be around in Trek’s time. The Klingons are once again portrayed as Animal Warriors in Pleather and the “literate” base that Nick Meyer uses is wafer thin and uses references found in day one of high school english class. The beauty of Trek at its best, like Swift’s Gulliver’s Travels, is that it took real world situations and questions and CHANGED THEM to fit in a fantasy or sci fi world. Trek VI seems like a Mad Libs page with “russian” substituted for “klingon” and the translation is so direct that it becomes parody. The lazy writing of the “bad admirals” is truly a goofy way to portray the Federation… and frankly delivers the cynicism of the filmmakers more than it does a view of the future. Am I officially a curmudgeon now? :)
Do phasers have a flambe setting?
Hate to say I am more in the darendoc camp on VI. He is right how the characters or actors worked. Although myself still feel ST III and IV still held together somewhat more to me. Although IV you could feel too much forced humor coming into these films. Humor in Trek should really come natural out of a situation. In the original series there were many scenes like those. VI did have some really good scenes that would then be undone by others. The whole conspiracy felt uneven and not well done. If they had to have it, Saavik a part Romulan that would hate Klingons should of been the main female role not the new Catrall character. I love Trek so it pained me to see the original cast in such uneven films. Just my opinion though.
The only *major* problem with Star Trek VI that I have is the photography used and the camera.
Somehow the photography of this film seems far less motion picturesque’ than the earlier entries.
I don’t care for Herman Zimmerman’s production design either.
The bridge of Star Trek V and VI was shit compared to Harold Michelson’s refit bridge of Trek I through IV. The oversaturation of flooded light is not complimentary to actors.
The subdued mood of the lighting in the first 3 films was dynamic and cast shadows across Kirk and Spock’s countenance.
I missed Robert Fletcher’s costume design as well, the maroon uniforms didn’t fit our beloved crew quite as nicely as earlier entries. I didn’t find the makeup effective either. Kruge had pores to his skin on the makeup appliances in Trek III, here, Chang and crew seemed a bit rubbery, again I feel because of the ridiculous set lighting and camera used. Films for some reason around 1990 looked like garbage, Rocky V is a good example.
I thought the script was servicable and accessible to a broad audience and added to the mythos in a powerful way. There were many subtle nods to fans yet Meyer brought a very stylized and memorable entry to the series anyone could enjoy.
I grew tired of seeing the Klingon Bird of Prey. That ship’s tenure should have ended with Trek IV. The Chancellor’s pimped out violet and gold K’tinga battlecruiser was a welcome sight – Chang should have commandeered a souped up Cloakable K’tinga class crusier for the big end conflict. Not a another Turd of Prey.
I think it’s a historical tragedy Kirsty Alley couldn’t be convinced to return as Saavik, truly a missed oppurtunity to bring more closure.
These are shallow nitpickings I know, overall I believe the film captured the quintessential essence of everything TOS represents. It is a *fun* film.
Contrast the frolicking se-faring spirit of Trek VI with Picard’s ass weeping like a newborn in Generations.
I recall vividly audience members bursting out laughing when Picard began to sob.
Weakness, however human, isn’t an emotional range you want your captain My Captain to demonstrate. It doesn’t add depth to the character as intended, it stains and taints it.
When Saavik informed Kirk that David Marcus was killed, Kirk didn’t curl up in a fetal position and suck his thumb, he shouted obscenities and fell on his ass with grief, quickly recovering from his emotional reverie and hatching a plan to GET.THOSE.BASTARDS.BACK.
That’s why he’s the Captain.
Kirk doesn’t tolerate or put up with that bullshit. He has a low tolerance threshold for mickey mouse affairs.
But I digress.
Love Star Trek VI, I saw it 3 or 4 times in the movie theaters I think. I’ve bought the VHS, the standard DVD, the Directors Edition DVD, and the Soundtrack on CD.
I agree with darendoc on this one. While I enjoyed the Trek movies when they originally came out, I realized as time went on that much of my enjoyment was based more on nostalgia rather than inherent quality of the films. The films become progressively more self-referential, increasingly full of “in-jokes” about the pop-culture status of Trek, and the characters increasingly one-dimensional charicatures of the ones in the original series. When I go back and look at the films now, TMP — despite some of its plotting and pacing problems — feels like the last time we really saw these characters as recognizably the same people we’d watched on TV for 3 years. While TWOK is my favorite Trek film as a whole package, even then the process I describe had already begun. By the time we got to TUC, everyone was all swagger and one-liners. They were parodies (or at least short-hand versions) of themselves.
I also agree that the TUC plot went beyond social commentary, through allegory, and into After-School Special territory. Watching the original TOS episodes, these folks felt very much like real people in a real quasi-military service, with characters coming and going, people getting transferred in, transferred out, etc. They were highly competent officers doing their jobs, but they weren’t gods and they weren’t even legends. By the time we get to TUC, they’re the same 7 people hanging out on the same ship for 20 years doing the same jobs (why, exactly?), reveling in their Icon-hood.
The movie was flat-out fun. If you can’t take some of the silliness with a grain of salt, you’re missing out on a good time. “How dare they have potato mashers on the Enterprise?” Relax, folks. It’s just a TV show, right?
As for Meyer including things that really don’t make sense like a galley (in STVI), I’ll point out that a) He’s the guy who put No Smoking signs in the Starfleet academy halls in STII, and b) in “Charlie X”, Kirk actually does talk to a chef about getting a Thanksgiving meal prepared on time. So there is some kind of galley/food dispenser duality going in on Kirk’s era that we just have to accept.
I have to weigh in again on this galley thing:
The Enterprise is the flagship of the fleet. As a luxury, she has “real” food prepared for some her officers. How crazy is that? Not a bit. In 250 years, I would hope humans were still able to eat real food. Even if it were considered a rare treat.
I don’t have a problem with the galley being there… Roddenberry always felt that preparing food was a pleasure for some… so why deny that in space travel… What I do object to is the clumsy scene that happens in the galley… from inanities like a weapons closet in the kitchen to the embarrasing character moments of Uhura and Scotty idiotically asking if someone had fired a phaser… These characters have turned into doddering idiots, apparently… with no hint that they have the ability to exist in space travel situations…
Oh… and the darn “space boots” MacGuffin… and the silly Alien Feet scene. Things like this were obviously put in to placate the secondary “stars” to give the supporting roles something to do… but it just comes off as jokes at our characters expense…. making them the butt of the joke, rather than showing them as people worthy of having a film around them. If the conspirators can doctor the log to show torpedos missing, they can certainly hide an instance of using the transporter at wide dispersal to get rid of a silly pair of ski boots.
The clumsy instances of racism against the Klingons just doesn’t make sense in the Star Trek Universe… The crew of the Enterprise has met and contacted thousands of new races and strange civilizations… they have experience with the “Infinite Diversity” of the galaxy… if they were closeted bigots, they wouldn’t go far in the established structure of StarFleet. I’m not saying that all of the human race has evolved beyond such petty things as racism in a utopian future… I don’t buy Roddenberry’s “Enlightened Human” philosophy… but I also don’t believe that the Federation beings of the 23rd Century would have gotten so successful in the galaxy had these features of bigotry been prevalent in the crews of StarFleet.
It would have been ok if there were glimmers of the anti-Klingon feeling in the movie… if our characters had indicated that such feelings are “without merit” and against the forward thinking of the Federation. I think it would have been a much more successful story if KIRK, the most likely enemy of the Klingon Empire, would have been at the forefront of trying to help the Klingons… because he has had the most contact with them… and has, at least in the TV series, been able to earn their respect… because he’s been one of the few able to beat them in the past. That would be a compelling reason to get our crew involved… not being dragged into a pow wow with the Klingons against their will… like whiny children… as it’s portrayed in Trek VI.
Just my ramblings. Talk amongst yourselves.
re: STVI–
Just how DID Spock manage to recurl his ears so they suddenly started pointing towards the front of his head instead of the back? Plus they stuck out like Alfred E Neuman’s.
Kirk’s bigotry bothered me when I first saw the movie. I thought to myself, shouldn’t it be our hero that pushes peace to the rest of the crew? But after growing 15 years older, looking back, it makes more sense that Kirk be bitter towards the Klingons.
Abstractly, Kirk understands the value of peace talks. But through decades of fighting these guys, he doesn’t trust them. And I’m glad that Kirk showed some emotional baggage re: the loss of his son. Here he is, just trying to save his best friend’s life when a typical lowlife greedy Klingon gets involved, murders his son and forces Kirk to destroy his ship. Philosophically, you can say that humans in the 23rd Century are improved versions of our present selves but look back three hundred years into our own past and you’ll see that a lot of human nature still remains the same. People are petty, emotional, guilt-ridden, etc. Are we to expect some exponential increase in self-betterment in the next couple of centuries? In some areas, sure, but in terms of human nature, not too much will likely change. Kirk is a man coming to the end of his life. He’s alone, he’s about to lose his command for the last time, and he looks over some of his life and asks “What if?” I think Generations dropped the ball on this theme, but certainly Kirk must feel by the end that he missed out on some important things, like a wife and family. And David Marcus’ death was a brutal and meaningless loss. Klingons murdered Kirk’s son. As a survivor, Kirk must feel some bitterness at the very least. To be honest, I would think less of him if he simply brushed it off. Kirk’s bigotry is a flaw, but he is redeemed by the end, and that’s what makes the story emotionally resonant.
Kirk is not perfect. In ST:TMP he is petulant and greedy in stealing back the Enterprise. In ST: TWOK he is overconfident to a fault (causing an unnecessary loss of life in his battles with Khan). So, having our hero be imperfect is good so long as he finds his way back to self-betterment at the end.
The United States was caught in a Cold War with the USSR for 50 years. While we as a nation struggled to improve our own civil rights in this country, our views towards the Soviets were still based on a lot of bigotry and fear. As an allegory to the Cold War (which was what ST:VI’s entire conceit), coming to an end of a similar cold war with the Klingon Empire, the Federation too had to struggle with all the built-up prejudices that were in place during that conflict.
“People can be very frightened of change,” says Kirk. That’s the message. I think ST:VI derives a noble conclusion that peace is inevitable and necessary, and it does so by showing how we are flawed by nature but we must strive to do better.
Your points are valid… and I agree that the allegory here is applicable… but my main complaint is that it’s handled so ham-handedly. This story would have worked well for me if it were not set in the Star Trek Universe… where it hadn’t been established that Kirk is a superior human… who knows his own foibles and strives to combat them. I missed attitudes that we even saw in the first season of Trek: in Balance of Terror when Kirk chastises Navigator Styles “Leave any bigotry in your quarters” when Styles shows animocity towards the Romulans and to Spock. That mere statement shows the advancement of mankind. Admitting that race hatred can exist in this time, but also stating that it is unacceptable behavior. I realize that all this backstory is silly to rest on and is only for die hard fans of Trek… who know every nuance of every character arc… and that the movies are intended for a wider audience, and need to be “dumbed down” slightly… but it speaks of the attitude of the filmmakers to the characters. In TOS, the underlying statement about mankind is “We know we are flawed… but look how good we CAN be.” But in Trek VI especially, the feeling is “Yeah, these are supposed to be our heroes, but they are just covering a deep rotten core of hatred”… a cynical attitude in a cynical time… and that is my core problem with the film… All of my problems with it stem from that basic idea… that goodness comes from luck, and mankind is basically an animal. The characters aren’t portrayed as being WORTHY of honor or posessing true courage. They are just buffeted by circumstance and stumbling into the final outcome. It’s not uplifting… it saddens me.
Don’t know why I’m motivated to talk so much about this at this late date… guess I’ve just had a deep seeded urge to express myself about it for a long time, and have only recently reasoned out my feelings. ;) Thank goodness for this site, and the thoughtful posters on here who are into this for the discourse and exchange of ideas. Cheers.
Lest we forget, Myer didn’t pen the script to VI, Denny Martin Flynn did.
If memory serves Myer’s only contribution was “Only Nixon could go to China.”
Regardless of how a person feels about Trek VI, I would hope it can be universally agreed that film had the singularly most outstanding Teaser preview of any Trek film, bar none.
Christopher Plummer’s narration over a shot of the Enterprise with all previous episodes superimposed over the hull kicked much to do about ass, and was a tearjerker.
Impressive, most impressive.
#21, I too appreciate the discourse. Thanks for a good discussion.
#22, I know Denny Martin Flynn wrote the script, but Meyer only wrote that one line? I believe it was more a collaboration. Certainly the Shakespeare, the Sherlock Holmes references, etc. are Nick Meyer signatures. And I know for a fact that Meyer wrote the “Second star to the right…” coda scene himself.
My impression was that Kirk’s dislike of the Klingons was something that had grown as he got older. As a young man, he told Styles to leave his bigotry in his quarters, precisely because he was a young man full of zeal and enthusiasm!
At twice that age, on his final mission, having lost the original Enterprise and his son in battle to the Klingons, not to mention having probably had a number of encounters with the Klingons between series and films that we haven’t seen, he’d slid into hating them.
The events of STVI bring him up short and make him realise how tired and angry he’s become!
OK…The Galley thing.People enjoy cooking as a creative social process.Makes sense to have an outlet like that instead of being totally reliant on replicators.
It’s a strange contradiction Adam.
On one hand, the film has Meyer’s ambiance and sensibilities written all over the narrative, from the literary allusions and references it feels like Meyer’s work,
yet on the other the DVD commentary is a veritable smorgasboard of interesting information, and if memory serves Meyer indicated that is his sole line in the film, of which he seemed rather adament it was included.
From script to film is naturally a collaborative process, perhaps when Nimoy and Meyer sat down with Flynn to break the story there was a laundry list of things they all agreed upon that had to be included.
I know Nimoy wanted an Abraham Lincoln like figure included, resulting in Gorkon. (Gorbachev)
Flynn probably was fully aware of Meyer’s work and contribution to Trek and put his best foot forward when hammering out the script.
No one truly know. Perhaps as with Trek II Meyer did a final script polish personally.
On Trek two Meyer’s script is an amalgamation of 4 or 5 different scripts, borrowing powerful themes from each, with Jack Sowards getting final screen-writing credit.( Evidently Sowards came up with the majority of concepts for the film, Meyer just flsehed them out on paper into something workable.)
As far as the ships galley,
The Enterprise has entire facilities devoted to personal leisure and pursuit.
The original Enteprise didn’t have food replication. That was a lazy Next Generation device. Who wants synthetic booze and food? Scotty was right.
The Enterprise had a galley and a series of conveyance mechanisms physically brought the food to each room of each deck where food could be ordered. Almost a conveyor system.
People cooked and prepared the food like any modern naval vessel, the tried and true method with chefs and food specialists.
Not everything is simulated or artificial in the 23rd century.
If I was serving aboard the Enterprise and I wanted to grow an honest to God plant, there are botanical areas and greenhouses for that.
Roddenbery was absolutely insistent that the wheels of mechanization NEVER replace human luxury or avocation.
The Enterprise has arcade areas, billiards, water treatment facilities for the swimming pool, a bowling alley, a chapel, a library of entertainment venues and films for the crew to enjoy, a galley, and any and every room can be converted to suit any need that may arrise, from mass public gatherings to hosting visiting aliens that dont have the benefit of breathing oxygen or even living in non-liquid enviroments.
We simply never had the oppurtunity to see most of these things as the budget and subsequent writers choices never took us there.
The presence of a galley isn’t anti-23rd century technology, it’s actually a more pro-humanistic nod to tradition. Hell, Kirk orders chicken soup in one episode. Evidently to make the blue cubes more palatable.
I wouldn’t be too entirely surprised if somewhere, on some quiet deck, there wasn’t a simulated golf course.
^^^^^^
Also, not to get into the canon vs. non canon debate,
but in MY Star Trek universe the animated series is canon and the last two years of Kirk’s five year mission, and the Enteprise featured a holo-deck LONG before the Enterprise D made it novel.
The galley in TOS got popped with real turkeys in Charlie X. McCoy at other times complains about the reconstituted food. So, it appears to be a mix of hand made and spacey e-z bake oven. Even so, in STVI it’s clearly a production choice, not a question of canon. If I were in space for months at a shot, I’d want real food. And it looks better in a movie.
Josh,
I’m going to have to dig through old materials, but I am certain that I’ve read somewhere that Nick Meyer and Denny Martin Flynn faxed pages back and forth every single day, splitting scripting duties. At the time the movie was greenlit, Meyer was overseas filming a movie (I think it was called “Company Business”) and since Meyer was finishing up that production, he needed a co-writer to help pick up the slack.
I’ll let you know what I find. I think it’s in an old Cinefantastique issue.
I vaguely recall that myself Adam,
now that you mention it, I believe Flynn faxed Meyer his pages and Meyer performed a final polishing adding his own flare for dramatics.
Spock’s ears sticking out
For TOS and the other movies Nimoy had them pinned back with glue (see I Am Spock)
I just want to send my kudos out to everyone in this thread… it’s been a great discussion, with everyone treating each other and their opinions with a LOT of respect!
Keep up the good work guys… :)
None other than Mark Altman just corrected me (and TrekCore.com) that yesterday wasn’t the anniversary…it was 3 days prior on December 3rd… Oops
thanks Mark for the heads up…and why didnt any of you losers correct me!?!
I don’t keep track of days anymore. lol I only remember that Today is the Pearl Harbor Anniversary and the 27th anniversary of the release of Star Trek – The Motion Picture. Which is STILL my favorite Trek film… followed closely by Trek II.
Oh… and I do remember fondly the teaser for Trek VI… was wonderful to see it in theaters back in the day… brought a tear to my eye. … and I was also in the “Sit Long and Prosper” screening in Westwood, Los Angeles back then when they screened all (6 at that time) Trek films… was wonderful.
glad to hear it DD…I knew it got to you somehow at least. I got all teary at the end of the film with the sigs…I am man enough to admit it. I knew it was over for my TOS heroes and I got all choked up.
Oh and actually I am retracting my ‘correction’. It is true that Dec 3rd was the premiere in LA, but the nationwide release was on Dec. 6th (according to IMDB). I think Mark may have been thinking I was saying today (the 7th) was ST VI day….but today is ST:TMP day as DD points out. But this article is from yesterday…so I am sticking with it
so false alarm
Mark Altman!!!
Mark if you’re reading this, you’re the man. I miss those annual capsule reviews of TNG you wrote for Cinefantastique.
HOWEVER, I don’t remember Star Trek VI having a Wednesday opening. The original release date was set for December 13, 1991, but was pushed up a week earlier (to December 6, 1991) because I think Spielberg’s “Hook” was coming out around that first date. I think Altman might be wrong here. I know I’m asking for a major whipping for even suggesting that he’s made an error. I can take the lumps, but if I’m right, then I want Altman to say so explicitly on this website.
“I’m sorry, Adam Cohen was correct, (signed) Mark Altman.”
it turns out Mark thought ‘today’ was ‘today’ as in December 7th. So he was correct it wasnt ‘today’….but it was yesterday Dec 6th…so there you go…as I said false alarm
I was correct!
I wrote my comment before reading #36!
I still want an apology from Mark Altman. I’m an extremely petty person. Anthony, if you recall in another article discussion yesterday, I was the one who wrote “I just realized today is the 15th Anniversary of the release of ST VI.” Then miraculously, you posted an article commemorating the release. Sure this info is in the public domain, but I’m dying for some recognition, as my best friends nowadays are two Siberian Huskies that don’t really give me credit for anything except my ability to open cans of dog food.
Ok, I’ve said enough.
#38, Anthony, you’re killing me.
Someone better apologize for something! Mark, I think its safe to say you’re off the hook (ahem, Mr. Pascale).
i am sorry you want someone to apologize….is that better?
;)
If you people werent watching this site like a hawk no one would have noticed I made the change and changed it back in a 10 minute period
Anthony, it’s YOUR fault for making such an awesome site, and it’s the readers’ fault for sustaining such a good thread. I second what #32 John N said earlier, this discussion has been a pleasure.
I can’t wait for the forums section. With this group of readers and contributors, we’re going to have some great debates/discussions (e.g. “Are Montalban’s pecs real?”).
The teaser made my eyes well up a bit too and the signatures at the end always make the end even more bittersweet.
My favorite ST VI moment was the final scene, where Shatner nails it perfectly as he speaks the line “Second star to the right…” I don’t know how he did it, but when he smiled before giving the line, for a brief moment he looked 25 years younger and I saw Jim Kirk from the good ‘ol days, youthful, vibrant and completely content sitting center seat on that bridge. And the reaction shots of the other actors were great too– particularly De Kelley in his last film appearance, with that inward smile and a face that told volumes without saying too much. These characters were made special by some fine actors. Man, I really do miss that crew.
Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country is by far my favorite film.
Actually the reference to “in the original klingon language” is a reference to a comment made by german officers during WWII as they would say Shakespeare was german, both as propoganda and as a means of simply insulting other europeans.
Oh and as for the other points. I think VI is one of those films, like many that occurred within the original series one that did many things right and a number of things wrong as well. But I feel that what ST VI did far better than many episodes have since is that it dealt with the natural progression that the world/universe takes. Ideas and cultures change and grow. What makes us enemies changes over time as we grow to learn more about the other.
And even though bigotry in terms of human-human has been overcome more in the future as depicted in Trek that is not to say that the social stereotypes do not neccessarily resonate between human-klingon or human-romulan and so on. Besides, I feel that to better get across the message of what Nimoy-Meyer were trying to present here in VI; that our enemies are really only our enemies because neither side actually knows the other; it is needed within the story telling to carry weight through out the piece. That was the one thing that I appreciate the more i see this film, was how Nimoy-Meyer actually took on the notion of stereotypes within the public’s own understanding of characters within the Trek universe. Klingons were seen as the enemy, but only because they were presented that way within a simplistic representation in the original TOS. Here they are shown to have culture, education, and emotion to the world around them.
And the use of slight bigotry in no way undermines the characters as to how they have been presented prior. Though Kirk does make a comment about leaving bigotry at the door in episodes such as “Balance of Terror” he is also the same person who wants to punish the Gorn in “Arena”; at least until he is forced to confront his own bias which is exactly what they show here as ST VI unfolds.
Besides, if u really look at VI there are only a few characters who carry any real negativity toward each other in terms of bigotry which i think is important since more of what is going on is less about actual hatred and more about the notion of fear that still resides over social changes. At the same time though there is anger and resentment, there are still many people who can look past that and see the wrong in any such thought (ie. McCoy through much of the film or even the scene outside of Khitomer where a starfleet officer and klingon officer actually begin to converse). It feels more that the purpose of this film was to show that such notions can be overcome easily when actually looked at for what they are; fear over change and too much emphasis placed on the mundayne issues that have occurred over time.
acb makes excellent points, and I do want to add one thing-
Prior to TNG (1987) the Klingons were fairly uncomplicated characters. They were warriors. They were the enemy, plain and simple. Gene Roddenberry made the provocative choice of putting a Klingon on the Enterprise-D bridge to show that the wars of the past had come to an end. And ST: VI sought to bridge that gap by honoring TOS crew as being the cause and conduit for that peace, ending poetically with the “where no man… where no ONE has gone before” line. Looking back now, it doesn’t seem like such a big deal (post-TNG, DS9 and VOY) but prior to TNG, the Klingons were really bad guys. Worf changed all of that and after 4 seasons of TNG, TOS caught up with that issue and bridged the gap between the two shows. It was the most appropriate story they could have told to wrap up TOS.
Ahhh, yes ….. Star Trek VI
Possibly the greatest Trek film ever !
Peace with the Klingons; Peace with the Russians.
It will last the test of time.
It is great to see the crew back in action one last time.
A nice way to end the series, but it’s hard to say goodbye.
STVI shows a much more mature approach, and the crew
members have to face, more than an outside enemy, their
own aging, and their fear of change.
Christopher Plummer makes a fascinating villain, endlessly
throwing out Shakespeare quotes on every turn.
Superb special effects … dark and eerie in spots, uplifting
in its finale.
Keep the Road Smooth
They should have signed off at the end in character though
Wow, I hadn’t read these threads, but glad to finally hear that there are other people out there who like me find Trek 6 to be less than stellar! I haven’t read all the threads so I apologize if I’m retreading ground here.
I always thought it’s flaws were the over the top … way too obvious, political and environmental overtones. It’s not that the movie HAS political and environmental overtones, just that they hit you over the head with it.
Not too mention the silliness of looking for a pair of antigrav boots to find the killer… and Spocks mental rape scene with Valeris. Plus lets not forget the Scooby Doo ending with Rene Aujerbonous (sp?)
This movie always left me flat. It looked really slick and all, but in the end it was just out of step.
Doug
#48
And yet ironically Adam, in many ways the Klingons are far more interesting…… AS two dimensional villians. ( Say it like Korax from Tribbles, it helps)
TNG and DS9 later, ventured entirely too far into faux spiritualistic / New Agey territory for my tastes.
Contrast Worf’s seemingly endless soul searching with the fun and panache’ of a Kor, or Kang. Or even Kruge. Sometimes you just can’t beat a classic mustache twirling villian. Especially when they have mustaches.
I wish they’d used the idea from the novels that the Praxis explosion was caused by the Klingons attempting to build their own version of Genesis. It would have given tied up all the various films very nicely.
Actually, Genesis would have been a good concept to use as the basis of the first TNG film. After all, it’s about death and rebirth. Genesis would have been ideal for the cinematic ‘rebirth’ of Trek.
Rather than Soran trying to use the Nexus to regain his family, Soran using Genesis to recreate his home planet, not caring that his target world is inhabited, would have been more interesting.
They could have made the film a la Godfather II and set the film in two time periods with the Genesis energies being twisted to bring the two crews together briefly.
Face it, even if Genesis was a maguffin that failed to result in a sustainable planet in the original movies, it represents a vital weapon for the military and would surely have had some historical impact on the Soviet Federation of Planets in TNG!!!
#52 Josh,
I totally agree. The Klingons were de-fanged and replaced by the Microsoft-era villains (the computer virus also known as) The Borg. Don’t get me wrong, I liked me some Borg villainy when they were truly imposing, a la The Best of Both Worlds. But the Borg, like the Klingons, were rendered ineffective by the constant New Age questioning of their nature, spirituality, etc. Soul-searching villains stink, that’s the bottom line. Even in Generations, Soran had to have a story, some pain in his past that made him do all that evil. It was a waste of screentime if you ask me. Well, the whole Generations movie was awful, save for the give and take between Kirk and Scotty on the Enterprise-B bridge. Now I’m rambling.
The best Trek villain, Khan, was just a really bad guy. You can admire his skill, strength and panache because he’s not apologizing at all for being bad. He’s quite pleased with his evil ways. That’s a good villain. Kruge, Chang, Kang, Koloth, Kor, etc. are the same types of baddies. Personally, Kor is my favorite Klingon villain– particularly when the Organians stopped he and Kirk from war, he lamented: “A pity, Captain. It would have been glorious!”
TNG-era Trek’s motto seemed to be: ‘Let’s find a good villain and make them boring!’
Look at how the Borg started out as a terrifying villain, growing children in what look like drawers and attaching electronics to them. The Borg were unstoppable, terrifying and utterly alien.
The first episode of The Best of Both Worlds had one of the best examples of a doom-laden atmosphere I’ve ever seen on TV. It gives us the feeling that the Star Trek universe is about to be shattered and will never be the same again. It even overcomes the often dull effects and balls-dull interior Enterprise lighting, thanks to good performances and Ron Jones’s wonderfully creepy score. And what an ending!
Then, part two shows up. What do we get? A tension-eradicating countdown and the most chintzy tinsel-light-beam display this side of Christmas, setting up a dud episode where the mood changes from bravery against insuperable odds to another episode of ‘We’re evolved humans, so we’ll win!’ sausage-machine Berman-Trek. Even the eradication of the half of Starfleet seems dull.
Two episodes after The Best of Both Worlds 2, it’s like nothing ever happened. Then we get Edward ‘Hugh’ Scissorborg who proves that the Borg can be cute and fluffy too.
In First Contact, you get a Queen Borg that Data can boink. By the end of Voyager, you get a Borg everyone wants to boink!!
The great thing in STVI is that the Klingons remain a tough, powerful race. Any peace treaty won’t be easy. For all the good words spoken at the end of the film, you would suspect that the peace will be an on-off affair.
The TNG era changed the Klingons from an ***archetypal*** warrior race into a ***stereotypical*** warrior race amid lots of liberal-group-hug soul searching and a (let’s be honest here!) over-earnest performance by Michael Dorn. By the end of the series Worf had been reduced to a vague ‘Let’s laugh at the black guy in the silly make-up’ cipher. His last great moment was at the start of First Contact, flying the Defiant into battle, with Jerry Goldsmith’s Klingon theme blasting away!
The Romulans were a wonderfully devious race originally, but ended up as a bunch of boring farts whose government got wiped out by a boring vampire-clone of Captain Picard who only did as well as he did, because he nicked all his schemes from watching old TNG episodes.
TNG-era Trek spent too much time psycho-analysing its characters, in an environment that requires strong archetypes. By resorting to stereotypes, TNG’s big ideas became little more than liberal box-ticking and lacked any resonance.
I remember catching a showing of STVI at Christmas a few years back. As the film came to an end and the actors signed off their names, I realised that, for me, there was only one crew that I truly cared about. I’d tolerated TNG and co, but STVI reminded me of where my true loyalties lie.
STVI’s flaw is that it’s more about its cast than its characters. But it is a great coda to the era of the first cast to play the TOS characters. I look forward to spending many more pleasurable hours in their company in the new stories to come!
Happy Anniversary STVI!!! I was there opening night and it is still one of my favorites… I miss the crew of the 1701-A
R5
A character is never interesting when they are two dimensional. The only way a two-dim character is interesting to watch is AFTER a good actor/actress comes in and adds some form of 3 dimensionality to its portrayl. The only reason the klingons in TOS were interesting in some degree was that the actors added some three dimensionality to how they performed the roles (which i will chaulk up to classic training there, something sorely laking in many actors/actresses of today). I can say the same for Khan, yes he did evil things, but Robert Montalban played the evil with counter parts of varying emotion as well. He added instances of
love and admiration as well to go along with his rage.
The big issue of three dimensionality not working comes in when lack luster writers attempt to add three dimensional depictions that do not actually fit with the characters or are not thought out well enough in terms of reality within circumstance. That is why I support VI’s depictions more than any since because the Klingons were still Klingons but now with more insight into who they are. Face it, a person or people do not become who they are immediately after they are born. The society u are born and raised in makes u that way. It is very easy to attempt to ignore this fact and simply say that “no they are only evil and that is all” but in doing so the whole point of Trek; to move beyond stereotypes and become more open minded; would be left null.
If Trek is to represent an idealiac metaphor to man’s nature in the future, then such revelations of character as in ST VI need to be approached.
In odd synergy, I just recently watched Star Trek VI… it kept me company on a sleepless night. I found some of the same complaints, some of the jokiness wears on me, but at the center of it; it’s loving jokiness, I believe. There are a lot of things you have to just swallow, such as the Klingon’s not noticing the veridian patch Spock had slapped on Kirk. Kirk and Bones not searched for hidden weapons, etc? ~LOL~ The final send off with the signatures gets to me as well. *sniffle* The music was perhaps the weakest element to me, but it served it’s purpose.
Definitely a good TOS Trek, not quite perfect, but nearing greatness. :-)
Trek 3 and 4 were sequels to Trek 2.Trek 6 was “stand alone” the way Trek 2 was (with the minor reference Spock made to being dead before in Trek 6 ).Trek 5 was ,well lets just forget Trek 5.So Trek 3 and 4 had to deal with the loose ends Trek 2 left behind.