Review – Star Trek V: The Final Frontier February 17, 2008
by William S. Kowinski , Filed under: Feature Films (TMP-NEM), Review , trackbackTrekMovie.com now continues our look back at Trek films past…
In the movie Little Big Man, the elderly Cheyenne medicine man called Old Lodge Skins decides it’s time for him to die. He goes to the top of the mountain, performs his rituals, reclines on the ground and closes his eyes. For a few moments nothing happens, except for some distant thunder. Then a raindrop falls on his face, startling him into opening his eyes. He stands up and prepares to go back home. “Sometimes the magic works,” he explains, “and sometimes it doesn’t.”
Every original cast Star Trek movie made missteps and experienced chaos on its way to the screen. Coming off their biggest success in Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home, the Star Trek movie team was confident. They’d successfully added humor to the mix, and it seemed they knew just how to make the magic, in spite of any obstacle. But this time it didn’t quite work.
In hindsight, it’s possible to see ways in which the stars did not align this time. Beginning serious work on the script and the filming was delayed, by among other things, something familiar from today: a Writers Guild strike. The delay would put the film in competition with several blockbusters, including Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, Dead Poets Society, Ghostbusters II, and Batman. These would become important to the moviemaking process as well as the box office, because they kept the usual visual effects houses busy—especially Industrial Light and Magic. Trek would have to look elsewhere, with near- disastrous results. A Teamsters strike also hampered location shooting.
Star Trek V’s June 9 release sandwiched between four top 10 movies
After initial rave reviews, Star Trek V: The Final Frontier came under critical fire and had less than stellar box office. Theatre owners in that very competitive summer of 1989 shortened the run to make way for the next blockbuster. Today among Trek fans this is the least popular of the original cast movies. When it was next in line for a special edition DVD, director William Shatner begged Paramount to fix visual effects problems with today’s CGI magic, especially in the last part of the film, even promising to foot half the bill himself. Paramount refused.
Everyone who has seen this movie (and some who haven’t) know what they don’t like about it. The visual effects are clearly a problem. Not only are they especially inadequate at a couple of key moments, but in some relatively routine scenes—the Enterprise shuttle in flight, for instance—the effects are obviously unfinished, lacking the subtle details and shading that makes them look dimensional and “real.” These are perhaps more damaging, because they take viewers out of the world of the movie, and can shake their confidence in the moviemakers.
Not the finest moment in Star Trek Movie effects
Then there’s the story: Sybok, a charismatic Vulcan renegade, captures the Enterprise to take him to the fabled planet beyond the Great Barrier at the center of the galaxy to meet God. In interviews and their books, the actors, producers etc. involved in this film attribute its problems to the movie’s premise. (Gene Roddenberry had tried a similar exploration in his first script for the first Star Trek movie, called “The God Thing,” but the studio rejected it.)
Almost alone, William Shatner (who came up with the story) disagrees: he believes the problem was that he compromised on his core ideas, and robbed the film of it’s dramatic energy. In various ways, they’re probably all right.
On the one hand, dealing with such a subject in any meaningful or even credible way in a big studio feature film would be very hard to do. Plus anything touching upon religious beliefs is going to offend some part of the audience. That was true then (when Shatner was inspired, or provoked, by the phenomenon of popular tele-evangelists then saturating TV screens) and it is even truer now, when Star Trek fans—especially on the Internet– seem split according to their political and religious loyalties and orientation, and any reference to religion brings charges of prejudice and worse.
On the other hand, going in search of God and finding the Devil is a repeated sci-fi premise but if done well, it is often relevant to contemporary times—especially, as in this case, when the seeker (Sybok) confident in his righteousness, ends up face to face with the devil in himself. But compromises and continued tweaking which left their residues in the final script probably did rob the movie of some internal coherence.
There are smaller issues that some find particularly irksome: the introduction of Sybok as Spock’s long-lost half brother, the humor at the apparent expense of some regular characters (especially Scotty) the suggestion of a Scotty-Uhura romance, etc. All these may be remnants of the original story that had the Enterprise crew, including Spock and McCoy, side with Sybok against Kirk— Shatner’s tone-deaf proposal, even if it was more dramatic. Both Leonard Nimoy and DeForest Kelley insisted their characters couldn’t betray Kirk, and so they didn’t.
The elements for a successful movie were there in “The Final Frontier”: action, visual sweep, drama, character moment, important issues of contemporary life, plus the humor that worked within the story of “The Voyage Home.” But due in part to various missteps and in part to the story development, it can be argued that in the first part of the movie, for all its flashiness and memorable scenes of action and camaraderie, and for all the provocative ideas given physical form, the narrative didn’t engage our emotions and involvement with a strong sense of why we should care about what happens.
STV went in search for God but found trouble
Viewing and Re-viewing
I saw this movie in a theatre when it opened, and I’ve seen it on TV, on tape and several times on DVD. A film’s flaws are acute at first because of disappointment that it isn’t better than it might have been. But after all this time, a movie on DVD is what it is, and its flaws become part of its nature. Most importantly, this is one of only six movies with the whole original cast, and there aren’t going to be any more. It’s worth honoring what’s good about it and what’s good in it.
Probably my biggest surprise on re-viewing it was noticing the visual sense director William Shatner brought to it. He used extreme outdoor settings to give some visual dimension in those pre-CGI days, but where he excells is in moving the camera inside the Enterprise and other enclosures, and especially in framing small groups of characters– the kind of elegant two and three shots that became the visual signature of the original series.
Shatner had to overcome Dee Kelley’s resistance to doing the of McCoy at his father’s bedside, struggling with his duty as a doctor to preserve life against his duty as a son to end suffering and preserve his father’s dignity. But now this is perhaps Kelley’s most dramatic scene in any of the films.
William Shatner directs a scene in uniform on Star Trek V: The Final Frontier
While some humorous scenes are questionable, others are classic moments that reveal the crew’s camaraderie. (The screenplay is by David Loughery, who Shatner credits with much of the humor.) They range from brief gags (Kirk saying wistfully that he misses his old command chair, followed by Spock’s tilting his head in sympathy; Scotty bursting through the brig wall shouting, “Dinna you know a jailbreak when you see one!”) to longer scenes, such as the brig scene itself. And while the early scene of Kirk, Spock and McCoy around the campfire has its awkwardness, it also has moments of convincing informality unmatched elsewhere in Star Trek. The reprise of this scene at the end is one of the most intimate moments involving the Trek trinity—and one of the great gifts we’ll always have from these movies.
Even some of the more eccentric elements (Kirk’s mountain climbing and Spock’s jet-pack, Uhura’s dance) are now unforgettable elements in the Trek legend.
There are other considerable virtues: the quality of the acting (especially Laurence Luckinbill’s brilliant performance as Sybok), and a film score that is considered one of Jerry Goldsmith’s best, for example. But I would also argue that the last part of the film—including the part that Shatner called “horrendous”—constitutes solid, meaningful and provocative storytelling in the best Trek movie tradition. To explain what I mean, we go back to the movie’s theme.
Luckinbill’s Sybok feels your pain
The God Thing
From one point of view, Sybok fails as a character in this film because he is not simple enough: he is not clearly a powerful, malevolent villain. But because he is complex and human, his character succeeds in other ways.
Sybok is on the one hand a religious zealot, certain God has spoken to him, and called him to pierce the Great Barrier at the center of the galaxy and find the fabled Sha Ka Ree. (You might wonder what combination of mystical words from various religions were chosen to name this heavenly planet. The answer is a little more Hollywood than holy: it’s a play on “Sean Con-ner-y,” the movie god that Shatner hoped would play Sybok.)
On the one hand, Sybok is a Vulcan renegade, convinced that the path to ultimate knowledge is through emotion, not logic—a perennial Star Trek tension that Spock himself has explored.
On the other hand, Sybok seems to have an inexplicable (and at times unbelievable) power over people, but on the other hand, his psychological skills are pretty sophisticated. After Sybok extracts McCoy’s agony over his father in a kind of psychic holodeck, Sybok urges him to release his pain over it. "You have taken the first step. The rest we will take together." Counselor Troi would recognize the basic approach of exploring a person’s pain, and after its initial release and revelation, going into it more deeply.
When Spock says he has already acknowledged and dealt with the pain of his father’s rejection of his human side, he has attained the therapeutic goal, which is also the goal of other soul paths: self-knowledge.
Kirk provides yet another point of view. Sybok tells him that he’s seen essential elements of his close friends—“This is who they are. Didn’t you know that?” Kirk has to admit that he didn’t. But he refuses to go through the process to release his own pain. Sybok suggests he is afraid. “I’m afraid of nothing,” Kirk says (a line since repeated by Denny Crain.) Kirk wants to keep his pain, because its essential to who he is. As someone who has literally been split into the Good Kirk and Bad Kirk, he understands the mutual dependence of that duality within him.
Kirk likes his pain
This scene, which takes place in the magnificent new observation lounge, ends as the Enterprise approaches the Great Barrier. Kirk warns Sybok that it’s never been breached. Sybok says that if we do it, will that convince you that my vision is true? It’s then he reveals it’s a vision from God “who waits for us on the other side.” “You’re mad!” Kirk exclaims. “Am I?” Sybok shows some doubt, and then recovers his sunny transcendence: “We’ll see.”
As a visual effect, The Great Barrier is pretty underwhelming. But immediately after it is breached, some of the best scenes in the movie begin. From the observation lounge, Kirk, Spock and McCoy see the planet Sha Ka Ree before them. “Are we dreaming?” McCoy asks. “If we are, then life IS a dream,” Kirk replies. The reference is to the campfire song they sang early in the movie (“Row, Row, Row Your Boat”) when Spock considered the lyrics and later announced, “Life is not a dream.”
Sybok returns control of the Enterprise to Kirk, knowing that he won’t leave without exploring the planet below. He accompanies the trinity aboard a shuttle. This sequence is the most magical in the movie: the dramatic quick cuts among the faces as they all wonder what they really will see, while bathed in the eerie violet light from the planet. They disembark in a strange landscape anxiously, sharp silhouettes against the alien haze. (All this was done with special effects at the site, rather than visual effects created in an effects house—a distinction I learned from a talk by Dan Curry.)
Kirk, Sybok, Spock and McCoy embark into the unknown
At first nothing happens. But soon some power builds walls of rock around them that might be a cathedral, or a prison. The power reveals itself as faces sacred to various religions, settling on one resembling familiar portraits of the Old Testament God. The voice flatters Sybok, but insists the Enterprise be brought closer, to transport him beyond the Barrier. Then Kirk utters his famous, very-Kirklike impudent question: “Excuse me, but what does God want with a starship?”
This is the very human challenge to those who claim higher authority: a question. This particular being answers by hurling a thunderbolt into Kirk’s chest, and then another into Spock when he repeats the question. Sybok is appalled, which is interesting, since the Old Testament God is often angry and smites wrongdoers. But it rattles Sybok’s faith, and he demands the being reveal itself. Which it does: with Sybok’s face, and its evil laugh.
Sybok immediately understands that he’s looking at his own shadow reflected by a powerful captive being—“my arrogance, my vanity,” and just as quickly, he sacrifices himself to save the others: his redemption.
Later, when McCoy and Spock are speculating on whether God could ever be found in the eternal reaches of outer space, Kirk replies: "Maybe he’s not out there. Maybe he’s in here—in the human heart." It’s a daring statement, though it comports with at least an aspect of many religions. And it is clearly a Star Trek statement.
But the full statement is also that if God is within the human heart, so is the Devil. There is a famous Cherokee story that relates to this: an elder tells his grandchildren that there are two wolves fighting inside everyone, one good and one bad. “Which one wins?” the children ask. The grandfather replies, “the one you feed.” That’s Star Trek’s view of the future in a nutshell.
The last part of the movie was supposed to have spectacular effects as the evil force pursues Kirk. They aren’t here, to Shatner’s anguish, but I for one don’t miss them. Maybe we could have seen more of Sybok’s struggle with the captive power, but Kirk’s escape passes quickly without damaging the story, because of his surprise rescue.
Sybok takes on ‘god’
I haven’t even mentioned two other elements of the story: the Federation, Romulan and Klingon representatives on the Planet of Galactic Peace—another failed Paradise—who Sybok kidnapped to lure the Enterprise, and the young punk Klingons who pursued the Enterprise beyond the Barrier. But the final scenes tie all the elements together in the best Trek storytelling tradition, with Kirk on the planet expecting to be killed by the decloaking Bird of Prey, but instead is rescued by it. The Klingon representative actually commits an act of galactic peace, and at a joint party later, Scotty exclaims, “I never thought I’d be drinking with a Klingon”—an unnoticed and unplanned preview of events in Star Trek VI. (The cultural combination also figures in another classic joke, when Kirk is about to embrace Spock in thanks for rescuing him, and Spock demurs: “Please, Captain, not in front of the Klingons.”)
The final scene back at Yosemite around a campfire, in probably the oldest setting for human interaction, reinforces the power that binds these three men together—the ones often called the trinity—which is expressed in camaraderie, but can also be described as love. They sing together, and this time Spock joins in, because in enacting journeys of the imagination, life is but a dream.
Trek’s core ‘trinity’ get back to basics
“The Final Frontier” certainly has its problems as a movie. Leonard Nimoy directed Star Trek III under tight supervision, and with a storyline that had to follow from the movie before. With the unique experience of directing a major feature film, he then made his Star Trek statement in “The Voyage Home.” William Shatner was given one film to learn from and to make his statement. Combined with some poor production decisions, this may have contributed to those problems.
But this movie should not be discarded or dismissed. It has classic moments, and there’s a classic Star Trek message somewhere within it. As the Enterprise approaches the mysterious planet, the camera fixes on the plaque at the base of the antique ship’s steering wheel in the observation lounge: “To boldly go where no man has gone before.” The search for a literal God outside becomes another exploration of dimensions of meaning and ultimate identity inside. In a different context, David Gerrold said it best: "Space is not the final frontier. The final frontier is the human soul."
Other Reviews In the TrekMovie.com series:
ST: TMP | STII: TWOK | STIII: TSFS | STIV: TVH
More on Star Trek IV at Soul of Star Trek.
Bill Kowinski (aka Captain Future, William S. Kowinski) is an author and freelance writer living in Arcata, CA. Thanks to his Soul of Star Trek blog, he chaired a panel on that subject at the Trek 40th anniversary gala in Seattle last year. He’s been published in the New York Times, L.A. Times, San Francisco Chronicle and other international, national and regional publications, as well as Internet sites.
Images courtesy of Paramount Pictures, screencaps by TrekCore.com
Loading ...
Comments»
worst trek film ever….
#1
Nah. Nemesis is worse.
Thanks for the well-written, very thoughtful article!
Peace. Live long and prosper.
The Vulcanista }:-|
Yeah, I have to agree. Nemesis was way worse. I honestly didn’t think that TFF was ALL that bad… especially when you watch it with the Mike Nelson Rifftrax!
Although, it’s my least favorite it does have many good scenes.
Daren Doc what would you have done with the effects ???? Just curious?? Besides of course not making them awful as Bran Ferren did.
It has problems, but I love it. The campfire scenes at the beginning and end are some of my favourites from any Trek movie or episode.
I could never get past the scene where the enterprise goes into the great barrier by getting smaller and smaller and going in to the corner of the screen, always annoyed me as a kid….that and the fact that it was too easy to take over the ship…….and many other things…but mainly that…..
The film’s biggest problem is that Shatner the actor needs a far better person holding his reins than Shatner the director. His career is full of great moments and tremendous missteps–it is the great directors that have found a way to reel him in and get the kind of performance out of him that his talent offers. Superb control of his instrument is not chief among his virtues.
Shat fans–commence with the colorful metaphors.
Those that think this is bad Trek must really hate TOS. Or they just don’t get it.
TOS was never about effects…or continuity. It was about Kirk, Spock and McCoy and how they faced adversity and danger in the deep unexplored unknowns of space. Of all the movies, Trek 5 is, hands down, the closest in feel and spirit to the TV series. Contrary to what some might believe, that’s not a bad thing.
Great review.
Star Trek The Motion Picture (the theatrical release) and Star Trek The Final Frontier were about equal in BAD… Nemesis is a close second. However, by any standard they are still “good” or rather “not bad” movies… they just fall too short of the high standard that the fans who love the show place on them.
Well written review. Trek V is easy to hate on but I remember being surprised the last time I saw at all the little things it does right. Sometimes you can’t see the trees for the forest, and the golden nuggets offered by this movie are skillfully highlighted by the reviewer.
It’s a shame Paramount wouldn’t let Shatner “fix” the film. His interviews and candid opinions on the failures and successes of the movie were a revelation and actually made me respect the film more still.
This was not one of my favs. uhura and Scotty having a romance??A klingon Captain apologizing like some kid for misbehaving?? SuperSpock catching Kirk before he killed himself. Chekhov giving Scotty orders??In the elevator shaft scene, there are more than 90 decks?? The effects did not move me at all!! Even though the opener at El Capitan were nice, but c’mon! Digging into the God angle. Then exploring the Great Barrier, I thought that was interesting, but could have been probed a little further.
After the flop of this film, Nimoy said that Paramount was going to finish off TREK for good, but they made enough money to get St6 together. A side note. Notice when the 1st officers make movies ( Riker and Spock) they do well. So Far the Captains up until this point suck. Besides featuring a heavier Nimoy.
He’s right about the good points of the film.
Nice review, focusing on the good elements. I had completely missed the “expulsion from Paradise” motif :)
I want to thank Bill for his well thought out review of STV, not an easy film to review. There is always more to any Trek film than simple knee jerk reactions…like thos of the first poster who didn’t even bother to read the review.
Great article Bill…and reading it, I was struck with the depth of the storyline and some interesting thematic parallels contained within.
I applaud The Shat for at least trying something different with this one even if the execution left a lot to be desired.
This is still my least favorite film, but I can see where Shat was trying to go with this. It’s just too bad he didn’t succeed.
However, admittedly, the deck was stacked against him as soon as he put “God” into the mix.
I still wish this film could get a proper makeover with all new FX! This is one of only a few films I can think of that has an unfinished feel. The final confrontation on Sha Ka Ree deserves to be remade with CGI rockmen for example. As the sequence currently stands, it painfully shows that it was a patchwork ending produced in the editing room at the last minute.
Robert Wise got to complete TMP to his satisfaction and Richard Donner finally got to complete Superman II to his vision. It only seems natural that Shatner should be afforded the same opportunity.
It’s a very bad movie, but I’ll agree that McCoy’s scene at his father’s bedside features some fine acting from Dee Kelley. I thought the chair gag with Kirk was a bit much, and the variation better done in Generations (one of the few things that movie got right).
Of course, my biggest beef was always the fact that Starfleet would send out a broken ship with no crew on ANY mission. That, and the fact that an emo Vulcan and some wannabe Sand People managed to take over the Enterprise so easily.
In all fairness, Hey! I did love the music score I still love TOS, but it seems like after ST3 and 4, Nimoy said Ok Bill! You try it, now. Then paramount said Nimoy you get back in the chair for 6. I cant imagine a few klingon torpedoes taking out GOD??!!!
Good review. There are some good moments in the movie.
Overall, I’d rather watch this than Star Trek VI.
I said TFF was my least favorite — but I meant of the “classic Trek” films. Insurrection and Nemesis are FAR worse films, in my opinion.
I’ve only seen each of those ONCE…and in the theater.
At least TFF can be watched — in the same way I can watch Spock’s Brain or The Way to Eden and enjoy them too.
A good way to watch TFF and get some extra enjoyment out of it is to download MST3K’s Mike Nelson’s RIFFTRAK. It’s a hilarious commentary done in the MST3K vein. They also have one for STVI: TUC.
http://www.rifftrax.com/
Oooooh! Second. Kirk is not dead, because in this film he says that he knows that McCoy and Spock are there when he does die. He said, “….I know…”
That’s canon. He knows whos present at his death, people keep forgetting that. IN addition some of you “fans” are just silly, “I don’t like that.” So you don’t go see it.(Nemesis) Star Trek is Star Trek is Star Trek Please.
This movie may not be the best Star Trek movie, but it has some of the best character scenes of any of the films…PERIOD!
William Shatner directed some very fine scenes between the characters..Well done Bill.
This is a ridiculous labor to apologize for the most abysmal of all the Trek cinematic outings. Worse than Nemsis? Nonsense. Utter nonsense.
In many ways, Trek V was the ultimate exposition of Shatner’s ego, ranging simultaneously from the pleasantly surprising to the morbidly embarassing. The writer is correct in that some flashes of great style were exhibited in Shatner’s directorial effort, but it is the pervasiveness of Shatner’s “my way or the highway” style that insinuates itself into the very fiber of this film.
That Trek could fall so mightily from the critical heights of Trek’s II, III, and IV down to the depths of V is a testament to the fragility of Trek’s story genetics, and sadly those weaknesses were exposed with a story that should never have seen the imprimatur of Paramount’s powers-that-be.
David
Strangely I liked the acting of Luckinbill, Sybok seemed very determined and arrogant. It was fascinating. Although, they made Sarek seem like a playa.. He got with a Vulcan priestess and then Sybok.
Excellent review. Made me look at the film in a different light. Going to re-watch it soon.
There may be only a handful of good moments in the movie — but /damn/ are they good.
Thanks for a review that actually focuses on them, instead of going for the obvious. :)
(That said, I crack up every time I see feet pushing the shuttlecraft in that one scene…)
#24, just where, in your opinion, specifically , did Shatner’s ego ruin a scene or have an impact on his directorial inmput? I’m very curious.
does anyone know about the fate of the fabled recut? i was tracking it for a while but lost the info. (i believe the same guy did a salvaging of the phantom menace as well.) the basic idea was to fix the fx, edit out the failed humor and tighten the story. i imagine a pretty good 70 minute film could be achieved.
nice review but nothing will ever counter total embarrassment i feel every time i watch it.
biggest cringe: SILENT warning of the approaching bird of prey.
favorite moment: the klingons blasting the voyager probe to pieces. i imagine they saved us from the return of v’ger with that one.
I am getting painsin my head just looking at those still photos from Star trek 5 who wants too reminice about this one , I don’t
Shatner’s not a director.
I get the impression he may have leveraged his way into the director’s chair as a condition to reprise his role as Kirk.Now ,that would be the real story of that movie.
The funniest thing about the STV is the sudden haircut Sybok has before they meet ‘god’.
oh and #22
Kirk says “I’ve always known…I’ll die alone.” ……. And he was right.
#31 jon C this film proves one thing, that Shatner should not be allowed to direct Traffic let alone movies.
I didn’t see any “rave reviews” for this one, initial or otherwise.
I’m sure some reviewer must have liked it. The writer for the Baltimore Sun left in the middle of the show to make phone calls.
Roger Ebert said:
“”Star Trek V” is pretty much of a mess – a movie that betrays all the signs of having gone into production at a point where the script doctoring should have begun in earnest. There is no clear line from the beginning of the movie to the end, not much danger, no characters to really care about, little suspense, uninteresting or incomprehensible villains, and a great deal of small talk and pointless dead ends. Of all of the “Star Trek” movies, this is the worst.”
Having recently been rewatching all of the ST movies, I will say this about STV: It’s always entertaining. But there’s no question it’s at the bottom of the pile, and I think arguements of Nemesis being worse is little more then pure blind hate for that movie, which I’ve never quite understood.
STV is entertaining, and the review pointed out some great stuff that it has going for it. And honestly the VFX never bothered me that much. What’s problematic is just the pure ridiculousness of it, whether it be something nitpicky like how buggy the Enterprise-A is to a grey-haired Uhura’s naked fan-dance. At times incoherent, the movie is pretty much impossible to take seriously from the moment you see Spock fly up in those rocket boots. And I think that’s it’s greatest problem, that from the start it just seems silly.
That being said, there’s good in everything, and I do adore the scene with DeKelley as mentioned in the review and others here.
“It’s me! It’s Sybok!” has got to be one of the worst lines in Trek film history. It just seemed so ridiculous that Spock had this half-brother of whom we had never heard. The notion of an emotional Vulcan seeking an alternative path to enlightenment wasn’t a bad one (indeed, it had been done in one of the Trek novels–I forget which one as I probably read it 25 years or more ago), but given Spock’s own struggles with emotion and his humanity and Sarek’s reactions thereto, it seemd rather odd that we had never heard of the emotional Sybok before Trek V.
And the God thing never made sense, nor did the way in which the crew fell for Sybok’s plans. And the Planet of Galactic peace never really made a whole lot of plot sense. It seemed awkwardly shoved into a tortured script.
To some up the redeeming qualities of the film: it was Star Trek and Kirk, Spock and McCoy were prominently featured. Beyond that, it wasn’t too swift.
I believe that the great German Director Uwe Boll to be a disiple of the Willian Shatner School of film Directing. If you look carefully at the editing and direction of the actors without getting a brain hemorage, you can note the same fine film technique demonstratedd in such soon to be classic Boll films as Alone in the Dark and Bloodrayne. And if you study the technique Shatner used in the battle scences on Nimbus 3 are almost a perfect match for many of the fine battle scences in Boll eoic and incredible film Dungeonseige In the name of the King . If you look at how Shatner directed the actors themselves again Boll copied closely this technique. Also Boll copied Shatners editing technique and shot selection approach very closely in his films.
Was it the best TOS movie ever? No. But it is definitely a TOS film worth watching and personally (and I am not afraid to say it), it is one of my favorite TOS movies. What I love so much about Trek is the characters and I really thought that in many scenes the characters were spot on. Granted the special effects weren’t the best, but I can easily look past that. I like the movie and always will, and while it is not perfect it should not be overlooked. It is a TOS movie and there are parts in it that are most definitely TOS moments that should never be forgotten.
note: i recall that roddenberry was adamant in the original star trek guide for TOS that there were never to be any spockian siblings. he felt that it would weaken spock’s character and dilute his backstory. talk about canon rape. sarek was a bit of a slut, i guess.
remember this quote regarding TMP from old harlan?
“it’s roddenberry’s standard plot; the enterprise finds god. and it’s either a child, a computer, or both.”
Wow, what a great review….I can tell a lot of time and thought went into it. It is easy to just say that the movie sucked, but to watch with the intent of finding positive things to say, despite its shortcomings took critical talent. Yes, there were lame scenes (Spock saving Kirk a the last second via his jetshoes for one), but there were good ones, too. And the general message of the movie was thought-provoking.
I understand that there were many obstacles dealt to Shatner, financially and with the strikes, etc. Several scenes were cut, and the FX were substandard even by 1989 standards.
I’ll give it that it had SOME moments, but all-in-all, it was a nice disasterous failure. COMPLETELY. I’m a Christian, but the whole “God” thing was just stupid. This film, along with Nemesis, should be thrown into the “non-canon” pile. At least that way we keep Data and get rid of Spock’s bastard brother. And of course, we never see Nimbus 3 again, for a good reason.
2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8 ,9 were all good. 1, 5, and 10 could be left out. Albeit, 1 did give us a sexy new Enterprise. And 10 gave Trek seatbelts, an important factor at Warp speeds.
If any of you believe in the theory of Parallel Universes there is probably one in which Shatner actually is a good director and Star trek 5 an acadamy award winning film. i know probabilities are stacked against this one.
The ‘God’ Sybok found was actually his own demonic puppetmaster.
Well done, Bill. ST V remains at the bottom of my list, but there are definitely some precious gems in it, and I think you tagged them all. Many thanks for your effort.
Re: 1 & 2 – I still think “Insurrection” is the worst Star Trek movie so far.
I think Insurrection is the most boring Trek film. I’ve always said it would have been a so-so TV episode.
STV would have been better with the rock monsters. That was the whole problem.
A? okay inpenetrable energy barrier, need starship to cross barier to get to god let me think well it begs the question why does god need a starship? answers so god can spead wisdom to his children. which comes back to the question if you are god, all knowing and all powerful. Why cant you cross the barrier youself . Conclusion Hey! your not God! your an evil imposter imprisioned. I mean after examining that the who premise of this move goes up in smoke. Whch begs the question of who wrote this crud and how could said auther be deluded into believing that this was actually a good story.
Great review. Shatner ain’t a bad director. The script’s the thing…wherein we’ll find the conscience of the king.
Too bad Parmamount didn’t ante up and fix the special effects.
This movie had so much wrong with it…Why couldn’t Kirk have just set the ship’s phasers on stun and taken care of the problem with the situation on the Nimbus III planet? I guess they forgot such a demonstration in “A Piece of the Action” ? And Spock’s boots — were they supposed to be rocket-powered or anti-gravity-powered? I don’t think they knew which…And the shuttle bay — what was it, about a mile long? Uhhhh…I’d better stop now…
Good read, great review. Star Trek V is or was certainly near the bottom when compared to the other trek films. It wasn’t so much a bad movie, but certainly not a good one either. IMO better than Nemesis and Insurrectoin.
Also no need to repeat why IV succeeded and V did not. It has been mentioned above. I wonder though, and this is just supposition and or coincidence, the person at the center of IV is involved in Star Trek 2009 and the person at the center of V is not. Food for thought.
Im sorry to be so comically sarcastic about this one folks but i just cant find anything redeeming about this film my comparison of Shatner and Boll was not done out of malice. what I hated about this film is all the work put into this and this is the result. the film looks like it was directed by an amatuer.
I enjoyed this movie although there were some painful moments. Uhura dancing and entrancing Sybok devotees strained credibility. Her romantic interest in Scotty was unprecedented. Scotty hitting himself in the head with a bulkhead was incredible. Having the young renegade Klingon captain apologize was childish. The effect with Spock in the jetboots was really just bad. It was a shoddy production that tried to be too “cute” and too grandoise at the same time. Still, it was TOS Trek. There were gems in it. I have it in my collection and will look forward to high def version some day. . .
#52 this film just has no credibility i cannot find any good in it. The direction,the editing specail effects acting story. this film failes at so many levels and that is what makes it irredeably bad
Just for the record, I’m among those fans who has no problem with the FX in this movie. I acknowledge them as crappy, but as a lifelong Doctor Who fan in love with the entire Who run from the 1960s onward (though it took me a long time to warm to the sixth Doctor), I can happily accept a piece of cardboard with paint and tinfoil as a work of extremely advanced and beautiful alien technology. In fact, I never in my life had a single complaint about FX until CGI jumped from novelty act (Tron) to everyday meat-and-potatos of movie FX (I love CGI when its done well, but when done poorly it somehow manages to look _wronger_ than a piece of cardboard with paint and tinfoil).
So, this leaves me with even more room to loathe, despite, ridicule and be disgusted by the _story_ in this particular craphole of a Trek movie. It didn’t help that I waited in line for like 4 hours to see it at the theater.
I do like the psycho-flashback scene with McCoy, though. That was the one moment I preserve from this film. The rest, I burn from my brain. I place the blame entirely on the otherwise-godly feet of the might Bill Shatner, because when push comes to shove, the director makes the movie. He made a bad one. I presume that, in his godly whims (which it is not my place as a mere mortal to contemplate) there is a cosmic purpose to its badness. I just hope that purpose doesn’t involve me ever watching it again (except when I’m paid to, but that hasn’t happened now in about 7 years).
And to all the folks who say that if you don’t like V, you don’t like TOS, I present exhibit A:
Spock’s Brain
Or if you like:
The Way to Eden
(moral: it ‘aint all gold)
Good review! At the beginning where Sybok laughs and the camera zooms past him fading into white, I knew this was going to be a good film. I’d rather watch this over many other Trek films.
#51, from previous posts, it’s clear you have some kind of hangup when it comes to Shatner. That’s cool, it’s you’re right. but lets get to the specifics. Exactly WHERE in the film does it “Look like it was directed by an amatuer”?
Like the reviewer, I found the cinemtography to be top notch. I think Shatner’s camera movment and scene compositions are very good. I espeically love the standing shilouettes of Kirk and McCoy as the doors to the observatory part. I also rather like the camera movement that ends with the “line-up” shot we see in the screen cap above..where they are all standing outside the shuttle.
The performances of Kirk, Spock and McCoy….you, know the ones that count…..were spot-on and completely in character. So, again, I have to ask….specifically, technically, what part of this film is so “amatuerish”?
I think it was the worst ever. But it did certainly have it’s moments… the interactions between the Trinity are great, especially Kirk’s “I lost a brother once…. I was lucky I got him back” line and the “I will die alone” line (even considering the fact that he didn’t technically die alone, it still rings true because he died without his closest friends by his side.)
Watch some of the fan reedited versions, they are far better, cuts out alot of the crap, and remember, the original crew at half speed is better than all the other crews at full speed!
#54 the thing that is gauling about all this is someone in charge actually signed off on this cow flop of a movie. That a writer wrote this script and thought that his work was actually good , that a story editor seeing this script did’n tsay to the writer”Hey this really bad script. That Nimoy who has written and Directed films himself did say to Bill shatner “hey BIll I think this script really sucks big time we ought to rewrite it before our names are immortalized by it”
It just should not have happened. A good writer could have prevented this cineramic nightmare of a film from ever happening. Jon if the story and the film had been good then the poor quality effects would not even be an issue
#57 everywhere
I still would watch it over Insurrection or Nemesis.
#61 “everywhere”
I get it now. In other words you don’t really have any specifics.
Typical.
39: I don’t recall any such thing myself. Frankly they didn’t deal with family over much. Heck, Spock’s parents weren’t even at his wedding. :)
36. One of the most irritating aspects of haters of this film is the Sybok thing. For pete’s sake people. So since we haven’t heard about any siblings of McCoy, Scotty Sulu or others then I guess they can’t exist either. That is ludicrous. Why tie the hands of the writers in such arbitrary ways? Outright flouting of continuity of the series is one thing, but c’mon.
And whats worse its basically a fandom thing. And its hypocritical. There has been tons of fan fiction and fan reference material that has invented all kinds of aspects of the Trek universe, some of which has since become ‘canon’. They just dissed on this because Shatner did it and they didn’t have a hand in it.
And it doesn’t make Sarek a ’slut’ or a ‘playa’. That is asinine. Vulcan’s are long lived. It is far from inconceivable and actually very likely that Sarek may have had a previous wife. What became of her we can’t be certain, but she may have died for one possibility.
And I never heard any cries of anguish when Sarek showed in in TNG sporting yet a third wife.
Star Trek fans are supposed to be the most imaginative and intelligent fans in the world. But the ones who make hay out of Sybok do not exhibit those qualities that I know they must possess.
I like Star Trek V: The Final Frontier. My reasons are the same as jonboc above and the positive points in the review. But I realize I am in the minority. All I ask is that if peope are going to dislike it, at least critize pertinent flaws and points. Sybok isn’t one of them. Least of all from Luckenbill’s excellent performance.
Star Trek V The Final Frontier is not the best trek movie, of course. But it’s much better than Insurrection. Nemesis is the worst trek movie ever.
Great review.
ST V is clearly not a good movie, but at least it aimed high and missed.
I prefer it to “Nemesis” (B-4 kills it for me) and the bland “Insurrection” I would even place it before “Generations” (the massive flaws in logic (”you can think yourself out of the nexus. WTF?) make that film nearly unwatchable)
The only TNG film that I think is better (it’s actually superior to ST V) is “First Contact” which is one of the best in the series.
10. jonboc – February 17, 2008
“Those that think this is bad Trek must really hate TOS. Or they just don’t get it.”
I am just not into anyone here determining who “gets it” or if we don’t subscribe to your opinion, it’s wrong or we are a “hater”.
I felt movie was, at best, very uneven and worst….silly. The humor was off the mark and made a fool of Scott and to some extent, Uhura. McCoy’s fathers scene was very good, but ended poorly…no flow into what had to happen next (by my memory). The FX were poor, as noted above and I found the Galactic Peace Planet a farce.
And regarding opinion… While #1’s opinion was short and to the point, I don’t think it should have been termed a “Knee-jerk” reaction . Do we know if they read it?. While it’s a good idea… did it really matter?
First of all, Mr. Kowinski, I think you need to watch the film again; Spock does not have a JET PACK—he has jet BOOTS-I can buy the concept of a jet pack ( and, in fact, there are some in actual use today ), but there’s something innately wrong about the idea of boots ( by Reebok, yet! Guess they made SOME money back with product placement! )
Second, why no mention of the rather implausible size of the Enterprise, as seen in the escape of the trinity through the turbo lift to the
( okay, this one I’ll give you ) incredibly wonderful observation deck ( love the steering wheel from the original sea-going Enterprise! ).
All the problems with this film, unfortunately, outweigh the bonuses; unfortunately, it leads me to the belief that Shatner had no idea then ( as now—what part of ” Kirk is dead in the post-Nemesis part of the new film doesn’t he understand? ) as to what the show that had been such a large part of his life for so long was about, and was-perhaps-his final stab at those he wishes would ” get a life “.
That said, there was one interesting thing about this film that I am surprised that you didn’t mention: in telling us the tale of Sybok and his mother, we are finally given something in canon that helps to explain a)how such a Vulcan as Sarek could possibly fall for a human woman, and
b) whether or not Sarek had a Vulcan mate for the 7 year pon farr before Amanda came on the scene, and what happened to her.
#66
“The only TNG film that I think is better (it’s actually superior to ST V) is “First Contact” which is one of the best in the series.”
Well, Star Trek First Contact is the “only” good TNG movie.
#61 okay Jon specifics the shuttle scence on board display looked cheep and tackey like something out of a b movie of that era, second the battlle sequence on nimbus god sloppy both in execution fight sequences haphardard. Nimbus three looked like mohavie freakin desert , looking at that I just did not buy ias an alien world. The pool hall on nimbus was not belieavble, the energy barries they had to cross ive seen televsion effect s better then that. also how is it that the enterprise which was perfectly fine morphed into a lemon by the 5th movie apparently starfleet doesnt check to see if its ships are in running order
Excellent review. STV is my ultimate guilty pleasure. Although there are issues with the visual effects and the stupid ending, the camaraderie between the three is the best of the six movies. There are a lot of good TOS scenes in STV and though it does not add anything to the Trek universe as a story, it adds a lot to the characters of Kirk, Spock nad McCoy.
Ran
Despite it’s FX problems, 79 decks & one or two more helpings of humor than required in the mix, this is the purest TOS film. As with the core of the best TV episodes, this is the only movie to focus on the Kirk/Spock/McCoy friendship, which defines ST.
It’s a rousing ride & among the best of all Trek. To sum up Shatner the director, as Captain Klaa would say, “He’s good!”
The best trek films Star trek the undiscoverd country, next The wrath of Khan and then Star trek first Contact.
#61 no disrepect of your opinion is intended on my part this film left an incredibly bad taste in my mouth. I still cant believe i iStood in line and paid money to see this movie. he irony was that the best part of going to this fillm was the previews for the coming attractions How sad is that
Bill, What a beautiful review. I really enjoyed reading every word of it. I’ll tell you, you hit all the important aspects. My impression from your review is that the movie isn’t perfect, but has many redeemable qualities and certainly was an original series type of story. I think there’s much to like about that movie, but yes, you do have to get over what it could have become. But hey, it’s been years since I walked from the theatre slowly just shaking my head…
Your comment that, “this is one of only six movies with the whole original cast, and there aren’t going to be any more. It’s worth honoring what’s good about it and what’s good in it.” That’s a sentimental view from the heart and I agree with it entirely.
Great review. Now if only someone would let Shatner disperse a “damage control party” to the film, we’d have the happy ending.
Thanks!
There was no way I could stay away from this topic.
I will concede that the film has some good moments, but that’s like saying the radio still works in a car that has been totaled.
Working radio or not, that car goes to the junk heap.
Most of this, in my view, is Star Trek apologetics. It’s the difference between fans and fanboys. If you don’t look at the object of your fandom critically, how can it improve? Excusing Final Frontier because it has some good moments is tantamount to telling Paramount to keep producing crap. And, in my opinion, they continued to do so in Undiscovered Country, but not quite as egregiously.
I hold Star Trek movies to the same standards I hold all other movies. STV failed me in almost every category. When you have to look for reasons to like a movie, maybe it isn’t worth liking.
I won’t be a Star Trek apologist. I love it too much to settle for less than the best it can be.
I confess I’ve never watched it once after seeing it in the theaters so long ago. I recently bought the DVD at Walmart but still haven’t made the time to watch it.
I remember the most damning thing from the movie for me was that the cast looked worn out and way past their prime. Everyone seemed to be trying so hard to look young that they dyed their hair, were wearing casual outfits and jumping around rock climbing etc- I thought I was watching their mid life crises unfold onscreen. Shatner’s hair was beyond laughable here- he had dyed it a bright red -orange and it was so removed from his previous hair colors that it seemed really jarring.
Furthermore, at the time this came out TNG had just begun hitting it’s stride and the contrast between the two made Trek V seem particularly bad.
But the reviewer is correct on a lot of points- there are moments in this film that are worth watching again. I’ll probably make time for it this weekend.
Hey Trek V was ahead of the curb wi 79 decks. The new JJ E is so big it might just have 79 decks. We should commend the production designers for their forward thinking
# 76 hey Jabob great to hear from you we could use you input on this subject
I was trying to prove that there is a correlation between the directing technique of Uwe Boll and William Shatner I don’t think i was able to convince anyone of my theory.
TNG movies were killed off with 2 stinkers in a row. The opening moments of STV started out okay, but it got real bad, real quick and was painful at times to watch. Such a huge letdown after the hugely impressive and enjoyable ST4….
#79
Thanks, man. I couldn’t stay away from this fight, though it is ultimately not winnable.
I have successfully avoided the films of Boll, so can’t add any insight to your thesis. In the end, I have more of a problem with the story than the directing on Final Frontier. I could have accepted Shat’s direction if the script hadn’t been absolutely wretched.
Hey #64, The playa remark is obviously a joke!!! It’s not uncommon for someone to have children from different relationships. We trekkies just look at Sarek as lossing 2 sons. Sybok embraced the Vulcan way, so much that he was thought to take his place amongst the great ones. But he followed his own course.Spock well we know did his own thing.
I bet Sarek wished he had daughters!??
Good to see you back, Jabob!
Maybe the staff here at trekmovie can pull you out of lurkdom more often!
Peace. Live long and prosper.
The Vulcanista }:-|
You compare the Shat to Boll
That is, of course, your call
Their work isn’t really fetching
Their direction causes retching
They both show a lot of gall!
The problem is that you just cant put a good spin on this movie. some are saying they like the cinematography. Thats like saying I love the paint job on that condemned building over there.
Nice review but, the movie still sucked. Hell, it’s a remake of the space hippies episode “Goin’ on the Eden, Yeah brother!’ -Huh, NOT one of Star Trek’s finest moments either in OS or as a movie. Not to mention all those plot, character and cannon issues… By Star Trek’s more or less high standards, this movie was beyond the worst.
Though I suppose it would have made a pretty good “Lost In Space” episode…
Jacob:
I am no apologist. Indeed I can be hyper critical about Star Trek since I love it so much. Like 90% of TNG for instance.
I am not going to pretend that V has no flaws. Certainly it does. But all of the movies have flaws. All of them. And I don’t mean that in the “well all movies have flaws” way. All of the movies have serious flaws. Even the much vaunted and beloved Khan. (The way the Spock character’s dialouge was written and Nimoy’s delivery of it early in the film. He made up for it in the death scene).
But all of them have something they deliver better than the others. TMP had the best special effects and music. Kahn had the best story. So on and so forth. But Frontier was the best at capturing the feel of the TOS. And frankly that is the ball game for me. THAT is what I am looking for. So its a simple equation. The movie that is the closest in theme and tone to the show I hold above all other entertainment is one of my favorites. Bing. Bang. Boom.
Jabob, good to have you back! Ya gotsta stay in the fold, man!
I originally saw Trek V and Indy III as a double feature. I went for Trek. But when I walked out, I knew that then Indy flick was 10X the movie Trek V turned out to be. Along with Generations and Nemesis, Final Frontier is in the trifecta of unwatchable Trek in my book.
In defense of TMP, the plot has holes you can drive a mac truck through, but there are some great moments in that one- none better than the shuttle fly-by giving us a view of the refit. Awesome!
#67 …ok, let me put it this way. You’re not so much a hater as an enigma….to me, anyway.
When certain key elements of TOS are put into place in a TOS based movie.. by the very people who were a part of TOS…. it stands to reason that, IF one liked those elements in TOS, one should like that movie that contains those very same elements. Yet the enigma is, many don’t.
Do you also hate all the TOS episodes that explored the friendship of Kirk, Spock and McCoy?
Do you dislike TOS episodes like “By Any Other Name” and “Chalie X”, and “Let that be Your LAst Battlefield” and any other episode that featured an alien hijacking the Enterprise?
If you think Trek 5’s FX are awful, do you dislike all of the TV episodes (prior to the remastering) because of the sub-par effects?
Did you despise “A Piece of the Action” or “I, Mudd” because it was silly?
If you answered “yes” to the questions above, then at least you are consistant…but honestly, probably not much of a TOS fan. If you answered “no” to the questions above, and love some of those episodes, then I remain puzzled by your dislike of Trek 5.
To refine what I wrote- thing that bugged me the most- whereas this movie shows these characters acting like over the hill teenagers- rock climbing, fan dances, joking about flatulence [essentially a series of characters going through a mid life crises], on TV each week I could watch a captain on TNG who seemed to have aged gracefully- fully aware he is not in his prime but he seemed comfortable about it and conveyed wisdom and authority. I think that’s why I’ve never liked this movie as much. I think this is the only time I’ve thought of these characters as immature, and you never want to see your childhood heroes that way.
I must agree that the soundtrack from Goldsmith had some wonderful moments. I just wished that The Motion Picture theme wasn’t used, as it became associated with The Next Generation (Trek V premiered during the run of TNG).
I did address this with a remastered edit of the titles. Please have a look here:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=tKnm1FgJR34
sirh.
the movie seemed rushed, It seemed that the film took fan’s loyalty for granted, The film seemed to have a new “flavor” that I didnt like. I would like to know what really happened between paramount and shatner that made this happen. I went with two friends to see this turkey. The theater was showing the film on two screens simultaniously (Sorry about the spelling) and there were less than ten people in the theater, A few months later I bought the film on laserdisc and started to notice how mismatched the movie was..the sound quality was top notch but the film seemed like a dream.
I know there is a real chance that paramount will fix the movie (at least to some degree) The FX in the first 6 star trek films look’s substandard in HD. and I think we will see new HD versions of all the films up to first contact..perhaps shatner will get his wish…I dont have any solid evidence that paramount is going to do any of this. and as far as the music? star trek 3 had the best soundtrack.
First! (heh heh)
At first, I thought this was a bad trip I had in college. Sad when I found out the film was really made…
#86 Gavin “I suppose it would have made a pretty good “Lost In Space” episode”
Hey, what the………Trek compared to Lost In Space??
Them’s fightin’ words……….arghh!
Batts: S’cool. Sorry about that. Funny joke in retrospect. Its just a pet peeve of mine.
And yes it appears as if Sarek may have had an easier time of it with a couple of Daddy’s girls. Heh.
Harry – Thanks, but there’s not enough time in my life to stay regularly involved. Too frustrating to do so, as well. I get tired of arguing with fundamentalists. I just can’t find enough common ground with them, and waste time I need to be using more constructively. But I’ll come back for select topics, and this is one I can’t ignore. Even though it’s one of the most frustrating Trek arguments.
#87 I loved wrath of Khan as well but there are two problems that I see on is that Khan never met chekov before and when scottie showing up on the bridge with his injured nephew shouldnt he have taken him to sickbay first?
Great review. Very insightful. Very thoughtful.
I never hated this movie and I don’t jump on the “it’s the worst movie of them all” band wagon. It’s certainly not my favorite but I liked it for it’s strengths even though there were obvious moments that aren’t my favorites.
When you read Shatner’s book “Star Trek Movie Memories” you have a new appreciation for the movie. Especially watching key scenes like when they storm they city and he talks about trying to get the shot in before the sun goes down. His book lends a new insight to what the movie was supposed to be.
#91 – Valar1
You really stated it well. I too was embarrassed by these characters acting quite unlike themselves.
I have always enjoyed Star Trek V. There are a few scenes I wouldn’t mind seeing cut out of the film, such as Scotty banging his head and then waking up in sickbay with Uhura. Other than that, I was pretty happy with the film.
The FX need to be updated. If we can update TOS, then surely we can update this movie!
Nemesis is by far a worse film… unoriginal, lacking so much of the Trek philosophies (or forcing them too hard), poor airection and art direction, and weak character moments.
Trek V is weak, but (to me) at least it’s the TOS crew, so that alone puts it higher in acting and class :)
And if nothing else, Trek VI made up for a lot of it.
Trek V is a good film (especially when you hear and read about the problems that plauged it..it’s a wonder it ever got made). Bill Shatner is a fine director. The directing in the film wasn’t the problem.
‘Generations’, now THAS the worst trek film……EVER.
#90 Jonboc it doesnt matter if star trek film looks pretty or has maybe one or two moment that are touching the film on the who sucks there is debate about that if you ask most trek fans what they think is the worst film a large number of them will say star trek 5.
Come on!! Can’t anyone here just enjoy the dream without having to concentrate on negatives? Where are the Trek fans?????
To me this movie was one of the best: Kirk ,Spock and McCoy sitting around the campfire talking about life. That’s real.
Seeing their “pain” brought a new dimension to their characters.
If you are going to judge a movie weak because of VFX or other things, then you are missing the point. Character insight and development is important and none of the other films really had the chutzpah to dig into this small part of the movie, Kirk Spock and McCoy discussing life, or perhaps the lack of life (”Other people have families”) to me is a real important part of Trek at it’s finest. Granted Trek 5 had some disapointments for the defintion of a movie as Entertainment.
Somehow I just engaged my mind and let it fill in the blanks.
Give it a try, you might find something good in your own creative abilities.
Maybe Kirk falling against a rather poor bluescreen or the shuttlecraft shot
may be lacking yes, but I could see past it.
I worked on Nemesis and while I remember my initial thoughts upon reading the script, I nonetheless enjoyed a chance to work on a Trek movie in a big way. I couldn’t say it was the worst. I don’t think their should be a “worst” gang.
Chris Dawson
VFX Supervisor “Star Trek – Of God’s and Men”
Motion Control camera operator “Star Trek – Nemesis”
Digital Integration artist “Star Trek – Nemesis”
Additional VFX Camera Assistant “Star Trek – Insurrection”
Lifelong Star Trek fan
And I worked with Shatner on Rescue 911 too! He rocks!
Back in ‘66 when the character of Spock became enormously famous and fans were sending tens of thousands of letters to Paramount and forming Spock fanclubs, the official “biography” for Spock was sent out, in writing, from Gene Roddenberry and D.C. Fontana. Part of the biography stated that Spock was an only child, and reiterated “absolutely no brothers or sisters”. The reason this was important to the creators of the character was the isolation the character felt in every aspect of his life and the enormous challenges he faced in day-to-day living. I am sure if you were to ask Dorothy Fontana what she thinks of the Sybok character, oh, and yes, his mother was a “vulcan princess”, the reply would be anything but positive.
From the first time Shatner told Nimoy of his idea for the Enterprise to seek out God (and he really wanted them to find GOD, before the script rewrite…why???), Nimoy warned him,”Bad idea”, and gave him numerous reasons why it would not work. Shatner’s only response to that, and all Nimoy’s later reservations, was “It’ll work, it’ll be fine.”
My own main problem with this movie was what seemed to be forced performances on the part of the Trek characters, almost to the point of seeming caricuturish. Yes, there were two or three good moments in the film, two or three good lines, but after watching this film I never wanted to see my beloved characters lowered to this type of substandard script and direction again – precisely the feeling I would have after viewing Spock’s Brain, if I ever chose to watch that again (shiver).
Thank you for a really fair and thoughtful review of ST V. It seems to have gained some esteem in recent years–while ST VI has slipped. I like all of the original cast movies, and my less favorite ones have grown on me in recent years, V included.
I hope one day it will get the CGI makeover that Shatner wanted. It deserves it. If it was me, if Paramount refused, then I’d pay for the whole thing myself. I bet Shatner could swing that, and maybe make a lot of it back on the DVD sales.
#70 “#61 okay Jon specifics the shuttle scence on board display looked cheep and tackey like something out of a b movie of that era, second the battlle sequence on nimbus god sloppy both in execution fight sequences haphardard. Nimbus three looked like mohavie freakin desert , looking at that I just did not buy ias an alien world. The pool hall on nimbus was not belieavble, the energy barries they had to cross ive seen televsion effect s better then that. also how is it that the enterprise which was perfectly fine morphed into a lemon by the 5th movie apparently starfleet doesnt check to see if its ships are in running order”
Well at least you do have some specifics! I can’t say I agree, as most of these types of complaints are simply aesthetics and don’t really get into the meat and potatos of Star Trek. You don’t like the desert, you don’t like a display on a control panel, you don;t like thebarrier effect…etc.
Well, I don’t like the foam rocks and orange bacdrops on Star Trek, but I still love the episodes. Why? Because the main attraction is the characters and the story and how they interact. For my money, this is where Trek 5 delivered the goods.
#108 im sorry jon i just cannot put a good spin on this movie. im sorry
#106 – Denise
Well said. Total agreement from me.
Denise: Thanks for the info. You learn something new everyday. But it doesn’t change anything really. Tons of stuff was written by Gene and others outside the confines of the screen and usually most if not binding. However I do agree with the intent that D.C and Gene were going for but frankly I don’t see how Sybok hurts that. Indeed it seems to do the opposite.
And I have no doubt D.C. could very well dislike Sybok and the Vulcan princess intensely. And I would respectively disagree. Unless she convinces me otherwise and knowing her she just might could. :)
As far as Gene? Well as much as I am grateful to him for bringing Star Trek in the world, after TNG, I just didn’t trust the mans judgment as much any longer.
#109- ” im sorry jon i just cannot put a good spin on this movie.”
Yep, clearly, we’re looking for two different things in our Trek. We’ll just have to agree to disagree. I’ll continue to watch my DVD while you will, no doubt, use yours for a coaster…assuming you even own it. lol
#108 Jon so from what you saying if V were an episode would you rate it as high as say Spocks Brain or perhaps the Omega Glory or maybe that other classic And the cChildren Shall Lead.
Great article.
“Not the finest moment in Star Trek Movie effects”…that caption cracked me up.
Did you know that there was supposed to be an Andorian god as well? Or at least they did a make-up test for one…don’t know how that was going to work out.
I’d have to say Star Trek V had some wonderful character moments. (the Kirk, Spock, McCoy around the camp fire – fantastic)
The problem with this movie is simple. It was a bad script, bad idea. The list goes on and on.
I cannot believe its almost 20 years since this movie was released in theaters.
#113 -
I’d rate it higher that Spock’s Brain and way higher than And the Children Shall Lead, but not as high as Omega Glory.
Yeah yeah, I know…American Flag, Declaration of Independence..improbable…couldn’t happen….blah blah blah….whatever, I still love me some ass-kicking Ron Tracy!
Wow what a great review!!!
^
Cringe moment, Uhura’s striptease.
The cleaned up version that limits the fart jokes and redacts the redundant decks during Super Spock’s ascent is a fairly watchable flick.
I don’t hate this movie. I just wish it had gone through a few more rounds of polish. Shatner has some ideas, but he needs a leash. He loves his dumb jokes way too much. It’s true in his current persona and it’s true in his directing of this movie. He shoulda put a limit on his own use of gags, or had the studio do it for him.
113: AMEN! Thats another pet peeve of mine. In TOS ever Starship Captain we saw was impressive, capable and formidable. Even more so if they lost it. In the movies we had Styles and Esteban. Tho Voyage had a couple of good ones.
And Country had Sulu. Woot!
This was the first movie I saw in the theater. As a kid watching a sci fi movie, I wasn’t let down. It was entertaining. The VFX weren’t a big issue for me at all. But upon re-watching the movie as an adult, my opinion changed drastically. Yes, I loved the down to earth scenes. But it was the forced humor and horrible dialog that suspended my suspension of disbelief. The whole reason I liked TWOK was that it took itself seriously. That universe felt like it might exist somewhere. TSFS was a little looser, but still within the general vacinity of acceptability. TVH was okay to be funny. It was a fish out of water story. But TFF – holy sh*t, it was embarrassing.
Sulu and Chekov lost in the woods
Scotty bumping his head on a bulkhead
76,000 decks
Jet Go-Go boots
Good Luck Chuck cat chicks
a “pool table”
Uhura lap-dance
At points the movie bordered on self parody.
Now…onto a bigger news topic.
Blu-Ray.
Please see post #55.
It ‘aint all gold. We all have the right to like or dislike whichever Star Trek episode or series or movie we wish. But we shouldn’t feel superior to others because of it.
The VFX in this movie are really a minor point to me. I wouldn’t say I liked or disliked it based solely on that (even though the Great Barrier seemed like a cheap ripoff of the Galactic Barrier, in addition to looking like a pool of mercury). Ultimately, it’s the major missteps in the characterizations and plain old lack of common sense that blow it for me (poor Scotty got the shaft big time).
Also, I’m completely baffled by people who feel that having a strong opinion on the movie that isn’t warm and fuzzy somehow classifies one as not being a Trek fan. If being a Trek fan means I accept every single thing on screen like it’s my mother’s Thanksgiving dinner, I guess I’m not a Trek fan. If people hadn’t made their dislike of TFF plain – both by saying so verbally and with their dollars – then we might have ended up with Star Trek VI: Kirk & Spock Go To White Castle.
On that same token, if we hadn’t spoken up and let TPTB know how bad Insurrection & Nemesis were, we might be getting ready for another bad TNG film. And I say that as someone who loved TNG.
Sure, I can recognize portions of the movie that are enjoyable – the aforementioned moment between McCoy and his father, Kirk’s speech about ‘needing his pain’, Spock’s joke about ‘not in front of the Klingons’. I can’t honestly find ANY of those kinds of moments in Nemesis (at least, not any that weren’t stale or forced). So I guess it does have that going for it. Still, those good moments were too few and far between for me to be too forgiving.
I remember reading an interview with Leonard Nimoy around the time TFF came out. He said something about Shatner ‘talking too fast’, and that it was the sign of a nervous director. He commented that when the director is nervous, the players are nervous. I honestly think the combination of the Writers’ Strike, ILM not being available, and a lack of feature film directing experience were just too much for good old Bill. I think it was less ego than his reach exceeding his grasp. I can sympathize with that while still giving the film an honest critique.
Old Testament God gets hit by a Photon Torpedo!!! It’s at least worth watching for that.
#120–Good points
This movie had so many flaws that it’s difficult to catch them all. I think the combination of lousy effects, bad acting, bad story, and forced humor at the cost of the actor’s and character’s dignity just made this the worst stink bomb of Trek movies. It reminded me of third season TOS.
From the beginning with the sexy Romulan/Asian babe sans any of the TNG’s
make up for Romulans–and the fact that Romulans were even there in a “peaceful manner” at that time period was bit far fetched.
The “I feel your pain” thing was so weak–I mean, how simple and weak have our beloved TOS characters become to fall for such stupid psychology.
And yes, I love the Rocket boots and the escape up the turbo lift shaft with the TARDIS like interior space ( deck after deck after deck..etc).
The whole movie’s pace reminded me of Shatner interviews of the time. HE was always really hyper, pompous, laughing at his own lame jokes–similar to this movie.
Now, I love Shatner. He is an absolute talent–author, actor, singer(Ok, I’m pushing it a bit) his sense of humor has evolved and is now fantastic. I know he had some good ideas for this flick. It just didn’t work out for him.
I really wish he was in the new film.
The reason we ALL stood in line is because we LOVE TREK!!! Bottom line. ITs regrettable, the movie did not stand up to our expectations. #96. Dont worry about it!! It’s all good on this end. I feel good that someone can at least READ my comments and respond. HA HA!! Let’s live long and prosper!!
We all are repeating the same things I mentioned at #13, 19, and 25!! That shows we are some really SMART carbon based units!! HA HAHAH!!
Now lets move on and hopefully discuss the next TREK movie. ST6!! I am READY!! “You either leave this war bloodied or with my blood on your swords!!”"
Re: #32. M-BETA and #22. Michael Adams
Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t Kirk say “I’ve always known I’ll die alone”?
Then, in ST:VII (Generations) he dies while talking to Picard. He was NOT alone. What do we do with that? Did someone defile the Canon? Was it just sloppy writing or is there something that I’m not getting?
Anyway, I echo the sentiment of those who were disappointed in the movie but thrilled at the good moments. I won’t discard it.
Re: #105. Chris Dawson
Thanks for the input. Don’t take the comments too seriously. Most of us are what you would call in the sports world “armchair quarterbacks”. If people looked at the special effects for TOS now, we’d say OMG how cheesy. Just as easy to look at ST:V that way.
Of course maybe some of you thought that as you were watching it in the theatres. Sorry if you feel you wasted your money. I usually don’t go see a movie to critique it. That only happens when it is so obviously bad that I begin to look for things while I’m watching it. (Of course some of you now will say “that’s what we were doing”.) I’m glad it was made. There were some excellent moments that we would not have if it weren’t (IMO).
Re: #109. Garovorkin
“#108 – im sorry jon i just cannot put a good spin on this movie. im sorry”
We all have different taste. There are always going to be some who hate and another camp who love THE SAME MOVIE. You will find it hard to find a movie that NO ONE hates. On the other hand you will also find it hard to find a movie that EVERYONE hates.
What is that again? I – D – I – C .
Cool.
kg
Star Trek VI: Kirk & Spock Go To White Castle?
Low budget and bad directing killed this movie. With a trimmed, less cheesy plot, in my opinion STV would have been a classical TOS episode on silver screen. Not my idea of an epic Trek movie, but even TNG flicks are almost direct TV to screen transpositions.
Hey, you have to admit: this movie may have been the best personification of the relationship between Kirk, Spock and McCoy.
And really, who WOULDN’T want rocket boots? Too bad the falling off the mountain effect was cruddy.
I remember going to see this movie when it first came out, and the profound disappointment in that it appeared to be a bit of a hack job…but that was then. I haven’t seen the movie since then, but after reading this review I’m thinking that I’m way overdue for a second look. I wonder if either Paramount or Mr. Shatner would consider doing a ‘Blade Runner’ type of treatment, sort of a director’s cut of the movie? To me, Shatner’s talents have only got better over time. I would love to see how he could tweak it.
Finally. A fair review for Star Trek V. It doesn’t deserve the crap it gets.
I finally got my chance to watch STV on a HBO channel last month, and I must admit that the reviewer has given me a new perspective on a movie I would have otherwise preferred not to have in my Trek canon.
After reading the review, I have to agree with the conclusion that it is a weak Trek film, but not a hopeless one.
Thanks for the review, William.
It’s taken me some time to read through all the comments so far, so first of all, thanks to those who read and liked the review, and said so.
There’s really only one issue brought up in the comments I want to address. This is called a “review,” which it is in the general sense–it re-views the movie and reports on how it was made and received, and offers observations on what I notice in my re-viewing. But it seems pointless to me to review it as if it’s a current movie. What I try to do is take another look at it, 20 years later or however long it’s been. I especially look for what is worth recalling (and re-viewing) now. I think whatever lessons Paramount might have learned from the reception of this movie, were learned long ago, or never will be. As for the makers of the new movie, I think I included some specific observations that might pertain.
This kind of re-viewing is also useful, I feel, because we may see something different or get a different impression on re-viewings, or simply see the movie in the different context of a different time. This may be especially true of movies seen only once and disliked, although it’s happened to me with films I loved on first viewing, and then later wondered where the magic went.
As for ranking these films, best to worst, everybody has their opinion, and everyone is entitled to one. But that’s not what interests me about these movies, or why I write about them.
If they tweak it, please, oh God, please, take out all the camping scenes. And the fan dance. And Scotty and Uhura getting cozy together. And Sybok, get rid of him. And trash the dialogue. Oh, and the plot. While we’re at it, get rid of the effects, too.
Well, that ought to cover it!
An inciteful and thoughtful review. I always felt that this movie could have used a few more test screenings, but that there was a kernal of a good movie in there.
For a variation, take a look a Jack Marshall’s “Thine Own Self Edit” of this movie.
I don’t think STV was a terrible movie, though it does have its’ faults. After all, peoples’ opinions can change over time; I’ve developed a greater appreciation for this movie, while I don’t like Nemesis nearly as much as I used to. If I had to pick a Trek movie that I didn’t like, it would probably be Insurrection. That movie was too heavy-handed.
Sorry to double-post, but I thought of something I’d like to add:
I would like join with others in supporting the idea of a Director’s Cut DVD for STV. New & better effects, a re-edited ending that could allow for the inclusion of the rockmen as originally planned through CGI, and editing a few scenes where the humor doesn’t work.
Star Trek V: TFF made for a better book than movie. I read the novel and it is a much better telling of the story than the movie version. That being said Dr. McCoy pulling the plug on his dad is one of most dramatic character scenes I have ever seen in ANY Star Trek movie to date. However that one scene alone isn’t quite enough to make up for the whole lot of less powerful scenes throughtout the movie. I left the theatre wondering how did the Enterprise pierce the Great Barrier without taking major damage like it did in the 2nd TOS pilot. I had to rely on the ST:V novel to answer that question. According to the novel, Sybok altered the Enterprise shields to pierce the barrier. The tailgating Klingons analyzed the Enterprise shield modifications, which occurred over the course of several hours, and duplicated the modifications to their Bird of Prey’s shields. This makes sense in the context of Star Trek. It is too bad the movie telling of the story couldn’t explain things this well.
Well.. when I first saw the movie all I could think of was, “great Kirk ego trip.” Later on, my opinions changed over time and I began to appreciate the movie a little more for the same reasons brought up in the review. What will always irk me most is the 90 decks thing and Scotty banging his head on the bulkhead.
Still, the movie wasn’t all that bad. Great review. At the risk of starting a debate – one point missed in this review, in my opinion, is Kirk’s prediction (planned or unplanned) of dying alone. The trinity, after all, was not present when he died.
#2: I need help here. I need someone to explain to me why so much hate is routinely directed toward Nemesis around here. No, it was not the best Trek movie, or even the best TNG movie. But worse than ST5? Are you kidding me? For all the significant problems with its premise and script, Nemesis is at least competently made — good special effects, decent acting and directing, and real character development. ST5 lacks every one of those qualities, and replaces them with some of the most jaw-droppingly embarrassing moments to ever be graced by the name ‘Star Trek.’
I have no idea how an honest assessment and comparison of the two films’ strengths and weaknesses could lead anyone to the conclusion that ST5 was somehow a better movie than Nemesis. The assertion is so absurd that I’ve wondered if what we’re seeing here is actually just a little anti-TNG prejudice, or perhaps a bit of lingering Berman-Braga animosity. So can anyone possibly shed a little light on this?
loudy movie ever i see in space effect suck!!! they should remastered.
Responding to #141: I was wondering if someone was going to bring up the Great Barrier problem. It was something I thought about but the review was getting too long. It’s not the first or last time the novelization explains an apparent anomaly onscreen, but in this case I don’t think that’s what was intended. I think the idea they were going for was that Sybok believed it was some kind of faith that did it. The others couldn’t explain it. But that wasn’t clear, and it did need some explanation later–for instance, that the Great Barrier got the reputation for being impenetrable before ships as advanced as the Enterprise tried it. It would remain unbreachable if no craft had tried to breach it for many years. Something like that. But as it is on screen, I agree it remains puzzling. Still, it does work in making Kirk, Spock and McCoy less sure that Sybok is completely wrong. They have a strange new world in front of them to explore.
deep down… i love this movie.
ST V – not the best of Trek films, but it surely has some wonderful troika-centred scenes and it is most faithful to the TOS spirit.
But if you judge the film only allowing for your dislike of the director, you’re probably biased and you might miss the film’s advantages.
Thanks for a truly well-written article.
So where can I see these Star Trek V fan re-edits?
This movie pretty much killed TOS off, the same way Nemesis killed TNG. Something to think about.
A beautiful article picking up (almost) all the postives of STV:TFF.
GREAT (and underrated approx. 60min. [within the movie]) score by J. Goldsmith!
It tried exploring the inner-space, quest for God, and that’s a great positive, at least for me, a partially spiritual-oriented being. A small but non-zero nutrition flavoured with “the bright-side of the force” [see the Cherokee story above].
PS: You may not like Sybok’s inclusion (as DC Fontana does) but I love it. }!-)
Star Trek 5’s “Problems”
The problem with ST5 is that the FX are a step down from 4, now if this was made for TV i’m sure no one would of had a problem, but it was A FEATURE FILM for crying out loud !
ILM’s stuff that was “borrowed” for this film looks great, then you have “Bran Ferren & Assoceates” who sound more like a law firm then a VFX house, who’s FX next to ILM’s look, well, as cheap as can be.
Now as to the stuff that isn’t FX
It’s quite good, yes, it is, if one could close thier eyes during the more “cheap as sin” VFX scenes the film becomes a lot better, yes Shatner needs to “FIX” this thing w/ the aid of folks from Foundation Imageing just like TMP was “Finished” by them along with Wise.
Sure there are some questional “Humor” scenes, but thankfully they’re short and brief and we’re back to the Story itself, which is good stuff, and why certain things got cut that would of helped the film out more got cut has to be because of the running time issue Paramont as well as Hollywood in general seems to have, a few more mins wouldn’t have HURT that much would it ?
I so would of liked to see “Rock Monsters” in this thing.
Yes, i’ve read the makeing of book, if only THAT stuff were in the film.
SIGH
I digress, it is watchable, yes, as long as you look past the flaws in it.
I watched it for the first time in years recently, and it helps that you are ready for the bad effects, the terrible Klingons and some of the worse puns… it lets you just enjoy the good bits, and I like that the reviewer enjoyed the new Observation Lounge.
It was one of the best Trek sets ever in my opinion, not sure why I liked it so much, but it just looked like a great place to be, standing in front of the stars like that.
Very nice review. Thanks.
I am happy to see such a great response and discussion here in relation to this particular entry in the Star Trek movie series. I would like to suggest that while this is indeed one of the weakest (if not THE weakest) entries in the series, there is an undeniable aura or feeling in this movie that successfully captures the feeling of the original series in small moments and scenes in ways that the other movies never did. It would have been interesting to have seen Shatner’s Star Trek explored a little further. It is not my least favorite of the movies (that honor goes to Nemesis, which has it’s shining moments also) but it is admittedly the most difficult to watch.
And, I too would love to see a fan re-edit. Where can we find them?
FIRST!!!
(I hope?)
It’s only really toward the very end that this film falls apart. It doesn’t conclude in a satisfying way, making the whole thing largely forgettable. The best things about it are some of the ‘moments’ already mentioned in the review.
Oh and I’d sooner watch ‘V’ over Insurrection and Nemesis, and maybe even Generations. So no it’s not the worst trek film.
The failure of TFF in my opinion besides poor visual effect, inexperience director, low budget & story/screenplay was the marketability of ,,old,, TOS crew. This can also reply with TNG crew when INC & NEM was released. The general public lost interest watching those old geezers in space. Thou the TOS crew did redeemed themselves with TUC.
I would categorized the Trek movies as 5 good movies & 5 not so good.
Good: TMP, TWOK,TVH,TUC & TFC.
Not so good; TSFS, TFF, GEN, INC & NEM.
what ever you say i like the movie it is fun ,you can finaly see the bond of the trio and what is behind their mind. but as for the god issue yes ok but it doesnt destroy the movie,also the special fx ……come on i prefer this movie than any other tng!
My least favorite of the original crew movies, and I can only watch it as best-of snippets. But I’ll eternally thank Shat for the Kirk-Spock-McCoy campfire scenes :)
Thanks for the review.
I just thought the film looked cheap (when i first saw it in the theatre). i thought back then “Why does Paramount treat Star Trek like an unwanted stepchild, when it is clearly one of their biggest money earners?”
I guess with the current film they’re trying to make up for the past.
Bill offering to split the cost of the effects rework should have been honored.
The film would look so much better now that most of our complaining about ST-V would stop dead.
I think both this movie and Nemesis suffer from trying to do too many things in one movie. My least favorites of all. TMP I like more, because it is Trek as cinema as opposed to two-hour episode.
#98
TWOK has many flaws that fans tend to overlook.
For example, how is it that two starships that are about 12 hours away from Regula One at warp speed (”Warp Five, Mr. Sulu” “12 hours 43 minutes, present speed” ) can get there crippled ( “They’ve damaged the photon control and the warp drive” “Engine room reports auxiliary power restored. We can proceed at impulse power.”) as quickly as they do?
And before re-enforcements can arrive? Because re-enforcements would be coming, right? (”We’re talking about universal Armageddon” “But no longer jammed?”) Kirk would have dialed it in, correct? Superhuman running around with a starship, looking for super-weapon. And to prevent Genesis from falling into a bunch of Superhumans’ hands, Starfleet would have burned out warpcoils getting starships to Regula One.
my suspension of disbelief got a pretty good workout on this installment, but aside from the obvious flaws, i really liked it, after i read how the studio hijacked the shats vision for the movie, i was pretty pissed. this should have been the dark, well shot (and financed) episode it was intended to be.
theres always trouble when the suits start calling the creative shots, this movie wasnt shatners fault, it wasnt his idea to hire a comic writer to punch up the script with jokes.
You know, after reading this article, I may have to pick up V and watch it again. I really wanted to like this movie, and try to ignore all those problems with it. One thing in the article that stands out; the reminder that we only have 6 films featuring the entire cast. As more time goes by (and more of the original cast passes on), Star Trek V might have some redeeming qualities to it after all.
some of the things i thought were hard to swallow:
1. sybok. he was more vulcan than spock, yet he appeared more human. he doesnt even look like sarek or spock. was it necessary for his character to be related to spock at all? it seemed unnecessarily apocryphal.
2. the great barrier didnt seem very difficult to cross, and didnt seem to take much time to get there, what prevented earlier expeditions from exploring it?
3. was it explained that the alien posing as god was in some sort of telepathic communication with sybok? was it just a lucky guess?
4. did the shuttle deck suddenly become severely downsized?
A few friends of mine came to these similar conclusions re: TFF years ago– yes, it is a flawed movie but there is so much that is good and unique to The Original Series here. If you love TOS, warts and all, then TFF is a worthwhile Trek. Personally, I love this movie like I love all of the first six films. The characters are all there– albeit drunk or slap-happy at times. But the family of the Enterprise is irreplaceable in their charm and wit.
Conversely, Star Trek: Nemesis is the lesser movie because it sacrificed its characters true nature entirely. Notwithstanding the fact that the movie is a direct rip-off of TWOK, Nemesis also unraveled years of TNG lore by making these characters out to be some cheap knock-offs of their true selves. And don’t get me started on the Troi mind-rape scene. Shameful.
Bill, I wanted to thank you for your thoughtful and well-written review as well. I really enjoyed reading this article!
oh, and whats with the ‘marshmellon replicator’? where can i get one?
I remember driving to the theatre while my girlfriend at the time read the review in the paper. I asked what it said and she just said, “Umm, they didn’t trash it, but they did not exactly give it a glowing review.” I think the title of the review was something like “Trek defies criticism” or something to that effect.
It’s true in a way. Most Trekkers will find some salvation in anything Trek. Case in point: Trek V, Nemesis, 1st season of TNG, Rascals…. you get the point.
For me, Trek V failed on so many levels: poor script, bad acting, failed attempts at humor and poor special effects. The we need “Jim Kirk” speech made me want to vomit. The jail break joke was just silly, and what happened to the Romulans — their representative was held captive, too!
Nemesis on the other hand failed for many of the same reasons. A contrived plot, predictable situations and more of the Picard & Data show. Don’t get me wrong, I love those guys, but TNG is an ensemble and the movies never reflected that. Seeing Picard & Data for 80% of the time in 3 pictures gets old.
149 “This movie pretty much killed TOS off, the same way Nemesis killed TNG. Something to think about.”
Not so. Even after he saw ST VI a few years later, Brandon Tartikoff, then head of Paramount, wanted a 7th movie with the whole TOS crew. But others were eager to push (rush) TNG onto the big screen.
168 “The we need ‘Jim Kirk’ speech made me want to vomit.”
Well, after saving the Earth twice in recent years, it kinda made sense that Starfleet would consider Kirk their ultimate go to guy, no?
Darn you, Paramount – of all the older films that could use an overhaul, I want this one to be granted one the most! It would be AWESOME if CBS Digital redid the fx on Trek V after they’ve completed all the TOS episodes! What a wonderful bonus for the fans that would be to end the big Remastered project. Something tells me Rossi, the Okudas, etc. would work very well with Shatner.
#154,
Now, THAT’s the way to do a ‘first’!
i have an idea as to how we can get paramount to give shatner the money for new fx!
bob orci post here , right?
tell bob to tell j.j. to tell paramount to give shatner the money!
they could over see the project if they liked and what with the new movie being pushed back they could release a new trek movie in the cinema and on dvd at the same time! and dont tell me paramount aint going to reissue all the movies again in time for may next year! IT MAKES PERFECT SENSE PARAMOUNT!!!
#169 – “of all the older films that could use an overhaul, I want this one to be granted one the most! It would be AWESOME if CBS Digital redid the fx on Trek V after they’ve completed all the TOS episodes!”
I couldn’t agree more. They have done a great job of giving TOS a nicely updated look, this is one film that could benefit by that same treatment. Besides, I figure that we deserve a little something to satiate the appetite while we wait for May, 2009 :-)
Great review, Trek 5 has always been a fav and is so full of great Trek moments.
Reading through these comments it seems so many of this film’s detractors either have personal problems with Shatner or are a product of the CGI generation and have many issues that are purely cosmetic. What this film is big on, is heart. And it’s focus on Kirk, Spock and McCoy IS what Star Trek was about. Someone said, take out the campfire scenes. That statement alone undescores the fact that so many don’t really understand what made TOS tick. They want to ditch the relationships and add more eye candy. Yeesh.
I’m glad Shatner understood the essence of the show and brought it to the big screen. I just wish the studio would give him a special director’s cut.
Great review, Bill. I appreciate the thought and honesty that went into your analysis. The thing that continues to piss me off about all this, is the “what if?” question of Paramount’s dedication to Trek. If Shatner and Nimoy and Meyer had been given the financial backing and support that JJ seems to have now how much better would 1-6 have been. This isn’t a knock on the new movie or creative team, but a certain lament for the previous films.
I remember reading about the original script for V, which included the spectacular ending that Shatner wanted. At one point a horde of demons chased after Kirk on Shakaree. One demon managed to grab Kirk’s communicator and was accidentally beamed aboard the Enterprise! Scotty fired a phaser at it and damaged the transporter in the process, thus explaining why Kirk couldn’t simply be beamed up.
Would’ve made a neat sequence if it could’ve been done! With modern CGI, of course, that kind of thing is now a breeze.
#173- I hear you on the campfire scenes. I didn’t like TFF on the whole, but the three old dudes around a camp fire worked IMHO.
Excellent review. I’m not ashamed to admit that I enjoy this film – not my favorite, but I do not look at it with the disdain others do.
I agree with everyone who believe that this film – of all the original cast films – would benefit the most from a re-master. In fact, I think this film could be easily tightened up, edited, add new effects and you could actually make a better film from it. It sounds like that is what Shatner wants based on what I’ve read, but those tight – wads at CBS Paramount won’t spend a dime on it.
Once a flop, always a flop – it’s the Hollywood way.
This is the first Star Trek movie I saw, and well, I enjoyed when I saw it.
Mostly I recall i fell in love with Jerry Goldsmith´s soundtrack, and I didn´t knew what the Trek fuss was all about “Why this powerful music just to some guys talking and talking” “Where´s the X-wings, where´s the Lasers, the robots”, and guess that I was looking for in a science fiction movie, robot violence and spaceship battles, instead of ALL that talking.
Then I started to see all the other movies, getting to know them, to learn what´s so special about them, and with ears wide open for the soundtrack. Well, I was curious, then i got hooked by better and better Star Trek movies.
Now, having all the movies on DVD, I still enjoy Star Trek V, mostly the soundtrack “God is a busy man”, and besides, It has several redeeming like…there´s no Ewoks on it, no Gungans.
Re. the campfire scene … I love the part when Kirk states that he’ll die alone. Jerry Goldsmith’s beautiful score rises, and McCoy and Spock – just for that one brief moment – are silent. The looks on their faces say it all. Neither one wants to contemplate the thought of their friend dying.
De Kelley was also given some wonderfully touching lines and delivered them well:
“It’s a mystery to me what draws us together. All that time in space and we’re getting on each other’s nerves … and then what do we do when shore leave comes along? We spend it together.”
I like the way #169 commented on the “we need jim Kirk”. That can be taken both ways that Kirk’s experience and gambling over the years has made him the best at getting through rough spots and as Admiral Bennett said “no experienced commanders”, were available. If you listen carefully, Kirk said “Oh,Please” Like give me a break. I am on vacation. I find it interesting that a 1 time Admiral with all the clout that he has would be allowed to go out there with a jacked up ship, I mean after all did not Kirk Counsel Capt.Harriman about leaving spacedock with virtually NO Equipment??
Something about this movie, I’ve always liked. I agree that the effects definitely need updating, but I’ve always loved this movie.
By the way….INSURRECTION is the WORST Star Trek movie, followed CLOSELY by THE MOTION PICTURE.
Can’t wait for the BEST flick, VI to be reviewed.
well done
#181 for me its just not effects alone its the movie as whole that I have a problem. With regard to Star trek Insurrection yeah that one does not rate very highly on my list either The story was not very good Picard lite aka Shinzon was not that compelling a villian It might have been more so had Shizon been the same age as Picard. If patrick Stewart had played both roles I think tthat might have made the movie at least a little more compelling. this would stil not have made it great film though. Star trek the Motion picture or as it is sometimes reffered to as the Motionless picture suffered from a very slow pace ,they waisted to much time on the reconstruction aspect of the ship. Also I find it hard to believe that Admiral Kirk would be that much of a fish out of water on his own ship. yeah he was out of the captains chair for a few years but how could he be that out of touch with Starship technology , that makes no sense to me at all.He’s an admiral in Starfleet and He not up on the latest upgrades to Starships?
Visually the film even by todays standards still look fantastic ironically it looks better then Star trek 5 which was made a decade after, which begs the question How could special effects technology have regressed so much?
Just a bad film, no two ways about it.
I’m sorry, but TMP is on no way the worst, or even a bad movie, especially since Wise had a chance to finish it. The new Director’s Cut is a lot better than the original version, and I put it on and watch it every now and then, whereas I never did that with the old version. And I didn’t even buy the SE DVD of STV.
also Leonard Nimoy some year later conceded that for Star trek the motion picture they did not get the script that they wanted.
its amazing that star trek 5 has spared the kind of debate that it has so many year after the fact i suspect they will still be talk about it decades from now
I actually prefer this movie over IV. Yes, light the torches and grab your pitchforks, because its true.
Here’s why: Yes, it’s true that Star Trek IV had more polish than Trek V. From a production standpoint, it was a fine movie. What I didn’t like about it was the time travel back to the ’80s. When I watch Trek, I either want to see the Star Trek universe in all its glory, or I want to see some version of Earth’s history that is not taking place all around me at the time. Kirk and Spock in San Francisco annoyed me. It made a lot less sense than going much farther back in time and simply plucking a pair of whales from the ocean, then zipping back to their own time to deliver them.
Back to Star Trek V, as the reviewer stats, there are a lot of great scenes in this movie. Watch this movie and then compare it to the stiff formality throughout Star Trek II. In the first two films, I have to wonder if the writers or the director were very much out of touch with the characters. In V, all of the characters seemed like themselves, as they were portrayed throughout the series. Then there were the classic line, “What does God want with a starship?” Great stuff.
As for the religious angle, I’m personally not religious, but the one thing nobody seems to want to get over is the fact that this being is not God. Call it irreverent, call it whatever, but this is not the creator being that they found, no matter how much it tries to pretend it is. Why is this a problem? Trek is full of advanced beings trying to pass themselves off as gods. Heck, even Q does it from time to time in Next Generation.
Yes the effects had their problems, and some of the scenes just didn’t work very well, but this movie reminded me of the original series more than any of the others did. I compare it to Star Trek Insurrection in that way. Both movies have their warts, but I actually enjoy sitting down and watching them from time to time. In fact, the only original Trek movies that I really care to re-watch from time to time are II, V, and VI, though I fully admit that V is somewhat of a guilty pleasure.
-The fans doesn’t like this movie because the ‘trek universe’ is not respected..the fx aren’t so great…but it’s a good movie ..
-What.. ??
..the ST. TMP is so good.?.
I think not..the story of the movie is more..a fantastic one…it’s a very weird one..very ..’out of fashion’ for that period of time…
#188 I think if Sybok had asked himself the question Why does a God want with Starship before he launched is litttle crusade being a logical man as well as embracing his emotions would have concluded that Hm this must not be god, We all know its not god and the thing of it is why would a god have put un an energy barrier in the first place and why couldn’t god have crossed it himself to deliver his message ?. Kirk Spock and McCoy and Yes Sybok are supposed to be Rational beings themselve so the notion of them on a quest to find god, I think the whole story concept just alittle on loopy side of things Again I know its not god and not issue. its just that concept is just plain bad.
#190 Why do seemingly sane rational people fall for clearly flawed religious concepts all the time? Heaven’s Gate, Jim Jones, Scientology…. Those are just the notoriously crackpot ones, it doesn’t even touch upon the truly self-conflicting nonsensical religions that are mainstream. I think its easy to believe that Sybok was so taken with the thing that he would have made the leap of faith to take this journey.
The biggest problem I have with this movie is one that wasn’t touched upon in the review at all – the fact that the Enterprise could reach the center of the galaxy at all. Clearly if the Enterprise could do this in the early days of transwarp, Voyager should have been home by dinner time the day they wound up in the Delta quadrant. This is really an issue that Trek continuity has never addressed since most people, both the fans and the studio, would prefer to just pretend this movie doesn’t exist. It must be a real problem for canon zealots.
Whew. Couldn’t read all the comments, and don’t expect anyone to read mine, but the big problem I have with this film is that it’s almost an exact remake of one of Star Trek (TOS)’s absolute worst episodes, The Way to Eden. I’m sure someone must have mentioned this before me, but Sybok is Sevrin, Sha Ka Ree is Eden, a band of lost souls take over the Enterprise, it’s personal because someone (Spock/Chekov) knows one of the pirates (Sybok/ Irina), and everyone is disappointed at the end. As much as TMP owes to The Changeling, this movie owes to “Eden.”
The main problem with a plot like this is that the ending will always disappoint, no matter how it’s handled; show “God” or paradise and it’s disappointing; prove God/paradise to be illusory, and it’s equally disappointing.
I’ll never forget watching the earlier showing’s crowd’s faces as they filed past all us Trekkers lined up for a later show. They looked like they were coming out of a dear friend’s funeral.
I also think Sybok should have been played by Martin Landau. I have other random thoughts about this movie, but I’ve said enough.
Scott B. out.
I enjoyed this review. For some time I have always attempted to discuss a balanced viewed of ST V among those who know Trek and those who don’t. It was enjoyable to read a review that did not completely dismiss the film wholeheartedly while at the same time not giving it an unintentful of “Everything Trek is Great” that seems to flow from others.
#181 I would couple Nemesis in there with Insurrection. To this day I still feel that they should have found a good script revolving around the return of Lore and that he would be responsible for Data’s death. That would carry much more emotional context with the events leading to said moment,. Not to mention the potential for dramatic context of how Soong attempted to create a replication of humanity itself with both Data and Lore and how certain aspects as jealousy, revenge and hatred will always be with us.
As for TMP, I tend to enjoy it (but only the Directs Cut or the version with the added 15 minutes). I kind of get tired of continually over the top action driven stories…….at least I should say the attempt at them (Generations, First Contact, Insurrection and Nemesis) and dont mind seeing one that has more atmosphere to it. But I do agree with #183, if they just cut the Enterprise approach after the cut to the close up of the bridge to them coming around to dock on the side that scene in particular would run much smoother.
Finding good things to say about Star Trek V is like looking for the proverbial pony at the bottom of a pile of excrement.
I love William Shatner and his portrayal of Captain Kirk but truly this was a perfect example of the “Peter Principle” at work. Shatner truly rose to the level of his incompetence when given the reigns to direct a major film.
The skills that make on a very good actor are not neccessarily the skills that makes one a good director.
I appreciate the reviewer bringing back to my mind the one or two memorable moments in this film but the bottom line is that the laughable special effects (the effects on STNG that was airing on television at the same time at a fraction of this films budget were much better) and a boring storyline poorly constructed doomed this film.
Personally I just pretend that this film never existed. I am embarressed to think that anybody who knows I am a big Star Trek film might watch this disaster as their first exposure to Star Trek and conclude I am crazy.
Other than Luckinbill’s ghastly performance as Sybok and the obvious absurdity of the whole Great Barrier premise, this film was fantastic! You had humor, drama, great action, Klingons, and great music. The movie seemed to have the feel closest to an TOS episode than any other. Even the Great Barrier and other goofs technically showed up on TOS as well. For me, the biggest problem was Sybok. I blame Luckinbill, because I think the concept of the outcast emotional Vulcan could have easily worked. His performance was completely out from left field though. Connery would have probably been just perfect.
What dogged the film the most? Paramount Pictures. The budget, time constraints, and idea to release it right after one of their own blockbuster films (Last Crusade) was foolhardy. The timing killed them, because all the effects houses were already booked and Shatner had to settle for some two bit outfit in NJ. Their refusal to allow Shatner to fix many of these things for the DVD was a real let down and slap in the face to him and Trek fans. If I were given a choice of seeing Shatner in this new film, or have him go back and properly finish STV, I would probably choose ST:V. I liked it a lot, it was the first Trek movie I watched over and over as a kid.
#181
Same here.
I actually liked Star Trek V.
True that it’s not the best of Trek, but there’s just something about it…
I love the colors and camera angles they used. The colors of the Enterprise’s hull and bridge are more of a earth color – warm, rather than the usually white-gray-bluish colors, which are colder of the other films. I liked that change.
Too bad that Paramount didn’t let Shatner fix the effects…
Nemesis and Insurrection are to my opinion the worst Trek ever…
This movie is a total piece of crap.
Here’s what really happend. Kirk ate some mushrooms growing on a rock somewhere in the park, went to sleep by the campfire, and star trek 5 was his halusination.
#192
“I also think Sybok should have been played by Martin Landau. I have other random thoughts about this movie…”
According to Shatner’s ST Movie Memories, their first choice was Sean Connery but they couldna get him…
#195 “Luckinbill’s ghastly performance as Sybok”
While I can understand how some fans would have issues with Spock having a heretofore unmentioned brother (though I personally do not – Spock is after all the same highly private character who failed to tell Kirk & co. that the ambassador of Vulcan was his father!), I do not agree that Luckinbill is in any way a bad actor! The guy is an award winning theater actor; he is the real deal and he definitely has chops. You may not like the way Sybok was written, but Luckinbill is a great actor who did some nice things with the part. He really made you feel the deep conviction of his belief.
Even though alot of people like to trash this movie it’s one of my favs. I’m a fan of TOS and am not really into TNG DS9 or any of the others. That being said this film is the only one of the series that was able to bring back the feeling of the old tv show. I would have really liked to have seen the studio do a new TOS series to run along side TNG in the early 90’s, if they had this would have been an awesome 2 hour premier episode.
A lot has been said about some of the clunky comedy moments in Final Frontier. And to be certain there are some no doubt. But the fact is that most of the Trek films have had them. In fact the only film I think that doesn’t have any clunker comedy moments is the one that was partially comedic. That being Voyage Home of course. Though as I sit here and write I am not coming up with any for Undiscovered Country either. Regardless if V can be considered one of the worst offenders on average then one has to put Search for Spock right along with it. An otherwise fine movie was hijacked along with the Enterprise in that awful middle section. Which was like a huge speed bump thematically atmospherically from the first and last sections.
And at least V had the campfire scenes, the brig scenes and such. So it may have been hit and miss on the funny but Search was all miss in that area.
Oh sorry, forgot. There was ONE scene in Voyage that gets too much credit. But it wasn’t awful. I will leave it to your imaginations as to what that is. :)
#191 Nzorak. now that is an interesting point with regard to the enterprise and the center of the Galaxy We know in Picards time that federation ships had never reached the center of the Galaxy I beleve with the excepetion of the first episode involoving the Traveler and his interest in Wesley Crusher and the episode dealing with Mr Barclay when He was enhanced by the sytherians. As inconsistancies go that one looms large. Im wondering why I didnt think of its so obvious. The point you made about rational people being swayed by cult and religious is on the whole quite reasonable.
Some believe this film pays best respect to the “Trinity,” With what the Kirk character does in V, Spock and McCoy would have had him out of the Big Chair in a minute for giving E over to Sybok so quickly. The real Kirk would have said, “Mr. Chekhov, warp out of orbit.” And the crew of commandos on the shuttle should have been able to take out that rabble around Sybok in Paradise City.
The Trinity does not work when the characters are poorly written, and Kirk definitely is. Spock is full of stupid jokes and hot air, and McCoy is OK.
Also, seeing “Good Morning Captain” written all over the E was just abysmal. It was funny on the Excelsior, so bash us over the heads with it another 20 times.
Luckinbill is not one of my favorite actors why couldnf someone like say Timothy Dalton have played the role of Sybok he would have been more intense and more belieable in that part.
#192 “I also think Sybok should have been played by Martin Landau.”
Considering that Landau was an early contender for the role of Spock – that would’ve been cool! A great actor and he does look more like Leonard than Luckinbill. Great idea!
205 yeah Landua could have pulled off that role with no difficulty
Garovorkin
warning for spamming
25 of the comments on this article are from you, and it is the same with other articles….you do not need to reply to every single comment and you are repeating yourself
comments to http://trekmovie.com/about/feedback
90. jonboc – February 17, 2008
“Do you also hate all the TOS episodes that explored the friendship of Kirk, Spock and McCoy?”
Sorry I don’t have time to answer quiz questions. I enjoyed TOS and all the series. I don’t anyone or anything about it.
You are the person trying to label me as a “hater”. I am not happy with labels and said so back in my original post. I described what I thought then and I felt it was enough.
Pardon me…. fast tying sucks
#208 should have said “I enjoyed TOS and all the series. I don’t hate anyone or anything about it.”
I have a question for anyone who knows the answer. The talk about a movie being “greenlit” — is that a reference to acting in front of a green screen (which I thought was blue) so the background is added later? Are they saying that too much was left to special effects?
kg
I have always enjoyed Trek V, I think overall the first 6 movies have a range of quality similar to the range of quality of the original series, any one movie is as good or better or worse than original series episodes were amongst themselves, as such they all”fit” with the quality of the original series. I think it’s something the reviewers on this site get, each movie has its moments, some overall are great (II,IV,VI) like Balance of Terror, Trouble with Tribbles, The Enterprise Incident) some ar okay (TMP,III) The Changeling, Gamesters of Triskillion, some are so, so (V) Spock’s Brain etc..
I always thought the reason the turboshaft was closed for repairs in Star Trek V was because some joker cadets mislabeled the floor numbers in the wrong order, and at too close intervals, so there is no real continuity error.
Oh and while in Generations Kirk technically did not die alone in that Picard was at his side, he otherwise was removed from his time with no knowledge of the survival of his comrades(which he could somewhat assume were dead) next to otherwise a stranger who embodied his replacement in the cosmos which can be interpreted as “aloneness”
I’m torn between the obvious limitations of this film, as cited by previous posters, and my deep gratitude for elements of the climax of the film.
As a man of faith the arrival at Sha Ka Ree and the “God-Show” stands at the zenith of the most compelling special effects sequences I have ever seen. George Murdock’s portrayal of “God” before Kirk’s question is inspired.
Unfortunately, we are not talking about actually encountering God here.
#192 “I also think Sybok should have been played by Martin Landau.”
I wonder what would have happened if Shat had decided to depict “God” as the Supreme Being was depicted in the Space: 1999 episode “Black Sun’? It worked for me. Martin Landau of course played Commander Koenig in that series.
As a followup I would like to add that it is a shame Paramount did not do Shatner’s suggestion at cleaning up the CGI for a new DVD release.
The effects in STV should be a corporate embarressment for Paramount and they should have done this just to protect the integrity of the franchise.
Reading some of these posts lauding STV as a great movie reminds me of just how pervasive the drug culture is in our country. LOL!!!
Re: #211. Captain Scokirk
“Oh and while in Generations Kirk technically did not die alone in that Picard was at his side, he otherwise was removed from his time with no knowledge of the survival of his comrades (which he could somewhat assume were dead) next to otherwise a stranger who embodied his replacement in the cosmos which can be interpreted as “aloneness”.”
Yeah, okay, I can accept that. Still makes me wonder why they goofed unless what you said is what they were aiming for, hoping the fans would get it (which I didn’t). Thanks!
kg
Re: #212. MrRegular
“…Martin Landau of course played Commander Koenig in that series.”
“Koenig”? As in “Walter”? Was that a nod to Star Trek? (Sorry, I’m not up on all this stuff.)
kg
Even though this movie is pretty bad, (bad as a TREK movie, but straight up terrible as a motion picture in general) there is something about it that has always drawn me to it. Maybe because it is nostalgic for me as it was the first movie I really looked forward to as a kid. I remember going to see LAST CRUSADE because I knew there was going to be a TREK V trailer (in those days most people stilled referred to them as “previews”) The beginning of the movie with Sybok and J’ohn in the desert is still very captivating and moving. There are also some really honest moments with Spock, Kirk and McCoy that every fan can appreciate. The other crew character are missed as they are not seen enough. In some cases when they are seen they are really misused (Scottie and Uhura romance HUH?) But, nobody can deny how exciting and perfect the Jerry Goldsmith music is in that movie. I would argue that the music is one of the best components of the movie.
Let’s face it: it’s the Moonraker of the series.
Katie, I believe that when a movie or project is “greenlit”, it is given the go ahead to start production from the studio.
#169: Sure Kirk has saved the galaxy so many times and would be the go to guy, if he was the right person in the right place. Here is Kirk and the Enterprise all the way back at earth who now needs to travel to the center of the galaxy in a malfunctioning ship because he is the only one who can do it?
It’s obvious as the film is about him going to rescue the hostages. My point is that the audience does not need to be told this – we already know this information, which is what makes the scene silly and the line throw-away. It does not further the story in a logical way.
Star Trek has always painted other captains in a bad light. Harriman (we don’t have any torpedos), Styles (I have a lump of coal up my a$$), Estaban (is there any danger of radioactivity). Only the Captain of the Saratoga seemed to have her act together compared to the others. Couldn’t she have handled the crisis if she was in the area, too?
#217 THX
As in “green light means go”, right?
Hey, no flies on me!
Katie G
“Greenlit” means a movie has been given the go-ahead to start production.
Peace. Live long and prosper.
The Vulcanista }:-|
Paramount really needs to revist this film, and give it a true Director’s Cut treatment. The FX don’t make the movie, but they are so bad, that they are a distraction to the viewer. Given the rework done on TMP and TOS, redoing the FX with CGI for this film seems the logical next step, as well as adding in CGI rock monsters, following Shatner’s orginal script.
The live action scenes could be recut to edit out some of the lamer jokes, and maybe renumber the decks, so that the top of the ship is Deck 1, instead of Deck 79.
Despite it’s flaws, TFF has some great elements – set design, costumes, use of the shuttlecraft, the camraderie of the “big three”, detente with the Kilngons (precursor to TUC and TNG), the Numbus three “experiment”, etc…
And let’s not forget a wonderful Jerry Goldsmith score!
Ooops, didn’t see you up there a few minutes ago, THX!
Peace. Live long and prosper.
The Vulcanista }:-|
I do like how Shatner freed up the camera, compared to the mostly stiff camera work of the earlier films.
If any of you are fans of this movie, I recommend you read the novelization by J.M. Dillard. It fleshes out Sybok a lot more, and it gives explanations to the continuity gaps left in the film (why was the Enterprise able to coast through the Great Barrier? Because Sybok invented a shield technology and adapted it to the ship’s systems). And the pratfalls and gags don’t appear on the page (at least they don’t read the same way if they are there at all,l I can’t remember it’s been 19 years since I’ve read the thing cover-to-cover). But either way, check out the book, it’s better than the movie, and I enjoyed the movie!
221-
“The live action scenes could be recut to edit out some of the lamer jokes, and maybe renumber the decks, so that the top of the ship is Deck 1, instead of Deck 79.”
A Theory:I always speculated that the reason the turboshaft was closed for repairs in Star Trek V was because some joker cadets mislabeled the floor numbers in the wrong order, and at too close intervals, so there is no real continuity error.
216-, others
Why couldnt Scotty and Uhura have a relationship, they lived along side each other for 25-30 years, they both are from the technical division, Worf dated Troi, I don’t understand why Scotty and Uhura having a relationship is somehow anti-Trek?
I think some critics interpret the humor of this film as being against the dignity of the lesser characters, I think that is not necesarily the case, the humor for good or bad is directed at most egos concerned equally,
Kirk hero extradornaire-falls off a mountain in a comical fashion
Spock- pointed ear resourceful and cunning individual who couldnt escape from new brig
Uhura and Mc Coy- can someone help me here- humor at expense of Mc Coy’s/Uhura’s dignity?
Sulu & Chekov- getting lost in the woods
Scotty-Hitting head on bulkhead/conduit
An arguement could be made that the humor was misplaced, but I don’t think it was specifically at the expense of the lowere ranked Characters
215 — “…Martin Landau of course played Commander Koenig in that series.”
“Koenig”? As in “Walter”? Was that a nod to Star Trek? (Sorry, I’m not up on all this stuff.)
More likely, they were twisting James Kirk into John Koenig. Space: 1999 did a lot of heavy lifting from Trek. There’s even an “Immunity Syndrome” titled ep, and a variation on “The Arena.” (Hilariously done with ill-tempered trees!!!) Space has about ten really good episodes and a whole lot of schlock.
#1 and #2 yes! in fact in order of badness, Nemesis, Insurection and Fianal Frontier. They made up for it with Undiscovered country though.
DS9 Movie anyone……..?
226 CmdrR:
It is very VERY important to make a distinction between the first and second series of Space: 1999. Way more so than folks do with the third season of TOS.
The Andersons divorced in between the two and Fred Frieberger was brought in and changed the entire style and feel of the series. An example of which is “The Rules of Luton” with the cranky foliage. :) Which was written by Fred under a pseudonym as a matter of fact.
Sorry for the double post but I forgot to add something.
Space: 1999’s second series was Fred’s attempt to do Trek like stuff. The first series of 1999 was more owing to 2001: A Space Odyssey and other 70’s Science Fiction films.
Here is how I’d rank the Trek films, these days anyway
II-TWOK
VI-TUC
VIII-FC
I-TMP
IV-TVH
III-TSFS
X-NEM
V-TFF
IX-INS
VII-GEN
Guys……you may even find my statement quite heretic…but it’s just a opinion….but here in my city….ST V is one the most appreciated films of Star Trek…it is a favourite here in my house….
and I enjoy it as well…..the soundtrack of Jerry Goldsmith insert me in that world in a way that I hardly notice the FX….
Live Long and Prosper
greetings from Brazil
#230
Nice to see someone agrees with me on where the TMP ranks in the hierarchy of Trek movies. That’s exactly where I would put it too. IN fact our lists are exactly the same for the first 6 movies. Of all of the Trek movies, I find myself re-watching TMP the most.
You know… just a thought, but couldn’t they get ILM to do some effects for a “re-mastered” edition of this film? I know ILM is expensive, and busy with lots of projects, but if there was no rush on it… say, give them 1 full year to complete the effects work at their own pace, we could have a Star Trek V that looks amazing!
1 The Wrath Of Khan
2 The Undiscovered Country
3 First Contact
4 The Voyage Home
5 The Search For Spock
6 The Motion Picture
7 The Final Frontier
8 Generations
9 Insurrection
10 Nemesis
Wow, a lot of response to a review of what is generally accepted as the “stinker” of the TOS movie series… Was I the only one that notices that the reviewer had three hands? a la Arex? ;-) “On the other hand…” Anyway, it’s an amusing movie with lots of flaws, that a remastering wouldn’t be able to erase, but might soften. Paramount’s a corporation, so you’d think they wouldn’t “hold” a grudge against the Shat, but it seems they have. ;-) I can’t believe the slag Sybok gets, when the dorky Klingon punk with his crappy (god, I was getting sick of this ship!) Bird of Prey is clearly the worste offender. ;-)
THX and Vulcanista
Thanks, guys. I’ve seen that term here and there and didn’t know what it was.
Re: #226. CmdrR
I used to watch that but haven’t seen it for YEARS. I remember the chick with the crazy eyebrows. It was when I was much younger or I wouldn’t have watched so many. (Sorry Space:1999 fans…).
and
hello, Brazil!!
kg
The whole movie was a dream. Think about it:
- All the stuff with Sybok, god etc happens between the camping scenes..the story started and ended in the same spot, with the Kirk, Spock and McCoy wearing the same clothes.
- The events of the movie are a reflection of Kirk’s fears: being put back into action while he’s unprepared, geting screwed by Starfleet, losing his crew and losing, above all, losing his friends.
- Events from the camping trip are mirrored in the dream: the fall from El Capitan/the fall from the turboshaft, Climbing El Capitan/climbing the mountain at the end, musing around the campfire/musing around the steering wheel.
- The broken and unreliable Enterprise is another fear of Kirk; that no ship can live up to the original.
- The movie follows dream logic: characters appear when needed (Spock in the turboshaft, Scotty in the brig, Spock in the BoP) and reality warps to accomodate the “story” (70+ decks, the mysterious wheel room, unicorns, a 30 year plus impossible journey to the center of the galaxy that happens in a few hours. ).
- Kirk ate gods for breakfast (Gary Mitchell, Apollo) so it’s no surprise they show up in his dreams. The fight against “god” is Kirk’s subconscious idea of a generic adventure. Likewise, a Klingon is his idea of a generic villain.
- In the end, Spocks saves his ass, just like he saved Spock’s.
- the song “Row, Row, Row Your Boat” (sung around the campfire) ends with the line “life is but a dream.”
- The romantic relationship between Scotty and Uhura all of a sudden
- The film dosnt have the same ‘feel’ or ‘look’ even as Treks II, III, IV and VI
- The dialog between Kirk, Spock and McCoy about it being a dream in the wheel room. Bones- “Are we dreaming?”..Kirk -”if we are – then life really is a dream…” – then looking at the wheels inscription ‘Where No Man Has Gone Before’
- Spock having a brother which was never mentioned before.
- A passionate Vulcan? They are usually refered to as Romulans.
- Uhura singing naked?? It was one of Kirk’s fantasy’s.
If you look at the movie as a nightmare, a reflection of Kirk’s subconscious fears and desires, then the film is actually a masterpiece.
anyway 2009 is the 20th Anniversary of Trek V – Paramount should give The Shat a couple of million for a Motion Picture-esque directors cut dvd -You know what I’m talking about – CGI demons..ILM style space FX to bring it into line with the FX of the other TOS films…a few snips here and there..maybe a lille bit of reshoots – who knows it could be the Blade Runner of the trek movies (after all TFF has unicorns too) and totally blow everyones socks off…winning awards etc….
This is where I got the dvd of jack marshall’s re-edit called “In Thy Image”:
http://fanedit.org/wpTF/?p=61
good stuff.
best!!
=h=
Terrible film. One of those many forgetable bits of creative flotsam that clogs the drain of bad artistry.
It’s funny. Looking at the sheer amount of commentary, this film galvanizes Trekkers and elicits more depth of review than any other ST film. I think it is awful, but watched it on the weekend. I enjoyed it as a timepiece, a view into what Trek was in 1989: A soaring new series with TNG, and a gross misstep with TOS. And as many have mentioned, a great score.
I really wish this movie had at least tried to link to a past episode like Wrath of Khan did …
“THE WAY TO EDEN”, PART 2!
If Doctor Sevrin and Tongo Rad were part of Sybok’s crew, or vice versa, and there was less Klingons and more TOS era Romulans … it could’ve been an interesting movie.
The Dream theory is interesting, interpreted that way it doesnt hurt the picture or “the franchise” and smoothes out some wrinkles.
The criticism of this film is generally too harsh versus the other TOS films, I think part of this could be the “dream” factor, it doesnt really tie into the other films. You have TMP which you cant really “throw away” because it is the first, then you have “the accidental trilogy” II-III-IV, and VI is sort of a prolog to that trilogy and TOS in general rather than build on V.
While not considering myself an apologist I think it is best to look at the movie in the context of all of the TOS saga, not as a TOS movie or as a standalone film and it can be appreciated more.
Personally I think the TOS films and the TNG films should not be rated together, it diminishes them both. They work best compared against their comparative series and the limitations of efx tech at the time they were made.
The excellent text of this article not even make me feel more confort about this movie (as it is one of my favorites, even with the effects problems), but also made me see some qualities in it that I haven’t, and remember some very important moments that are now on Trek’s history. Thank’s for that Bill. And Thank God we have some very intelligent minds like you to bring light into darkness and forgetness…Now I think I’ll roll my ST V DVD on da player again sir, aye!
#237-You know, when I first read your opening statement, it made me angry in the “Bobby Ewing” sort of way. But seriously, I think your idea is actually very cool. I can’t really go any further with it because you covered everything so well. This movie has always fascinated me for a lot of reasons, but perhaps what you said best hits the nail on the head about what intrigues me. It seems so “different” than any of the other Trek movies, but it hits the nail on the head (frightenly well) regarding the Kirk, Spock, Bones relationship. Those characters are dead on perfect. The rest are much foggier. Maybe it WAS a dream, because Checkov and Sulu got lost, Uhura fancied Scotty and danced naked, Scotty bumped into his own “bulkheads”, and Kirk even dreamt about an alien female with three breasts jumping on his back. Fascinating……
“The whole movie was a dream. Think about it. . .
Dude, usually when someone says “I’d like to have what you’re smoking” they mean it as something of a snarky insult. Not in this case. I’d like to have some of what you’re smoking. Seriously. That was one cool, insightful post. To which I can only add: as a nightmare, the story as filmed beat baked bean farts. Barely.
Nemesis = Hands down worst Trek feature. Period. End of discussion.
As for the God of the old testament, He may have gotten angry and taken out those who, in His infinite knowledge and wisdom, deserved it, but He would never…EVER kill someone for asking a question. Anyone who thinks so obviously needs to read the Bible a bit more thoroughly. In the context of the film, Kirk’s question is valid. What would God need with a starship? That request alone should have told Sybok that this was not God, omnipotent creator of the universe.
As for God being in our hearts, yea…He’s in our hearts…if we let Him in.
This one’s as easy to hate as Khan is to love, but it has its moments. For some reason the scene where Kirk comes onto the bridge as the ship reaches “Eden” strikes me as closer to TOS than any scene in any other Trek movie. If this one had better effects it could have gotten by despite the risky religious premise. I kind of think they (Par) wanted to ship the old crew out in favor of Next Gen (in hindsight not the greatest idea). USA Today did a phone poll concurrent with TFF’s release asking which crew should continue the films (the TOS crew won). Oddly the plot is like Roddenberry’s God Thing. And the line “What does God need with a starship?” is 100% vintage Kirk. Could have been better.
The sad thing about this film is that the 1st 45 min.-1hour are quite good. The film begins to bog down when the “Big Three” are sent to the brig. The pace slows considerably and becomes talky. Action is at a minimum. The other main factor in the crippling of this film was the visuals by Associates and Ferren. This may not have ended up as one the best Trek films even without these problems, but it could have been good. The potential was there.
I dunno I think insurrection and Nemesis are essentially of equivalent character- they are the worst TNG movies, have some really great moments, some great efx although the insurrection effects something about them is off, is that because they are so good or bad? I cant tell. Insurrection has moments but overall the plot is unsatisfying, and the scope of the filmed material with the exception of the lake and mountain scenes is very tee vee. The village is laughably so turn of the 20th century shopping center stucco and crown moulding, I mean its paradise right?, not Ladera Ranch, California.
Nemesis, ambitious but ultimately the plot again is clunky, it feels like a collection of moments that had you on the edge “I really should like this but something is off”, some aspects really theatrical, Reman ship, Romulus aerial shots, some astonishingly tee vee, I mean after Star Wars prequels any galactic government hall is going to pale in comparision, the senate set was rich but to small, I sort of get it , very Roman and probably ancient but I mean this is The Romulan Senate and it looks not like the UN or congress but a city council chamber.
They made the same mistakes, they thought too small, and didnt compensate with compelling story, TNG had such an intellectual warm heart and these movies were so action oriented, it worked for First Contact but not he later two.
Insurrection fails for me for many reasons. Mostly, 1)Starship Helm Joysticks, 2)Klingon pimples & 3)Data Brand™ floatation devices.
Nemesis fails due to 1)Dune Buggy rides on pre-warp planets, 2)Reman starship corridors made of rubber & 3)Data’s mentally impaired family members.
Insurrection would have been an alright TV episode; Nemesis would have been a decent action film if it wasn’t a Trek movie.
226 CmdrR:
As #228: I Am Morg Not Eymorg said, please make a distinction between the first and second series of Space:1999. What’s the difference? Fred Frieberger. He did the same disservice to Space:1999 that he had done to the 3rd Season of TOS.
The first season of Space:1999 is compelling. As I mentioned earlier, “Black Sun” is a compelling mystical experience that inspires.
Commander John Koenig and the crew experience some thought-provoking adventures. The first season is available on DVD, BTW.
It is very VERY important to make a distinction between the first and second series of Space: 1999. Way more so than folks do with the third season of TOS.
The Andersons divorced in between the two and Fred Frieberger was brought in and changed the entire style and feel of the series. An example of which is “The Rules of Luton” with the cranky foliage. :) Which was written by Fred under a pseudonym as a matter of fact.
252.- Funny post, are those really the things that did it for you?
I agree the bulk of those are silly but I am curious if you had story/structural problems or was it really a collection of pet peeves that simply overwhelmed the production for you?
“Insurrection would have been an alright TV episode; Nemesis would have been a decent action film if it wasn’t a Trek movie.”
That really sums it up perfectly
Except I thought “Gorches” were funny.
I will never forgive Paramount for not giving us more movies of the TOS actors. Bill, De and Leonard are my all time heros since I was 10 years old in 1966! Live long and prosper Bill and Leonard!
Star Trek V is the film that doesn’t get respect but should be hailed as a templete on how to do Trek right, except for the FX & aging Uhura showing way too much skin.
Just as Family Guy didn’t originally get respect & now steamrolls over The Simpsons, STV 19 years after it’s release is now seen in a more positive light, especially after the TNG batch (save FC) showed us how bad a Trek movie can really be.
Some trekkies will accept and defend anything with the name ‘Star Trek”.It just feeds the studio’s contempt for the fan’s intelligence and perpetuates lack of quality.I think that’s why the mainstream audience is so dismissive of Trek.
Abram’s has got a job to do.He’s got to make a great movie that breaks the fanboy mold and convince people to see it.
#254
True, except Family Guy has gone Trek V on us, and severely lost its way in the last few years. The pre-cancellation episodes are miles beyond what they put out now.
#252
I was being glib, but all those things did annoy me. Storywise, Insurrection kind of falls apart for me because it was a story we’d already seen countless times on the show. There was really no reason to explore the Prime Directive any further. I thought some of the jokes were overly silly (the joystick, Worf’s pimples, etc.). Plus, they really overkilled it with Data and the young boy. Again, been there, done that.
Nemesis didn’t work for similar reasons – it all felt like explored territory. Another brother for Data, a Kahn-lite villain, Picard’s aging, etc. Not to mention the fact that it had characters like Picard behaving and acting in ways they NEVER would have (since when does JL Freakin’ Picard freeze at a critical moment?). The MacGuffin was even something they had explored better in the show. Plus, all the little things – the Enterprise now has a bottomless pit to dispose of baddies in? Despite his fight to protect for the Prime Directive in Insurrection, Picard is now willing to ignore it to go joy riding? A positronic brain now emits a signal that can be detected light-years away? Finding a Data prototype is a surprise, and no mention at all of Lore? Data’s emotion chip is all but forgotten, Picard was suddenly bald from childhood, Worf is aboard for no reason at all, Troi is reduced to a subspace divining rod…I mean, I could honestly go on and on.
Sewriously though, V is pretty awful in many ways. But the reviewer is right IMO in that there are some positive moments. One thing that stands out in my mind is the extremely professional cinematography during the opening scene. In the end, I think Mr. Shatner did the best he could under the circumstances… lower budget, writer’s strike, etc
I agree with many of you that it would be very interesting to see a “fixed” Director’s Edition on DVD. ‘Cause I loves me some ROCK MONSTAS!
Okay…another reason I don’t like TFF is that the scenes with John Schuck’s Klingon ambassador in TVH set up the perfect direction for the fifth movie to go in, namely, a war with the Klingons.
After the lighthearted nature of TVH, I thought that surely the next movie in the series would be a view of the horrors of war through the lens of Star Trek. Imagine Kirk leading a fleet of starships in battle against an invading Klingon Empire. I can well imagine the epic, heart-wrenching anti-war war movie that could have been…
Scott B. out.
P.S. I’m glad several of you thought my suggestion of Martin Landau as Spock’s brother was a good one…I’ve always wished they’d done that.
The same problem exists for Star Trek as what tore my first fanbase of choice apart: endless complaining and expectations of something more than entertainment.
I applaud this article for highlighting the good in this film, which is a talent forgotten by nearly every cynical fanboy in front of a computer. We’ve all become an army of ‘critics’ beyond Ellsworth Toohey’s greatest wishes.
Is TFF the best movie ever? Nope. Is it the worst? Not by a long shot.
Is it entertaining, and have good parts that make up for some of the weaker moments? Are the core messages solid (beware false prophets and feel-good fixes, know yourself and what makes you tick)? Are the performances good on the whole?
Yes, yes and yes.
But it didn’t provide Nirvana. It’s not a classic! (Though neither are TMP, TSFS or TVH, honestly.) Therefore, we must hate and revile it. We must toss it onto the refuse heap to be burned…until we dig it out to tell the world again how much “we” hate it.
It’s a good time. If it doesn’t do it for you, why spend 20 years bashing it? Pick up and move on.
Reading a lot of negative posts sorta bums me out (even though many of the comments re: STV do have have merit), but I am back in a good mood now. Just watched City again on DVD and I’ll be damned if that isn’t the very finest piece of Star Trek ever produced. I’ve seen this one probably ten or twelve times and it has never failed to mesmerize me.
The story is of course, masterful, most have acknowledged that. The music is riveting. The direction is dynamic. The dialog is five-star. But there’s one thing I rarely read about. For some reason, the caliber of acting by nearly every person in that episode was raised to a new level, particularly De Forest… flawless. Even the extras – the bums, the little old ladies – were just fantastic in each and every scene.
And I always, always get a maximum chill up my spine when Kirk says to Edith, “McCoy!!….. Leonard McCoy?!!”, as the music kicks the door down at the end. My god, if that is not perfect drama, perfect sci-fi, perfect Trek… then I don’t know what is.
Thanks for letting me get that out.
Star Trek V could have been a much better film, Shatner had ten million dollars removed by the bean counters and shifted to Hunt for Red October during this time period. A loss that the film never recovered from. Poor visuals, shooting schedules cut, over all budgets reduced, and weather related delays caused shooting problems. The film deserves a new directors cut and the re/mastering of those gawd awful FX. When you watch a film on DVD and the visuals on the menus are better than whats in the movie you know you’ve got a problem.Paramount screwed William Shatner and the fans when this film was released in the form it was presented.
Ok, I just watched this travesty again…and I’m sorry…it’s WRETCHED!!!!!
This film has the best Kirk-Spock-McCoy interactions, in my opinion. It shows they are not only shipmates but friends that want to spend their downtime together.
In particular I love the scene with McCoy and his father.
Great review. Sums up my feelings on the film well. I personally prefer this film slightly to TMP and definitely over IV (which is my least favorite).
Nemesis is worse.
If you can find the out takes on the 2 dvd set- there is an extended set of tests of the “rock monster” that was to be used in Kirks escape sequence.
Interesting stuff.
Campfire scenes interesting. I wonder… did Kirk in fact “Die alone?”
STV is the Citizen Kane of Trek movies, while Nemesis is Ed Wood level dribble on par with Glen or Glenda.
Re: #237. Snake
“If you look at the movie as a nightmare, a reflection of Kirk’s subconscious fears and desires, then the film is actually a masterpiece.”
Sooooooo he accidentally made a good movie but didn’t know it. How apropos. Naw, I know you’re kidding but interesting point of view! Kind of like when PeeWee Herman fell off his bike and then realized that some kids saw him and were laughing and he said “I meant to do that!” If Mr. Shatner only knew…
Re: #245. Michael Hall
“…the story as filmed beat baked bean farts…”.
Say that three times real fast!! (You had to know that someone was going to say it sooner or later. I wanted the honour.) :-)
Re: #259. JWM
“Is TFF the best movie ever? Nope. Is it the worst? Not by a long shot.”
and
“It’s a good time. If it doesn’t do it for you, why spend 20 years bashing it? Pick up and move on.”
Excellent. Good stuff.
Finally,
One of the things that I’d really like to know is, did Nichelle Nichols have a body double? No way she did that fan dance in the nude. How embarrassing! Tell me it ain’t so.
kg
#266: “One of the things that I’d really like to know is, did Nichelle Nichols have a body double? No way she did that fan dance in the nude. How embarrassing! Tell me it ain’t so.”
Katie, Those were indeed Nichelle’s pudgy thighs, along with anything else we really didn’t need to see.
Re: #192. Scott
“As much as TMP owes to The Changeling, this movie owes to “Eden.”
Wow. Thought I was the only one who believed that TMP was just a grand remake of “The Changeling” (Nomad = V’ger) which I thought was a brilliant episode (Spock complimenting Kirk’s logic). Funny thing is, I never connected ST:V to “Eden”. I’ll have to watch it again with that in mind.
Re: #264. mctrekkie
“I wonder… did Kirk in fact “Die alone?”
See comments #32, #58, #128. We were discussing that as well.
Btw, sorry ‘LostOnNCC1701″ (#58). Just saw your post now.
Re: #267. Moogie
Nooooooooooooooooo! I thought for sure it wasn’t. Okay, guess I shouldn’t ask things that I REALLY don’t want to know!!
Thanks, Moogie!
Good night all.
kg
Martin Landau as Sybok? Since Landau has worn a rather cheap toupee for many years now, that would have been intriguing to see……..
The characters of Kirk and Sybok chasing each other around the bridge of the Enterprise, the winner being the first one to snatch the “dead rat” off of the other’s head!
A head-to-head hair-raising battle with only one victor!
Gawd, I’d have paid good money to see THAT!!
#269 Harry … LOL. But you know, since about the late 90’s, The Shat’s hair has looked great! I’m not sure what changed, but I do know one thing … that “dead rat” (I prefer “deceased tribble” myself) you refer to has since been handed down to Walter Koenig, who sports it not so proudly to this day!
I hear the Shat has moved up to some “top of the line” hair weave that is so fragile it’s replaced every two weeks…..the trade-off is that it looks realistic as hell……right down to looking like it’s thinning a bit…
Sheesh, I must have too much time on my hands!
“the effects are obviously unfinished, lacking the subtle details and shading that makes them look dimensional and “real.”” – this is the perfect description of remastered TOS…
Star Trek V is obviously the worst TOS-era movie, but IMO both Generations and Insurrection are much worse than this one.
I always considered this to be trek’s weakest link, referring to it as “Star Trek V: Death of a franchise”, but after reading your review I realize that I have always loved this movie. Looking back I think I’ve been over analyzing it for years; the travel time to the center of the galaxy being way too short, the jet boots that defied the laws of physics and momentum, and of the whole god thing, but now I see it as more of a diamond in the rough. I had forgotten the most important part of trek, the message. Star Trek was never really about all the technology, but the people who use it. I guess the message was so fundamental that I never really saw it, taking “god” as just some alien. The reference to the Native American “wolf” story really put it all in perspective, I think it’s time I find my old VHS copy and give it another go, thank you for the perspective.
“you can’t make a silk purse from a sow’s ear”
Famous old quote……wonder how it applies? Talk amongst yourselves……
Brilliant review! spot on, my thoughts exactly.
Was very disappointed when it came out, but over the years come to cherish the highs and get used to the toe-curling lows……..
272. Insurrection is actually competently made, watch it again you’ll see.
A very well thought out review of Star Trek V. While it is obviously the least favourite of the Original Series films for most fans there are still some classic Star Trek moments!
Re: 270 — I saw Koenig speak at a convention way back in 1983. He walked from the back of the auditorium to the podium. I was on the aisle as he passed, and noticed that it looked as if he grows his hair out from the nape of his neck and fwoops it way over the top and front of his head; a huge comb-over. Since then, that’s what it’s always looked like to me, not a toupee.
One thing that struck me when I went to see the remastered “The Menagerie” at the theatre in November was John “Dr. Boyce” Hoyt’s comb-over. I had never noticed it before.
Scott B. out.
STV was, without a doubt in my mind, the worst of the original cast films. With that said, I will applaud the author’s effort to write a fair review.
My problems with this film have nothing to do with f/x. I have a problem with the concept of the POIP. Somehow the otherwise benevolent Federation allows this project to be completely neglected to the point of deprivation. That never sat well with me.
I also believe the Romulan ambassador was poorly written, as were the Klingons (head down, apologizing?). I do not think the actors knew what kind of people they were playing, and the director failed to make sure that they did.
I did not like the fact that the Enterprise did not work, or the notion that they could be the best option at Starfleet’s disposal for such a mission.
I also take exception with the fact that the Enterprise is “hijacked” by such a rag-tag bunch of hooligans, and the “famed Enterprise crew” is never able to regain control on thier own. This was a low point in the illustrious career of Jim Kirk.
The humor was far too forced. I think someone made the mistake of thinking that, following the success of STIV (where the humor was more natural), this was the way to go. STV made our beloved TOS characters out to be complete buffoons!
This was, in my opinion, the Great Trek Turd. It was the only time I have ever actually been embarassed to be in the theater during a Star Trek film, it is the only one of the original movies which I rank worse than the TNG era films, and the only one of the original movies I never bother to rewatch.
Again, the author makes a few fair points, particularly on some of the standout individual performances. I also think Shatner should be allowed to clean up what he felt was rushed.
Personally, I just imagine that it was all a bad dream and it never really happened. Everyone is entitled to their own personal likes and dislikes—one of my dislikes is STV.
- It’s a great movie….klingons…smart people..
274 Harry:
Perhaps not, but there is nothing wrong with a solid non silk purse. :)
Oh brother. For some, just having Trek characters wandering around in front of a camera is enough. A good film requires so much more. Raise the bar, for crying out loud. ST: V is truly an awful mess when compared to the overall spectrum of film-making. Even when compared to the ten Star Trek films, it still ranks as the worst, though most Trek films always seem to make me cringe despite being a fan myself. ST: II is the only Trek film that was executed well from start to finish.
I sincerely hope that Abram’s ST: XI raises the bar and, perhaps, ends Star Trek on a good note. Personally, I need something new when it comes to science fiction film, something finally reflecting excellence. I have been waiting for a long, long time…
#282–I’m with you on raising the bar, but I am far from ready to see Star Trek end at all. On the contrary, I would much rather see the potential success of the new film spawn new interest to the effect of once again lauching the Enterprise on the small screen for a broad audience. There are a plentitude of adventurous stories left to tell. I want a post TOS/ pre TMP series of films, a post-TMP/ pre-TWOK film, and a post-TUC/ pre-TNG tv series. There is plenty of “fan” left in me, and with a successful STXI–perhaps there will be enough support to do some of that.
Funny thing is that Shatner´s intended Rock Monster was homaged later in the trek spoof “Galaxy Quest”, which features a living forcefield which uses Rocks to craft a body, a “Rock Monster”, this time, with ILM/special visual effects as it should be in Star Trek V.
284 – how funny! I never made the connection but you’re right! musta been some kinda “in” joke.
“Oh brother. For some, just having Trek characters wandering around in front of a camera is enough.”
Hardly. Some of us just look for the positive in life and entertainment instead of grumpily insisting that everything be exactly the way we want it. For my money, and say what you will about my opinion, ST III is less enjoyable than STV, despite its own “high points” and ST:TMP (depending on which of the 200 versions you watch) perpetually treads on thin ice at best.
#279
Darn it! I *almost* made a “countdown to Closet showing up and declaring Trek V a ‘turd’” post last night! Seriously, I knew he’d use that exact word. I’ll be quicker next time. ;)
“I also think Shatner should be allowed to clean up what he felt was rushed.”
Well on that we agree!
#284–Great spoof! I watched that movie again a few days ago, and I think I will purchase the dvd. It cracked me up even more this time around than it did the first time. I wonder what the original Star Trek cast thought of it. I would like to think they would have enjoyed it.
I disagree with the guy who worked on Nemesis that there should not be a worst film — BUT — for me it’s a four way tie. :-)
Here’s my breakdown (based solely on my own opinion. If you love these films, God bless ya…but I find watching these on a par with taking cod liver oil):
ST:V — Wretched, but still watchable every few years or so*.
ST:Generations — Wretched and unwatchable for repeated viewings.*
ST: Insurrection — Wretched and unwatchable for repeated viewings.*
ST: Nemesis — Wretched and unwatchable for repeated viewings.*
*All of these may be deemed watchable with the addition of one of Mike Nelson’s RIFFTRAX. ;-)
282
“…most Trek films always seem to make me cringe despite being a fan myself. ST: II is the only Trek film that was executed well from start to finish.”
This is really how I feel as well. Very well put.
My two cents. Yeah, I love the original crew but I have wondered from time to time if it’s not a combination of two things:
1) the cast attempting to keep vibrant but appearing old and “tired”
2) some extremely corny dialog
Obviously ST II: The Wrath of Khan was stellar in nearly every way, but I think that the “old and tired cast” thing worked best in that movie because it was addressed right at the start of the film. We didn’t penalize anyone for being old since they were honest about it.
Let’s face it. The original TOS syndicated crew – young, full of life – set the bar so high in the original series that anything less was hard to accept.
#281 “there is nothing wrong with a solid non silk purse”
Oh, you mean a knock-off? Still doesn’t say much about the product, does it? :)
#287–Believe me, it took a great deal of discipline for me to allow 279 posts to go by first! An entire article dedicated to it? Are you kidding me? I’m glad I could help fulfill the promise of this thread.
“Well on that we agree!”
Look, I don’t hate the guy, and I do think he is entitled to some respect. Nothing he has said or done in later years will negate the fact that 20 years of his work on Star Trek was fantastic, and that is a big part of my love for TOS-era Trek. STV is what it is, but it wouldn’t hurt to clean up some of the awful f/x that never should have been. That much was beyond Bill’s control for sure. Heck, I’d be all for rewriting, reshooting, and redirecting the whole mess! It is, afterall, the lone blight on an otherwise very decent series of films.
Excellent review.
I love the music score, Yosemite and the scenes with Kirk, Spock and McCoy.
Wished Shatner could have redone the DVD.
Still glad V and VI got made.
To me the worst two movies are Insurrection and Nemesis. You cannot knock Firstt Contact a great TNG movie.
#293–”Still glad V and VI got made.”
Back then I felt the same way (at least until about 10 minutes of STV had gone by). However, in retrospect, I wish they would have went out on the high note that was STIV. Still, I give STVI some credit for bouncing back a bit.
As for First Contact, it was the only TNG-era film worth watching twice (IMO).
Wow. I’ve been reading all the posts and feel like I’m SO out of my league. Personally I liked all of the Star Trek movies (but then that’s no surprise to you guys because you’ve probably seen my comments.) Yes, I do agree there were shortcomings and some moments were hard to sit through but thank God for “Fast Forward”.
I’ve been trying to rate all of the movies from 1-10 but found it difficult as each one had it’s great moments and each one had it’s “turkey” parts. Nemesis is a little dark but I still enjoyed the good parts. Guess I’m just not as much of a connoisseur. I didn’t notice most of the things mentioned. Maybe in this case ignorance IS bliss.
Re: #36. Steven Taylor
“It just seemed so ridiculous that Spock had this half-brother of whom we had never heard.”
Not really. In TOS, Episode “Journey to Babel”, when greeting the Ambassador from Vulcan, Kirk asked Spock if he wanted to beam down and visit his parents since the Enterprise was orbiting Vulcan; Spock says “Ambassador Sarek and his wife ARE my parents”. He didn’t even tell Kirk, probably his closest ‘friend’ that much about himself so I think it’s not a stretch that we don’t know about the half-brother either. Vulcans may probably be the introverts of the universe.
I enjoy reading everyone’s comments because they notice things I never thought of. Now when I go back and re-view the movie I’ll be going “oh yeah — I see what they meant…”.
Keep it going, everyone.
kg
Re: #284. Victor Hugo
Yes and they also made a reference to the Captain managing to get his shirt torn off. That cracked me up. It made me wonder just how much of it was true. I knew there was trouble behind the scenes but in “Galaxy Quest” they make it look like everyone made up. It would be nice to think that happened (although when Shatner had Scotty walk into a bulkhead and had McCoy talking about the explosive combination of beans and booze on a Vulcan’s digestive system, they may have doubted his wisdom)…
kg
no ones mentioned the kinda embarressing press confrence thing on the extra disc on the DVD? all dressed up in uniform…introduced by Bennett (who comes across like some dodgy 2nd hand car salesman – in this and also in the message to the sales troops)…Bennet looked mighty angry when the music started playing at the wrong moment – best bit was where shatner forgot Walter Konigs name and Walts gives the shat such a disgusted look….and wtf was up with Ralph Winters jumper? my god even in the 80s stuff like that can not have been the thing to wear!
Gotta love the shatners comeback to a reporters Q about how Trek V is gonna complete with the other summer blockbusters like Batman…’well we have people in masks in this film so come see this instead’
Anyway Trek V is the best suprise ending film ever made – it was all in Kirks head……a weird dream brought about thanks to Bones’ bourbon and beans…and spocks marsh melons (uh..thought it was ‘mallows’?)…..Sixth Sense?….Fight Club?….Pah! – Trek V is the daddy of that genre…
291. Harry Ballz: “Oh, you mean a knock-off? Still doesn’t say much about the product, does it? :)”
Hardly, I mean there is nothing wrong with a good solid leather or some other solid material purse. Silk is too fancy anyway. :)
Regarding Galaxy Quest,
I’ve always considered GQ to be something similar to Star Trek what Wes Cravens New Nightmare was to the Nightmare on Elm St movies…or at least what the Austin Powers movies are to James Bond (although GQ is even more powerful a homage to Star Trek than AP is to Bond)
It mainly references the original Star Trek and actors ( theres literally too many to mention – but yeah that Rock monstor thing has got to be inspired by the lost ending of Trek V) but there are a couple of nods to The Next Generation too (the kid at the helm in the original GQ tv show…the shot from Tim Allens eye when he was returned to earth – similar to the opening shot of First Contact..The design of the NTE ship is based on a Star Trek comm-badge)
Also I noticed that the Enterprise series (2001…GQ was 1999) had a similar alien to Sarris species (the Xindi seen in season 3), a vaugely similar ship design and uniforms and even a young black dude at the helm! – Wonder if that was intentional from the Star Trek Enterprise makers??!
its the best ‘Star Trek’ movie since First Contact…i remember seeing this in the cinema and thinking ‘man if only the last Star Trek movie (Insurrection) had been this good!’
GQ had the same budget as First Contact ($45 million) but only pulled in $90 million world wide…
What I would like to know is why do so many people think that just because Kirk said he believes he would die alone that he would? All the canon nuts freak out because when he died he was with Picard. The fact is that Kirk was WRONG!
I might believe that I would die during a lap dance but the reality is that I will probably die in a nursing home!
How about dying in a nursing home WHILE enjoying a lap dance?*
*hopefully the dance is not being performed by one of the patrons!
#300
“The fact is that Kirk was WRONG!”
I always took “die alone” to mean Spock and McCoy would not be present. Which proved correct. Sheesh, everyone is so damn literal!
“I might believe that I would die during a lap dance”
No, that’s how Harry is going to die.
I wouldn’t have it any other way!!!
Or, to paraphrase Kirk, “I always knew I’d die with a bone!”
I never doubted it for an instant, Harry. And given the nature of some of your postings, it will likely occur in front of your computer screen. :)
#225.
It is not that I don’t believe that Uhura and Scottie wouldn’t get together, I just think that they would follow Starfleet’s general order #2- “Don’t sh*t where you eat”
To me, the VFX grated.
Here, we had effects *worse* than what we were getting on television with TNG. When I pay $5-7.50 (1989 prices) to see a film I’d better be getting something BETTER than what I get for FREE at home.
Especially disappointing since VFX created for Star Trek II and III, created 5-7 years earlier, were vastly better. Look at the Klingon BOP and 1701-A *glued* to backgrounds. Look at the bad lighting, etc. Absolutely terrible and even inferior to some of the stuff seen in TOS!
#306–To me, that wasn’t even the point. It was the sheer juvenile foolishness of it, coupled with the fact that it was a completely directionless subplot, both within the story and beyond, which made it so intolerable. I don’t know whose idea it was, but it should have been stopped for the sake of the two characters’ dignity, if nothing else. Oh well, everyone else’s dignity went out the window in that film—what’s the difference, right?
I don’t know if it compromised there dignity,
If Kirk and Spock had discovered that Sybok’s men were all gay and Scottie (God rest his soul) had to do that peek-a-boo palm frond dance, THAT would have compromised dignity!
I KNEW you’d still be reading these comments! ‘fellow trekker.
-Cheers
Well Star Trek five was one of my personal favorites for reasons beyond my comprehension. I liked the bridge set because it seemed warm and believable, and as mentioned in the article, the Obsevtion Lounge was a beautiful set. The story left something to be desired, I am a Christain, I’m not afraid to say it. But I was not offended by ST 5. I really dont understand why someone would. Its not about disproving God, its about a man trying to find God in the galaxy. But enough of that. I think it was a fairly good film. If Shatner had been allowed to redo the film as he wanted theres no telling what could have happened. I guess for now it will remain a dream…
Well written article. You made a 20 year old film seem fresh to me. I’ve always been a ST V defender, but this adulation was hampered by my awareness of the film’s flaws. Thanks for reaffirming my appreciation of the film, warts and all!
” I am a Christain, I’m not afraid to say it.”
Why would anyone be afraid to say that? That’s silly. :o)
It’s amazing that after all these years, Star Trek V can still fire the passions like those on this thread. And everyone still ignores the shortcomings of nearly every other Trek film to bash it.
Really! I love Star Trek pretty much _in spite_ of how many crappy movies they’ve made. TWOK and TUC are the only ones of all ten that can actually stand on their own as films and appeal to those outside the core group as well. TVH appeals to those outside the core group, but watching it 20 years later, it redefines “dated” to a great extent…and that soundtrack STUNK.
So there! :o)
Star Trek V is still one of the 5 best movies of the first 6!
I love the interplay between the main characters very much in this one.
And so do you all, admit it or not!
http://battlebloggalactica.files.wordpress.com/2007/08/kirkuni.jpg
STV was a disappointing film, to be sure. The worst thing about it was the FX. The story had some serious issues. The characters tended to be more caricatures of who they were supposed to be. Is this entirely William Shatner’s fault? It might be said that just as the Captain is responsible for his ship and crew, so too is the director responsible for his film and crew. At the same time, if a director is not given the resources required to do the job properly, the director can only be held responsible to a point.
I think Mr. Shatner’s original story idea was a mistake to begin with. As much as I like and respect him, this was a wrong choice… for all the reasons people have mentioned before. The “God” thing just doesn’t work. There are too many personal “visions” of God for a vast audience to embrace one man’s idea about God. I can appreciate Shatner’s ponderings about why some people think God speaks to them, but I think ST was the wrong venue to try to address the matter.
Meanwhile, I think Shatner has a fine eye with a camera. The opening scene of Sybok riding the horse-creature across the desert is one of my favorite shots. There are other great shots, as well, but, in some cases the lack of good FX tended to take away from the good shots… such as the shots aboard the Klingon BOP, intercut with FX shots of the satellite being destroyed. Really horrendous FX.
I’m really disappointed that Paramount wouldn’t let Shatner do a director’s cut. Perhaps some “enterprising” fans will just go ahead and make their own director’s cuts… um, I’m not suggesting anything….
This movie actually caused me to be embarrassed as a Trek fan. I was about 12 years old, I was real excited about it because I loved Star Trek IV, and then this movie just stunk to high heaven.
When the idiocy of believing that God would somehow be trapped beyond the Great Barrier is apparent to a 12 year old, Sybok’s insane quest just baffles the mind. THe problem is that he didn’t seem totally nuts about himself, it would seem that he was a relatively intelligent fellow, and to be hoodwinked by the “urban myth” is ridicoulous. Plus Dancing uhura was an embarrasment. And the effects sucked.
The trio; Kirk, Spock and McCoy are brilliant, they work wonders the moments camping are fantastic but The Final Frontier was indeed very very bad – worse than Nemesis.
I look forward to reading the next 5 installments of this feature and perhaps a 6th after May 2009.
Re: #314. MIkeG
“…The characters tended to be more caricatures of who they were supposed to be. Is this entirely William Shatner’s fault?”
Well, looking at that statement logically, if Shatner wrote the lines, and Shatner directed the actors to say the lines, yes, sorry, it is his fault. But for those who think the FX were awful, Shatner is not responsible for that unless he saw them and okayed them. Unfortunately, I highly doubt that he released the movie without checking that first. Then again, I wasn’t there. Who knows what happened. I will still watch it occasionally regardless.
But then, this thread is just repeating itself over and over… It’s all been said before.
kg
Yeah. Nemesis is worse. But STV really needs a SFX facelift . I can grade on a curve on the silly parts with the cast and story but those bad FX really make the film blow chunks. Paramount needs to let the Shat redo them before he really grows old.
#318–”I can grade on a curve on the silly parts with the cast and story but those bad FX really make the film blow chunks.”
Wow. I guess you don’t like TOS.
I couldn’t care less about the f/x, as compared to the poor writing, directing, and in some cases—acting in that film. I don’t see anything wrong with allowing Bill to “fix” the f/x, but THAT is what I grade on a curve. There is NOTHING he can do now to fix that movie—unless it is begun again from scratch, starting with the script writing!
Ah, so my imposter has emerged again (#273!)
I really like STV, although I’m a ware it’s a badly compromised film. There’s much to enjoy in scenes such as the bar where Kirk is attacked by the catwoman. We see evidence of 23rd century TV entertainment, for example – the kind of detail TNG was sadly lacking in!
The FX are dreadful and help make the film look cheap and much of the humour is painfully forced.
And yet . . . often this film often better captures the feel of the TV show which spawned it than any of the others. The lighting is often very atmospheric. The mood in the room with the sailing wheel is deeply introspective. The relationship between the big three is really nicely played. Also, the theme of exploration into the unknown is back again.
I honestly believe that although the film can never be great, with some recutting to improve the pace and ditching much of the excessive humour, along with some decent new FX, and a bit of ADR to make the ‘evil alien’ at the end Satan again we could have a little gem of a film.
“Brilliant” and “Star Trek V” should never be used together in a sentence or paragraph, just like the terms “brilliant” and “George W. Bush”.
I’m just sayin’
Oh jeez, “Trek V” if anything, should be Compared to “Insurrection” not “Nemesis”. the two had more in common, light-hearted lame humor, silly Ideaology , and effects… well even “Insurrection’s” weren’t that great. But at least the Original cast could make some of that work. I thought “Nemesis” was Good. I wanted to see a Much Darker NextGen flick. And it Utilized the Characters Strong points. It felt Like an Actual Movie and Not Just a Big Episode on Screen. I wanted them to be challenged and see what they’d do Against that. Oh But everybody whines and moans over the Data thing, I like Data too, but when he Sacrificed himself I thought: COOL!! How Human.
I mean Who doesn’t want to see the nextGen crew Fight against Maynard James Keenan? (AKA Shinzon)
#321: Hey Phil, you wouldn’t happen to have degrees from both Harvard and Yale under your belt, do you? Just wondering.
I hope we learn the origins of the ‘god thing’ in the new movie!…as well as young Sybok…
I am jumping in late, as usual. (I should claim “last”). Have always thought Kirk’s line about needing his pain was one of the best of the entire series.
I don’t really care about the effects. This movie has its weak spots, but as I have said before, it is what I consider a “real” ST movie. It has the entire original cast. That is my Star Trek. With all due respect to TNG, that isn’t my Trek, and any chance I get to visit with the original characters is a treat. There were plenty of bad episodes, so I consider STV a lesser episode. Still hasits moments, still a chance to see everyone in action. Warts and all. (and some of those warts have hair on ‘em!)
Say what you will about the Shat as a director, but STV has the closest “feel” of a real TOS episode.
#323
So, I guess you could say he’s two degrees above zero………
#325 “some of those warts have hair on ‘em!”
That’s a terrible thing to call Shatner!!!
Re: #327. Harry
Ba-dum-bum…
kg
Heh…heh…heh……..
That’s why we love you Harry!
not as polished as other starterk movies but 2/3rds of this film is quit good its only really the ending that failed and even the shat agrees with that,fire breathing rockmen may have been the answer or maybe not..Still this flick is nowhere near as bad as insurrection..
The Trek movie Insurrection
Could cause a big defection
Not that it’s bad
It’s just kinda sad
Movies should be made by election!
.
Brilliant analysis…!
.
The only way to watch this thing anymore is with the wonderful Rifftrax by Mike Nelson & Kevin Murphy. They brilliantly tear it to pieces! Must see for Trek fans and V haters everywhere!
~JYH
STV is certainly not a good Star Trek movie, and its defects have been well described in the above review, but I think Nemesis was MUCH worse.
[img src="http://www.victoriana.com/animate/canon.gif"]
You people are nuts. ST V was an abomination. At least Insurrection and Nemesis didn’t have the crew forgetting how to run a starship and ignoring all the things they’d “normally” do if the Enterprise was being taken over. What, were Kirk and Scotty and Spock having a “bad day” when Sybock boarded the Enterprise? They never would have let the intruders out of that shuttle bay if they were their real characters. Flood the damned thing with Anesthezine gas or something. I guess Scotty just froze and shit himself when he saw the shuttle land, huh? Please. I could go on and on. This scene just happens to be the one that’s pissed me off since I saw it in the theater. There are many more.
Star trek five was better than any TNG cheese whiz film.
335. Holger – “STV is certainly not a good Star Trek movie, and its defects have been well described in the above review, but I think Nemesis was MUCH worse”
Um, describe how exactly it was worse.
I don’t recall cringing during NEMESIS.
NEMISIS was noe BIG cringe, through out!
#317 Katie G
My understanding is that David Loughery wrote the screenplay, and I’m sure some of those lines made the actors cringe. I do tend to agree that the director is ultimately responsible, but the director should be given “the goods” from the studio, in order to bring in the best possible film. I know Shatner was extremely unimpressed with the FX, but by that time there was nothing he could do about it.
And, yeh, I agree, the topic has been talked about to death. But it’s like one of those moments you have when you do something that doesn’t work out, and then keep replaying it over and over in your head, thinking about all the ways you could have done something differently. I think it’s a form of coping….
Surely the effects in Nemesis were not even in the same league as those of STV. But beyond that, the story in Nemesis was just a sequence of implausibilities (by in-universe standards) and plot holes. And while the effects were good in a technical sense, much was over the top, like that Scimitar spaceship design or that odderon-radiation thingy. Not to mention Starfleet CARS in the 24th century.
But perhaps we should pause the discussion until Nemesis is reviewed. Remember: I’m not saying STV was good, only that Nemesis was even worse. This would make STV the second-worst movie.
I just finished the JM Dillard novel of the film (something I decided to do after this article came out) and I have to say that I fills out the story much more.
you should read it if you’ve not already.
I doubt anyone’s still paying attention, but this movie makes Spock’s behavior in “The Way to Eden” much more logical
First, Star Trek 5 had to compete with other huge blockbusters at the time. Second, there were budget problems and due to Shatner’s lack of experience he had to conceal to others’ point of view trying to please everyone. The plot of the film was already difficult and probably based on Rodenberry’s own old idea of making a film about God. The special FX department screwed Kirk’s efforts as well.