Star Trek V 20th Anniversary – Retro Review June 12, 2009
by TrekMovie.com Staff , Filed under: Feature Films (TMP-NEM), Review , trackback
Today is the second Friday in June and the number one movie at the American box office is a Star Trek movie. And on the second Friday in June of 1989 another Trek film opened, Star Trek V: The Final Frontier, to an entirely different reception. This weekend TrekMovie begins a 20th anniversary look back at STV with a series of articles, starting with this (repost of our 2008) retro review.
Review: Star Trek V: The Final Frontier
By Bill Kowinksi
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."
More Star Trek V Anniversary Coverage
TrekMovie will be doing more coverage for the 20th anniversary of The Final Frontier over the weekend.
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»
You know something…I actually like this movie. It definitely has an original series episode feel to it…
I always like this film believe it or not, I was surprised so many people hated it.
actually it was 89, and I’m only putting that because someone else will and us trekkies do love to catch things like that. Usually you hear Trek being #5, but I guess that’s because they dont count it by total box gross.
I think number V was underrated in many ways.
Okay… so who’s in for a rousing rendition of “Row, Row, Row Your Boat”?
Anyone? Anyone? Anyone?
Bueller? Bueller? Bueller?
This movie is utter tripe from the opening credits to the final frame. You cannot simply pick out the few moments that “work” as if they are not part of a dreadfully ill-conceived whole. Compared to all other Trek those moments are in truth only the one’s that are least embarrassing. The Final Frontier should be considered essential non-viewing for any true fan of Trek, not to many all the ‘Shat needs to be in Star Trek’ again groupies.
I like it also. It does have its moments.
1989 you mean…
I hated Star Trek V after several viewings, it had potential, but the stars did not align for it. I had hoped Paramount let Bill Shatner re-work the SFX for a Director’s Cut Blu-Ray release, like they did for the late Robert Wise and his ST-TMP DVD release. With Trek XI still making big bucks at the cinema, Trek will be around for many more years to come. I do like Karl Urban’s McCoy and Simon Pegg’s Scotty, but DeForest Kelley and James Doohan will always exist in my imagination for as long as I live… The final frontier IS the human soul!
@linuxglobe at twitter.com
I don’t care what anybody says, this flick was light years better then Insurrection. My only problem with 5 is when the Klingon bird of prey kills God.
I still contend if they got Sean Connery to play Sybok (Shatner’s first choice) and had Shatner stuck to his guns for his story and the special effects were done right, this would’ve been one of the more popular Trek movies. The premise was good, searching for God and finding the Devil. Also, the actress that played the Romulan ambassador is a terrible actress, she ruined the whole movie for me.
Star Trek V has problems, but the scene on the Observation Deck is among the best Kirk, Spock & McCoy scenes in any of the movies. And lest we forget, this movie WAS #1 at the box office opening week. It just couldn’t stay there with all the competition.
While it is my least favorite of all 11 movies, it is still a good movie. It’s a lot better than a lot of the crap out there today. I think people tend to rate Star Trek movies only amongst other Trek movies, all in all this flick is pretty good.
This movie is true to TOS… some of the episodes (and movies) just weren’t that good.
like what Fry says in Futurama:
“you know, Star Trek? 79 episodes, about 30 good ones”
that said, i can watch this movie and enjoy it. but, i don’t watch very often.
This movie overall in every way was awful, but like you said since we only will ever have 6 of them, you have to try and take a few worthwhile nuggets that you can. Whoever approved this story really screwed up, and really shut down the great momentum they had going with 2,3 & 4. Shatner’s ego leads to the crew meeting god. It is a shame we could have gotten one or two more solid tos movies.
I still contend that with an effects overhaul and some artful editing, this film could work much better. Shatner even offered to work with Paramount, but they refused.
It will never be as good as TWK or ST09, but I’m okay with that.
I agree with Bill, there won’t be any other original cast movies, so why not make the best of what we have? Trek fans consititute enough market share to make it a profitable venture.
Either that, or some intrepid fan will do their own recut, with their own effects, it will be the most popular movie bootleg ever, with Paramount will be left out in the cold.
This review cements how I’ve felt about this movie for quite a long time. I think if for a few creative decisions and circumstances beyond Shatner’s control, this movie could’ve really worked. I also have to agree about McCoy’s “dad scene”. That is probably his single best bit of acting in all of Trek, it is extremely effective.
Anything that deals with God and/or religion falls on many deaf ears. Even Trekkies. I love STV because it’s the type of story Gene loved to tell.
My favorite line comes from Kirk. “Perhaps God is not out there.” and then he points to his chest and says “Perhaps he’s in here, the human heart.”
Just like Nemisis STV is worth a second, third and fourth look.
STV: The Great Trek Turd Of ‘89—
The horror….The horror…The horror…The horror…The horror…The horror…The horror….The horror…
The lone pimple on the butt of an otherwise pretty good film series (the original movies).
I love how the retro review basically begins with a list of excuses! Lol. :)
This movie just stinks. Period.
And redressing the special effects wouldn’t make any difference to me. You can put a turd in a tuxedo…but it’s still a turd nonetheless.
I wanted to row, row, row my boat right out of the theater!!!
I appreciate the fair and balanced review. I enjoy the movie, flaws and all. It’s like an 80th episode of TOS!
As a fan in the theater Back in the Day, I never even noticed the “problems” with the visual effects. Honestly, when the writing is this bad, and the directing is this bad, I can’t be bothered to care about how expensive the FX look. Of course, I grew up on shows like Blake’s 7 and Doctor Who and Battlestar Galactica and Buck Rogers, so crappy FX are just automatically filtered into their story-role without any special effort … and by the same token, expensive and highly-polished FX don’t impress me (which may be a big part of the reason why I’m more reserved in my admiration for ST09 than many others around here … I’m just not all that swayed in either direction by FX, good or bad).
#12: “And lest we forget, this movie WAS #1 at the box office opening week. It just couldn’t stay there with all the competition.”
Sure, but the first week of box office never has much to do with the movie itself, only with the movie’s marketing and the public’s expectations and whatever else is out. It takes a week or three for word-of-mouth to become more important than the pre-release buzz.
After so much promise with ST IV… Maybe if the special effects weren’t so utterly insulting, or the Romulan princess wasn’t so utterly annoying, or the ending so utterly bad…
How come nobody ever mentions that great scene where Sybock gets a hair cut in the shuttle, on their way down to the planet.
You all must know what i’m talking about, it’s the best part of the movie.
Maybe in the next DVD they can CGI his hair back.
I read an interview with Laurence Luckinbill not long ago where he said Star Trek V was “one of the best” Star Trek movies ever done. Ha! Poor guy. :-) I do agree with what this review says, though – whether you like his character or not, he gave a great performance!
PARAMOUNT, PLEASE LET THE SHAT SORT THIS MESS OUT ONCE AND FOR ALL !!!!
It’s a lot of fun to watch, and there are a lot of good laughs, but sorry I don’t consider this one Cannon. Here’s what really happend:
Kirk decided after his trip to the 20th Century that he wanted to do a little “LDS” (LSD) that is. So after McCoy and Spock went to sleep at the camp site Kirk droped some acid and the result was the rest of the movie.
Seriously, Voyager gets trapped in the Delta Quadrent and they’re all like “Oh Crap, it’s going to take 70 years to get home” Maybe they should have been stranded in the DQ aboard the Enterprise A then they could have been home in time for dinner, around a campfire.
#23 … He cut his hair on the ship, before going down to the planet. People dress up for church, so if you’re going to meet God, why not?
When the notion of Sybok—Sarek’s child with a Vulcan “princess” and therefore Spock’s elder half-brother—was introduced into Star Trek canon, I wouldn’t be at all surprised if Dorothy Fontana threw up in her mouth a little.
One of the things which irked me most about the character of Sybok was the feeling that it diluted the impact of Spock’s breaking with Vulcan tradition (and that of his family), something which I felt was significant to the backstory of one of my favorite characters in television/movie history.
The visual effects should be remastered in ST:V. The studio cut the shooting schedule of this film, didn’t allow re/shoots of key scenes, and cut the overall budget by ten million dollars. They owe it to the fans and they very much owe a directors cut to Bill Shatner for short sheeting him in the first place. I’ve seen the fan edited version of this film with different visuals for just the opening credits and this small change made a huge impact on the flow of the film. So if some fan boy with a mac can make this much difference just imagine what someone with some real major resources could do. Dave Rossi are you out there?
#21—” I’m just not all that swayed in either direction by FX, good or bad.”
Agreed, although I think we might be of the last generation to see it that way.
Lackluster special effects do not, to this day, impede my enjoyment of TOS. I certainly could have overlooked the f/x problems if the story had been better.
Only Kirk could hit God with a Photon Torpedo!!
Better than Insurrection and Generations.
#29: “They owe it to the fans [...]”
How? Why?
#25—”PARAMOUNT, PLEASE LET THE SHAT SORT THIS MESS OUT ONCE AND FOR ALL !!!!”
That’s a nice thought, but I don’t think we’ll be refunded anytime soon.
:)
19. Closettrekker
Don’t mince words bones, tell us what you really think.
#30: “I certainly could have overlooked the f/x problems if the story had been better.”
That’s pretty much the way I am with _any_ kind of nitpicking. If the movie sweeps me up, transports me, satisfies me … it can have all the nits in the world and I just can’t be bothered to notice them.
If I’m noticing nits, it’s because the movie isn’t holding my attention, and my mind is finding other ways to entertain itself.
Or, as I’ve said in the past: “If I don’t notice a nit until my fourth viewing … well, the fact that I’m on my fourth viewing really says it all.”
“I think we might be of the last generation to see it that way.”
Okay, now you’re just being a downer. :)
#31—”Better than Insurrection and Generations.”
It very well might be, but I was never interested enough in the prospect of a TNG movie to even bother paying to see one—so there were no built-in expectations on my part. They could have handed the script of ‘Ishtar’ to the TNG cast. I still couldn’t have been that disappointed.
Has anyone heard the commentary for the movie? Most of the time, it veers off and they aren’t even talking about the movie. The little text commentary for the DVD does the same thing
SHATNER SHOULD BE SHOT FOR THIS FIASCO
I remember seeing this on opening day in an almost empty theatre.
Another factor to the film’s box-office failure which is interesting to note is that while TWOK & TSFS were both successful Summer releases, TVH, with its lighter humor-based plot was moved to a Winter holiday release where it did better than either of the other two Summer films, having little other similar competition.
While the competition in the post houses with other vfx-driven films impacted the effects, the films themselves definitely had an impact at the box office. Opening against the huge hits of Batman, The Last Crusade, Lethal Weapon 2. Honey I Shrunk The Kids, Dead Poets Society, etc. it’s hard to imagine what Paramount was thinking. Obviously TVH was moved got a Winter release because it was a softer film, so even though they demanded a similar treatment for TFF and the previous Summer releases performed more poorly, the still elected to move it back to a Summer slot? Not that it would have done much better that Winter against Back To The Future II, Driving Miss Daisy and The Little Mermaid, but I’ll bet it would have done much better then the Summer. Afterall, Paramount knew what they had before they set the schedule and ST:V really lacked the stuff Summer movies were clearly offering.
In many ways I felt about Trek the way I felt about Insurrection and in some respects Nemesis. Trek movies are at their best when they are onboard the ship, strategizing and fighting the enemy. The action in TFF, INS, & NEM feels artificially induced – people too old really to be mounting ground assaults. It feels unrealistic and forced. Outside of that, at least TFF & INS offered very little in the way of more traditional action. TVH was indeed a fluke, but as a light-hearted WInter film it offered the same beloved elements which makes Trouble With Tribbles the classic it has become, though bereft of the elements which otherwise comprise the best of the episodes. Indeed TFF would have done much better with those audiences, despite its obvious story and vfx flaws which Bill Kowinski fairly reviews.
I’ve always enjoyed STV. Lots of nice cinematic moments. Mr. Luckinbill should have got an Oscar nomination. The good stuff considerably outweighs the bad.
#35
Poor visuals do detract from a films enjoyment. When you purchase a copy of a film and the visuals in the damn menu are better than whats in the feature film then yes there is a problem. You can’t expect Bill Shatner or any director to have schedules shortened and budgets cut and still make some parts of a film work. The original script was superior to what was up on the screen. Poor production quality is what we as fans and the movie going public ended up with, and yes Paramount owes us something better than what was finally presented.
Bill,
Please accept my thanks and gratitude for this touching review of my favorite Star Trek movie. I think you captured its esse and did so in a way that harkens to the Star Trek loved by an important minority of Trekkers. Indeed, the fraternity amongst the principals is something most of us will never know. I am fortunate to have such friends as those Shatner shared with us and yes, the campfire is the sine qua non of such camaraderie. I suppose it is possible those fans who are dismissive or even contemptuous of this film have never experienced this in their lives – a pity, really, as it is a fundamental part of our spiritual life, Christian or otherwise.)
As to the film’s religious content, I am delighted Shatner chose to show us universal religious truths, elegant and graceful and powerful, rather than indulge the cheap and sneering condescension toward people of faith popular since the 1970s.
In short, when I watch Star Trek V, I see elements of my own life’s experience and I am reminded that it is possible to see little snatches of heaven on earth, in between battles with Satan the old trickster himself.
Sincerely,
C.S. Lewis
For the valiant effort to rationalize this movie as something other than the abysmal effort that it was, ultimately this movie plays better as a DVD release on TV than it ever did as a movie.
And that may be the most telling indictment of Trek V.
This film opened up with splashes of delightfully Trek absurdity – Kirk’s mountain climb, Spock’s rescue…Goldsmith’s score was rousing, too. Ultimately, however, the core of the movie is doomed because its premise is fatally flawed.
Absolutely terrible special effects combined with some odd production choices just exacerbate the problems with this film. Shatner did have some good directorial moments, as the author of the article above noted, but they’re not sufficient to make the film even passable.
#21, it also finished #25 at the box office for the year, in the same company as The Abyss, Pet Cemetery, Black Rain, Major League, Always, Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventures and License To Kill, most of which closed below. All things considered, it did respectably opening against such stiff Summer competition, however bad anyone thinks it was.
Well done! Great article.
One item left out, was Kirk’s attestation in Trek V: that he always knew that when its his time to die, he’d die alone…and he did…alone… on that metal bridge on Veridian III…on it…he paused a brief moment before he lept across the chasm to retrieve Soran’s remote…considering this his last selfless act to save an entire planet…
This film gets easily lost amongst the great TWOK, my personal fave TSFS and 2nd fave TUC; but I agree with Mr Kowinski’s summary of its necessity in our hearts as a solid piece of Trek lore.
My personal favorite’s include the fact that this is the ONLY TOS film to not feature the fanfare at the beginning…nice touch. I loved the Goldsmith score during the rock climb…my friend played it at his wedding during the guest’s seating. I liked the bookends of the troika camping out! Loved the assault phaser’s debut! Stylish, and blue beams reminiscent of TOS! I loved the scene where Kirk is confronted by Sybok after the failed assault! Its backlit similar to the Admiral’s intro in TWOK!
This score def stands up as a testament to Goldsmith!!! Simply outstanding! Although my friends and I thought it odd that they chose the ‘next gen’ theme to open the latest Trek feature! We were hoping for a a return to Horner’s fanfare, or a new one!
I recall walking in the theater on opening night! I had an interview for college the next day! And guy in full Starfleet uniform said to us “…Shatner directed it!!!” when we asked how it was! Ugh! We all felt a bit nervous! I think we all liked it, never really noticed the awful FX at that time, but we all agreed TVH was better!
I always liked this film as well as all of the others.
#35—”That’s pretty much the way I am with _any_ kind of nitpicking. If the movie sweeps me up, transports me, satisfies me … it can have all the nits in the world and I just can’t be bothered to notice them.”
I’m a little bit different. To touch again on a subject in another thread, I noticed plenty of “nits” to pick in all the Trek movies. Even as much as I love TWOK, I still found plenty of weakness in it back in the 80’s. Some of the more silly story premises are just part of the history of Star Trek movies. It’s just that, most of the time, they don’t overwhelm the story for me or preclude my ability to enjoy the film. Regarding the 7 films which feature all of the original characters, STV is the only one in which this is a problem for me.
Nitpicking, at least in this context, means finding minor flaws that might be construed as negative about something and criticising them. With STV:TGTTO89, it’s nearly the opposite of nitpicking to me. There simply aren’t many things which I don’t find negative about it—-Kelley’s acting being one of those scarce moments in the film which (to his credit) briefly caused me to forget that just about everything up to that point had been so disappointing.
Even an entire handful of “nits” in a one and a half to two hour film isn’t damning to me. But when the “nits” outnumber what is good or even good/neutral—-the “nits” have become an infestation!!!
I liked it the first time I saw it. The second time I saw the flaws. Emotion the first time-reason the second time; so very human. I still enjoy some of the humor (like finally getting to see a toilet on a starship!)
But the premise? As a student of earth ( and alien) religions, I know of none that believe their Deity resides on an Edenic world,
Scientifically, there is no Great Barrier at the center of our galaxy-only a Black Hole, or so it is believed at this point.
It did have potential, and perhaps had Mr. Shatner (no, I am not a fan) been able to fulfill his vision, he might not have turned out to be an arrogant, overweight ass. No, he still would have been arrogant but perhaps not an over weight ass!
We will never know, will we?
I’ve watched star trek v many many times . V.fond of it I like his movie, its performances, the story, dialog and never thought the fx were bad.
I could think of 1000 movies that were worse than this. And i would take these FX over the cartoony TOS-R any day.
I read the book a few days before the movie opened and I was so turned off by the storyline that I decided to wait for the video. I’ve only seen it once or twice all the way through. It wasn’t the religious part of the plot, but the characterizations and weakness of the plot that I didn’t like.
However, it is not without its fans. Sometime in the early 1990s, I was staying over at a friend’s house and early one morning I went downstairs to find his mom (not much of a Trek fan at all) just glued to the TV screen watching TFF on some premium channel. She was mesmerized until the ending credits.
#45: “#21, it also finished #25 at the box office for the year, in the same company as The Abyss, Pet Cemetery, Black Rain, Major League, Always, Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventures and License To Kill, most of which closed below. All things considered, it did respectably opening against such stiff Summer competition, however bad anyone thinks it was.”
Sure; it’s a franchise film.
#43: I agree completely. #44: I disagree completely. Yes, it’s flawed, but so are plenty of other Trek installments.
I always liked STV, despite the constant ribbing. It has humor. It has heart. Like the best of “Star Trek,” it takes big risks on big questions. It also focuses closely on K-S-M dynamic in ways that some of the other films don’t.
Also, in all honesty, as someone who’s buried quite a few loved ones over the years, I regard “The Final Frontier” as unusually brave in how it addresses grief. As much fun as it is to mock some of the dialogue (”I need my pain!” har-de-har-har), we are all defined by suffering. How we respond to it makes us who we are.
I’ve often wondered whether I would, if I could, change some of the saddest events of my life. And I wouldn ‘t. Because they brought me to where I am now.
Anyway, this is just my long-winded way of saying the movie speaks to me. I’ll always have a soft spot for it, no matter what anyone else says.
#35 says: “Poor visuals do detract from a films enjoyment.”
For some people. Not for all people. They don’t for mine.
#39 says (and I envy him): “I remember seeing this on opening day in an almost empty theatre.”
Ah, I wish I could say that. I remember seeing it on opening day in a PACKED theater full of fans who’d lined up and waited … and I was one of them. I feel filthy admitting that, but hey, the last one I’d seen was the fun whale movie.
I also remember the crowd grumbling on the way out of the theater, talking about wanting their money back and what-a-pile-of-dog-crap … even despite the heady saccharine rush of first-day thrill (which can make many a crapfest feel like a good time out) the response was already one of vocal displeasure.
#48: “I’m a little bit different. [...] Nitpicking, at least in this context, means [...]”
You’re a little bit different, for starters, in that you’re using the word “nitpicking” differently, so it’s hard to compare.
posted b4 but here its again:
Star Trek V – A Shatnerian Masterpiece…
If you look at TFF as a strange dream of Kirks…from the first campsite scene post mountain fall to right at the end of the film with the ‘Row Row Row your boat’ reprise..then its possible that Trek V is actually a masterpiece of modern day cinema
Consider:
- 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, his friends.
- Events from the camping trip are mirrored in the dream: climbing El Capitan/climbing the mountain at the end…the fall from El Capitan/the fall from the turbo shaft…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, sybok, god).
- Kirk ate gods for breakfast, 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 romantic relationship between Scotty and Uhura.
- A 30 year plus impossible journey to the centre of the galaxy that happens in a few hours.
- Spock having a brother which was never mentioned before.
- the song “Row, Row, Row Your Boat” ends with the line “life is but a dream.”
- when going through the great barrier and the 3 are in the mysterious wheel room Bones asks ‘are we dreaming?’ and Kirk goes ‘if we are..then life is a dream’…
- Being chased by ‘Rock men’ would also have had a very nightmare like quality to it (although those scenes were dropped)
- Kirk, Spock and Bones remain together for much of the movie..just like at the campsite..
- And of course the story starting and ending in the same spot, with the Kirk, Spock and McCoy wearing the same clothes.
When you look at the movie as a nightmare, a reflection of Kirk’s subconscious fears and desires, it actually, somehow, makes *more* sense. In fact, it starts making a *lot* of sense
I didn’t like the movie at first as a kid, but it has certainly grown on me. I love the dramatic scenes with Spock, Kirk, McCoy and Sybok. The visual style and production design is cool. It just ran out of cash and the humor was way too forced. I enjoy it a helluva lot more than Nemesis, Generations and Nemesis though…
Hey, it’s got a better plot than the latest movie, by far. That’s right, I said it.
#51—”I could think of 1000 movies that were worse than this.”
Lol. I don’t think I’ve ever *seen* that many bad movies. I certainly couldn’t think of them. Kudos to you!
But point taken. It’s certainly not the worst movie I’ve ever seen. However, the difference to me between TFF and the average bad movie is the level of disappointment. And that speaks to my own expectations for a film that featured my favorite fictional characters.
I loved TMP, absolutely adored TWOK, found TSFS to be reasonably entertaining, and loved TVH. Then TFF (aka TGTTO89) arrived. I’ve had PTS ever since (due credit to Sean for that one)!!!
Even if they add new effects, that won’t change the fact that an “all-powerful evil being” couldn’t hit a not-too-skinny man (Kirk) on a 10 m-distance (you will just see this super-lame moment more clearly).
The movie has uneven pacing – nobody really cares about the whole Nimbus story, it’s a poor man’s Tatooine and way too long and complicated.
TFF has the same main flaw in its structure like TMP: you are told that the main dramatic situation is “We’re searching for something really, really important” and when the big reveal at the end occurs, you automatically go: “Huh? THAT’S what it was all about?”
Still, the movie has some good moments (like McCoys flashback, Enterprise/Klingons working together etc.), but you already have to be a Star Trek fan to savour them.
I always thought the best way to watch TFF is to pretend it is all a dream: the Big Three fall asleep at the campfire and dream the whole story (which has the logic of a dream), and then they wake up and have some more marshmallows. Try that – TFF makes perfect sense this way!!!
Btw, Sha-ka-ree part was kinda remade by TNG: in “Skin of Evil” (the one where Tasha Yar gets killed). There, it was better.
6. Stan Winsone – June 12, 2009
The Fan Edit by Jack Marshall is actually really good.
I ‘ve always thought that if they had stayed in Yosemite…it would have been a great movie…the very beginning and the very end are the only redeeming parts of TREK 5…oh excpt the Uhura feather dance scene!!..what legs!!
rock monsters indeed straight from the Savage Curtain or something..as if that would have saved the movie….I recall the teaser posters about putting seat belts on the cinema seats…just to keep from leaving mid way though the movie would have been the only reason…Shat nearly destroyed the franchise. in one fail swoop..
I guess as I think on it more..there were some moments that were pretty good…the scene in the hospital when McCoy had to pull the plug on his father, or the Spock birth scene.. “so human”
.though I wish we could have seen Kirk’s pain…
And the whole line of dying alone went out the window in Generations…I suppose he meant alone from his closest friends…Spock and McCoy….
regardless of how bad this movie was..at least it wasn’t as bad as Nemesis…truly the franchise killer…at least until now!
I liked the film *with* some reservations.
Likes:
* The triad never worked/looked better. Shatner did a great job when he concentrated on the MKS triad.
* McCoy’s scene with his father.
* Sulu and Chekov lost in the woods; Uhura to the rescue. Priceless
* Premise on surface value, was VERY intriguing (execution not so much).
* The small moments, which worked far better than the larger ones.
* Jerry Goldsmith’s score.
* “I thought I was going to die.” “Not possible, you were never alone.” Wow!
Dislikes:
* Scotty being made the fool, especially hitting his head on the bulkhead.
* Sybok as Spock’s half-brother (I think his character would have worked as well, if not better, if he is was *just* a renegade Vulcan, perhaps a childhood friend of Spock’s). I refuse to believe Sarek fathered a child other than with Amanda (as did Roddenberry).
* The SPFX were nothing close to being special.
* Beans (nuff said?).
* The Romulan ambassador was no Romulan, she was a prima donna.
* 79 decks.
* The film’s sense of humor was forced, sophomoric and artificial.
* Fan dance? ewwwwwwwwww!
* The scenes when the renegades capture the three ambassadors on Nimbus III look unrehearsed, and so fake, fake, fake.
* A Klingon apologizing??? I think not bloody likely.
Overall, I agree with Kowinski’s review. He sums up the good and the bad nicely, pretty much dovetailing everything I’ve always said about this film.
It was an intruiging movie that just didn’t quite gel with us fans, but let’s face it, a weak TREK film often stands head and shoulders above the usual fare that is out there.
#55—-”You’re a little bit different, for starters, in that you’re using the word “nitpicking” differently, so it’s hard to compare.”
Compared to what? Unless the term is being used in its actual literal sense (as in the act of removing the eggs of lice), I’m not sure what other use is there for it.
nit·pick·ing [ nít pìking ]
noun
Definition:
petty criticism: trivial, detailed, and often unjustified faultfinding
Encarta® World English Dictionary [North American Edition] © 2009
The best argumnet for the new JJ Abrams timeline is that Sybok was killed on Vulcan…..it makes me feel better that we will not be going down this road again!!
# 58. There, I’ve said it too. ST V: was a very good movie, and just what was needed after the breakneck pace of II, III, and IV. My favourite line in it?
Spock: I am well versed in the classics.
Mc Coy: Then how come you don’t know ‘Row , Row, Row Your Boat?’
Priceless !! :-)
#64: “I’m not sure what other use is there for it.”
I agree entirely with the Encarta definition, if that helps.
I think you could do a capsule review of this one: “Still sucks after all these years.”
#54 … Trek Nerd Central
Nice post, man! :-)
It would’ve been super cool if CBS Digital had redone the fx for this prior to the recent Blu Ray release. John Rossi and those guys are all super fans. You know they would’ve loved to!
#68: Ooh, cool. I love one-line reviews :) Mine for all of the movies with Spock in:
Star Trek: The Motion Picture: “Real men don’t need to be filmed in color.”
Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan: “The quality of this one outweighs the quality of the many.”
Star Trek III: “Yeah, okay.”
Star Trek IV: “Family-friendly Trek that embraces Trek ideals and warms up to our affection for the characters.”
Star Trek V: “Shit sandwich.” [with apologies to "This is Spinal Tap"]
Star Trek VI: “Just as embarassing as the last one, but less crappy.”
Star Trek 09: “James Kirk was a great man, but that was another life.”
#67—That seems contrary to your suggestion that I was “using it differently”.
My extemporaneous definition in #48 was as follows: “Nitpicking, at least in this context, means finding minor flaws that might be construed as negative about something and criticising them.”
Encarta’s definition is more concise and succinct, but that’s about it.
#68—”I think you could do a capsule review of this one: ‘Still sucks after all these years.’ ”
That’s perfect.
I don’t know, over the years, I’ve gone from hating this movie to really liking it.
Big pluses:
Campfire scene, Goldsmith’s score, assault phasers, certain Sybok scenes.
#70—”Star Trek VI: ‘Just as embarassing as the last one, but less crappy.’ ”
Equally perfect.
This article/review is extremely kind. Face it: It’s just a really bad movie – the golden turkey of the Trek series. I remembered hating the scenes where Spock is..um..flying in his jet boots and the reference to Sybok as Spock’s half-brother is just completely hackneyed. Star Trek can survive bad effects, but the story here and the script were just awful. The only good thing is that it’s indeed one more film with the original cast, but this entry is to the film series what “Way to Eden” was to the original series. Now that I think of it, don’t “Final Frontier” and “Way to Eden” have a similar story?
#71: “Encarta’s definition is more concise and succinct, but that’s about it.”
I see :)
I have a soft spot for all the ST films with the real cast, soi don’t hate this one. I remember my first impression of it in the theater being positive for a few reasons.
-It was another new Trek movie, and I love Trek.
-I remember liking the idea that it felt more like a real episode than the previous films. It had a prologue, then the fanfare and credits.
-I loved the fact that the TMP theme was back. I was disappointed when it wasn’t in 2, 3, and 4.
-the end was satisfying, and ended with the fanfare again, like an episode
It wasn’t until repeated viewings that the weaknesses really stood out. I am just not as offended by them. There are far worse episodes of TOS than STV. And again, it is the real crew.
I have a much longer, self-indulgent review. Maybe later.
#75—”…but this entry is to the film series what “Way to Eden” was to the original series.”
I suppose some might see it that way. But to me—”Way To Eden” is on the short list of episodes that are *so bad*—-they’re fantastic!
“I’m gonna crack my knuckles and jump for joy, I got a clean bill of health from Dr. McCoy!”
#77: “i don’t hate this one.”
And to be clear, neither do I. I don’t hate any Star Trek film.
I was deeply disappointed in STV. I think STV sucks. I’m comfortable calling it “shitty,” but it has a place in my heart for the main reason you cite: it’s these people. I love these people, and – like family – I love them even when they embarass me or when they’re raiding the fridge or annoying me or even when I’d rather live several hours’ distance from them. I still love them.
Later in life, when I was pouring my heart into editing and co-authoring an RPG guidebook to the “movie era” for Last Unicorn Games, I had to watch STV several times back to back (along with all the other films) recording every last detail, outlining everything that needed to be in the sourcebook and comparing across my notes for the different films, etc. During those days, I officially _resented_ this film, but even then I didn’t hate it.
Because I do love these people.
(and yeah, the music is nice, too) :)
I was on holiday in Canada when ST/V came out – I took my parents to see it with my wife – my Dad has always hated Star Trek – but he came out saying it was great fun!! – Personally I felt let down by the film as a fan – and although it is better than some of TOS episodes – to quote #68 ‘Still sucks after all these years.’
#80 says “my Dad has always hated Star Trek – but he came out saying it was great fun!!”
Oh god, nobody let JJ Abrams see that post. Quick, Anthony, do something or we’ll soon KNOW what the sequel is about :)
59: You hit the nail on the head. That’s the point I was trying to make.
There might be a lot of films above it, but there are plenty below it too.
I have participated in arguments about how good this movie is (it is actually possibly my personal favorite movie with the TOS cast). There are always so many people who just…don’t…get it. I don’t know if it’s because they haven’t spent much time thinking about religion (whether they unquestionably adhere to one, or outright reject any of them) or they just aren’t interested in the truest philosophical questions, or what… There are so many great character moments in this movie and a lot of subtle symbolism. For example, as this review points out, the way that the journey starts and ends in a camp, around a fire, like primitive man, but in between they rise to explore space aboard a starship and even go looking for “God”. You can interpret just that framing alone in so many interesting ways. This movie *shouldn’t* have tried to answer all the questions, and it didn’t — if it did, it would have offended some group too much. It has a huge amount of heart, and can really make you think (if you open your mind)…and with those ingredients all the flawed execution in the world can’t take them away.
#53. S. John Ross wrote:
“#45: ‘#21, it also finished #25 at the box office for the year’ … Sure; it’s a franchise film.”
Nemesis was a franchise film too as well as a Winter release and it still #54 for 2002. The only one to gross out of the top 25. It was beaten out by Jackie Chan’s “Tuxedo”. I also believe it was hurt by “Lord of the Rings” which opened the following week, but if it was a franchise film it should have not been hurt that badly.
It is interesting that your list in #70 does not include any of TNG films (I realize it is only a list of those with Spock which is also interesting in that Nimoy made the best calls, unlike Shatner?). Overall TNG films did not do as well as TOS films. It does make me wonder if TNG, DS9 & VOY just kept the franchise alive on life-support until ENT came a long and killed it. Certainly the TNG features brought box-office Trek to its knees. Is it merely a coincidence that TOS films did the best overall at the box office and the most successful have been TOS?
Out of curiosity, why do you describe TUC as “Just as embarrassing”?
@56,
That is a great interpretation. Likely not the intent at all, but still very interesting indeed. In fact, if that had been the intent, you are right that it might well qualify as a masterpiece.
#69. Thanks, Shatner_Fan_Prime.
Someday, maybe, the effects will be spiffed up. . . someday.
Star Trek V was the worst movie of the whole series. The idea was good, but the execution was awful
I just didn’t let the films shortcomming get to me, I rather liked seeing Kirk, Spock and McCoy around the campfire and climbing mountains, etc.
I liked the music and it’s still probably my most favorite of all the Trek soundtracks.
Yeah the VFX weren’t that great, but the design was OK.
I liked the use of micron-photography for the barrier and planet FX and still appreciate the “organic” in VFX technology in a way (and I am a VFX professional) that overused CG just doesn’t quite have.
It’s one of my favorites despite all the criticsm.
You know, I could’ve saved all the time and trouble of writing an unnecessarily long review like this and just given it the Jay Sherman review:
It stinks.
I’ve said it many times: this movie was a much better product than was released for public consumption. It’s a shame that Shat wasn’t given the resources to flesh it out the way he’d envisioned.
It is not a bad movie AT ALL. I hate to listen to those whining about “the grand Star Trek turkey” or whatever they may call it. It was the weakest of the six original movies but that doesn’t mean it’s bad. TMP, TWOK, TVH and TUC were simply brilliant and timeless classics…TSFS a nice follow-up to TWOK. This one was considerably weaker but for a low-budget late 80s production it was pretty good. Some silly mistakes yeah (deck numbers, galaxy dimensions)…but the rest was pretty decent…
What is with the repeated use of “ewwwwwwwwww!” ?
This is not first grade. Use an actual word.
#56 – curious, the Rockman test footage appears on the Special Edition DVD for this film. Does that mean they shot the live-action sequences for the rockman fight? Memory-Alpha claims a portion of the aborted scene is still visible in the final print. If so, I wonder if Shatner will ever get a shot at his director’s cut with finished vfx and possibly add the rock-monster scene properly (not that it will necessarily improve anything). Hard to imagine he’d want to, especially after the extremely well done Galaxy Quest parody.
Great retro-review! It made me replay the movie in my head, since it’s been several years since I’ve actually watched it. And I’ve put it on my list to watch again. In the current poll I gave it a “C”, the same grade I give to GEN, INS, and NEM. All the others I give a “B” or higher.
As pointed out, it does have some very good moments, but the review also neglects to mention the very bad moments. It was those very bad moments that really ruined it for me. I agree with #63’s list of those moments. In my opinion, the absolute worst moment was Uhura’s fan-dance. I physically cringe when I even think about it. It turns a strong, smart, classy character (Uhura) and actress (Nichols) into a buffoonish, embarrassing stripper. I vividly remember seeing this in the theater and being embarrassed for Nichols and Trek. But maybe thats just me.
Though no big fan of Shatner (to say the least), I do think he was, and has been, screwed by Paramount. Must be something personal there, maybe. He was handcuffed by the studio during production and left dangling. I think the mindset at Paramount was that they had a cash cow, and they could release anything with the name Star Trek on it and it would make money, no matter how bad or cheap looking it was. And they should have accepted his offer for the Directors Cut. After all the money he’s made for them, they owe him at least that. I for one would love to see that. But to really make an impact and make it sustantially better (re-writes/re-shoots) is impossible, thus just wishful thinking of what might have been….
My new movie order preference:
1. Star Trek ‘09 (11, whatever)
2. Star Trek 2
3. Star Trek 6
4. Star Trek 4
5. Star Trek 8
6. Star Trek 3
7. Star Trek 9
8. Star Trek 1 (TMP)
9. Star Trek 10
10. Star Trek 5
11. Star Trek 7 (the beginning of the ALMOST end of Star Trek)
Star Trek 5 has some of the very best moments of TOS movie Trek and has some of the worst. It’s a shame, because it felt rushed and unfinished. It could have been great.
#95 JimJ
Don’t be so hard on “Generations”. It was a really good TOS-movie. Too bad it was only 40 minutes long …
I always liked this movie and believe it has received undue scorn from fans. A perfect film? No. But what Trek movie is? While Abrams and company did a pretty good job with the new film, I do not think it is as great as many fans and critics believe it to be. Not bad. But not great.
ST: TFF was the most spiritually-themed of the Trek films, and I think it shows that Shatner has a great deal more depth to him than most people give him credit for. His appreciation for Trek and its fans comes through in it.
And it was a powerhouse performance by DeForest Kelley in the scene where he commits euthanasia on his father.
One of my favorite lines in Star Trek V and to me a classic McCoy response to Kirk question God “Excuse me, but what does God need witha Starship?”
McCoy, in typical sarcastic fashion, asked Kirk what he was doIng?
Kirk responded “I’m asking God for proof’.
McCoy, classicly chastised Kirk by saying,”Jim, you don’t ask the Almighty for his ID.” I laughed and laughed at that line.
Anyway, I did enjoy the movie, although , as a Christian, I did find it pretty sacriligous. But I understand the point they were trying to make.
But give me a break – “Sha Ka Ree” for “Sean-Con-ner-y”. How corney can you get.
83. Someone – June 12, 2009
You make it sound like the only reason people disliked it was because of the spiritual/religious themes. I don’t think people ‘don’t get it’ as you state….that’s a rather presumptuous statement. Hardly why I disliked it. I disliked it because all the ham fisted humor undermined what could have been a deeply moving adventure. There are moments, but they’re continuously busted up with the crap.
Jack Marshall’s fan edit “In Thy Image” is a great example of what the whole movie could have been. It really lets the story push through with a bit more power.
Although it is not my favorite, Star Trek V is not without merit.
As long as we’re making TOS comparison’s – “Spock’s Brain” was much worse and far more contrived. “Brain and Brain, what is Brain?”
Star Trek V is much more compelling than 5 space nymphos who steal Spock’s brain to run their underground city, while McCoy keeps Spock alive with a little metal hat and a remote control made out of a block of wood and “Lite-brite” pegs.
The fx in STV are sub-par compared to what we are used to… and all the original movies seem like that to my kids who have been raised on CGI -
The positives on Trek 5 is the way our heroes interact with each other. Like they have been friends for 30 some years and in the service together.
(even though we know off set was a different story… the animosity never showed on screen)
The triad of Kirk Spock & McCoy was my favorite part of this one. Closer as friends than they were in the series. The small moments between the crew are the best parts of the film. I always wondered what the crew did on leave besides going to “pleasure planets” throughout the galaxy.
The humor was great. I even liked Scotty’s head bang on the bulkhead. Over the top? Maybe. but still funny! Scotty may be a miracle worker, but he’s still human. Trek fans take this stuff way too seriously. If Doohan really felt it was degrading to Scotty, he’d have objected to it and refused to do it.
Shatner’s ego may have been driving this one, but the studio screwed him, just like they screwed him out of a special edition, which in the end, would have made them money — most trek fans would have bought it.
The Teamsters strike, the studio execs, the producers and the bean counters, watered down the story, budget, and FX and made him “settle” for what we now have.
I have an inkling that the entire film would’ve had the richness of the observation lounge scene –where we see McCoy’s Dad’s death if Paramount had given the movie it’s full attention. –This is the best scene in the movie and one of the most dramatic star trek scenes EVER – next to Spock’s Death.. Had the whole movie been treated like that… it would’ve been a whole different animal.
They were more concerned with “cranking out another one” for some quick cash, and the movie and franchise has suffered for it.
I think this film is a good example of how truly difficult it is to make a movie. Most of the nit-picking that goes on about STV is simply because it IS Star Trek. If it were any other film, numerous things about it might be overlooked. I didn’t find Shatner’s direction to be all that bad, and, for the most part, the characters stayed true to themselves. It was the story (that got filmed) that I had the biggest problems with. And, yes, the FX were sub-par.
That said, if I were making STV, I’d have gone in a totally different direction…
” 1. Sallah – June 12, 2009
You know something…I actually like this movie. It definitely has an original series episode feel to it…
I agree. While not my favorite it had many moments I enjoyed. Many original series feeling moments. Maybe more than any of the other movies. You should read Shatner’s accounts of it in his bio to appreciate it better.
#56:
excellent post. I never thought of this movie in that way and it actually makes it a lot easier to watch. And you’re right, it does make a lot more sense to think of this movie as just a “nightmare” or “dream” of Kirk than of reality. I never hated this movie but I never really liked it either because it seemed too silly at too many times. But I would rather watch Final Frontier over Insurrection or Nemesis.
First I read the Star Trek V book and enjoyed it. Then I seen the movie in the theater and was disappointed. It’s too bad the story didn’t translate well to screen. But I admit it was a difficult subject matter to work with in the first place.
There are many great Trek moments in V. The relationships work and it’s great to see the crew working together. I feel, of all the films, it has the classic TV show feel. Sure the effects bite… but so did all of the TOS effects.
There are several things that really define our heros in this instalment… “so human”… “they found a cure”… “I need my pain!” Priceless stuff.
Sybok was a great addition… who cares what “sour grapes Rodenberry” thought about this. He was “out” for a reason in that he produced a big letdown with TMP (but I love it no question)
I felt the “family” of these people in this film like never before.
Thing I loved:
The Galactic Army of Light (What a great name!)
WHAT I HATED MOST:
Deck 79
I think the film has great moments, and suffered a lot from the writer’s strike. Mr. Shatner had Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens to help him out with Trek novels, he could have used a good polish on the script.
The idea of the Enterprise going to find God is fantastic, and I think could have been handled better. Regardless, you can’t tell me “Excuse me, what does God need with a Starship?” is not one of the best lines in Trek history.
Kirk, Spock, and McCoy get some great moments here, though the rest of the cast is really just there for jokes at their expense and that’s my biggest problem with the film. ST:IV (and the new film) shows us you can be funny with the characters, but not at their expense- it just comes off a bit cruel.
I think Sybok is a great villain- he’s not evil! He really thinks he’s doing the right thing, and is going to help the galaxy with this journey. That’s a lot more intriguing than just a bad guy wanting to kill good guys.
The first time I saw it (in the theater mind you) I recognized flaws, but enjoyed it a lot. On subsequent viewings, I think I love it the way I love some of those third season TOS episodes. You just have to polish a little harder to let the genius stuff shine through.
I bet you Simon Pegg watches this movie and thinks there’s a great idea for future Trek relationships there… ;)
I knew we were in trouble when the title wobbled as it zoomed into place in front of the starfield.
And it opened on my birthday.
Definitely enjoyed Trek 5 better than Insurrection. With alittle story tweek and better FX this would have been one of the top Trek movies.
Paramount should allow Mr. Shatner to fix the FX, he’s not getting any younger and we can then see what he intended to do.
I can’t imagine it costing too much more than what CBS spent to upgrade the FX or one or two TOS remastered episodes.
A bad picture of your kids is better than a good picture of your mother in law. 20 years ago, Star Trek with all the beloved ones, flaws and all. It’s fun, who cares about the rest?
I always thought Trek V desperately needed an fx polish. You could fly a shuttle through some of the matte lines. I read the ‘Making of’ book and realized the mistakes Paramount made were the things that always annoyed me about the movie.
Shatner’s acting performance was broad, but not nearly as hammy as it could have been given there was no Nick Meyer to rein him in or wear him out.
I rated the movie a 2 star, but the theater in my mind [the one with the solid FX and the swarming rock-men] gives it a B.
I liked The Final Frontier enough to get Mr. Shatner’s autograph on the DVD cover.
There was nothing wrong with the direction on the film except structurally: If Bob Justman had been around at the time, he could have pointed out (as with “Demon With A Glass Hand”) most of the action could have been reworked to take place aboard the ship. Even the Yosemite climb/fall could have been done in-ship, in the turbolift shaft (”Why are you doing this, Captain?” “Actually, I WAS once a Boy Scout. Be prepared.”), tying into a direct purposeful reprise later. Just have the crew transporting the ambassadors to Nimbus III (thereby eliminating the Paradise City set and related location shoot, plus Yosemite), whereupon Sybok’s moles in the ambassadorial staff kidnap them and barricade themselves in the shuttlebay with plenty of boobytraps outside; Kirk goes to great lengths (Die Hard On A Spaceship) to rescue them; after they turn on him he discovers that Sybok has been clomping across the hull of the ship in a spacesuit and has taken the bridge. Then it’s into the wormhole to the center of the galaxy…
This movie was done too early. Mr. Shatner got vision of future style moviemaking
“the quality of the acting (especially Laurence Luckinbill’s brilliant performance as Sybok)”
That’s where the review lost me.
#100
“Star Trek V is much more compelling than 5 space nymphos who steal Spock’s brain to run their underground city”
I think I’ll take the space nymphos over Uhura’s fan dance any day.
I don’t suppose Daren’s got a remastered version stashed away like the doomsday machine he did a few years ago?
My favorite movie to watch when I first got the 5-movie set on VHS when STVI was being made. Everytime I watch it since it’s release, I have a different impression. Yeah it has its mistakes, but so does every Trek movie. As mentioned earlier in some posts, the editing can be annoying (especially during the “fire the rockets!” scene, with all those repetitious and excessive decks, but some of the best sci-fi movies have had the worst effects (that’s no excuse, as this is not the best sci-fi movie), but in the end, the Kirk/Spock/McCoy moments are priceless and a Trek treasure.
I saw STV in the theater and yeah, it was kind of dissapointing on a lot of levels. Very uneven, in terms of pacing and character development. The whole notion of Sybock being Spock’s half brother was superfluous and unnecessary. The notion that Spock would betray Kirk for any reason after the events of STII-STIV is ridiculous and Nimoy and Kelley were right to argue against it.
That said, however, I can’t concur with some of the more virulent posters; though uneven, this film had some really great moments – which made the ones that didn’t work seem that much more glaring. The scene on the observation deck where Sybock starts picking apart the psyches of McCoy, Spock and Kirk was perfect. The acting, the script, the direction all seem to come together in that scene. I was quite moved by Kelley’s performance. And I was quite surprised that Shatner didn’t dominate the scene. I was expecting Sybock to start probing Kirk and Shatner to be all over the top, ala Amok Time (”No…….. BEACH……..to walkon”), but instead he refused to participate. That changed my opinion of him a bit – I thought for sure that as director, Shatner would be chewing scenery and marginalizing his co-stars for the full 2 hrs. True, he DID marginalize the supporting players a bit, Doohan in particular, but if he was trying to use the film as a vehicle for self-agrandizement, he clearly missed some opportunities.
So, flawed, but still Star Trek, IMO. I’d rather watch ST V than Spock’s Brain.
The camping scenes are frankly the best scenes ever that clearly define the friendship between the three of them.. I hope that we see more of this in the next movies.. They truly are friends, playing friends in those scenes… Frankly, Mr. Shatner, they are wonderful, and I really like this movie.
I like Star Trek V as well; the shoddy production values often take you out of the experience and some of the “humorous” moments aren’t particularly funny. But those flaws are offset by some really good character moments; in particular, McCoy having to confront his father’s illness is utterly heart-wrenching. Sybok is also a very charismatic and compelling character who in the end proved far more memorable then other, more black & white “villains” from the movies.
Given the advances in good, affordable CG effects I’m surprised that some enterprising fans haven’t tried creating their own cut of the film with improved effects and maybe some tweaks to the editing. Star Trek V has long been a red-headed stepchild, maybe a fan-initiated remastering might cast it in a better light or open the eyes of the Paramount execs to a full blown restoration.
Excellent review. You captured my feelings for this film. Initially it was a great disappointment, but after later viewing there are some gems within, particularly the character moments, particularly the campfire and observation deck scenes. And as said above, the latter scene was quite true to the characters from McCoy’s deathbed scene to his father to Spock’s struggle with his duality from birth, and Kirk’s refusal to submit to Sybock’s “therapy”. It was also interesting that after so many years together these friends still had parts of themselves unexplored and unknown to their comrades. Another true life aspect of the film, in my opinion. And, I have to say I love the campfire scene it is the most casual moment in Trek–simply friends hanging out.
Obviously, some of the humor was misplaced and overcooked in reaction to the success of Trek IV from which the humor naturally flowed as part of the fish-out-of-water circumstance.
Thanks for capturing my feelings about this film.
It’s interesting that ST V: has more social message than the new Start Trek out now, but people love the new one to death for some reason.
I think the tone is what counts. The opening scene was truly gag inducing. There were many gag inducing scenes, actually. Star Trek IV was funny because it pointed to the stupidity of Star Trek: what does Scotty really look like walking down the street?
In every way imaginable, Star Trek V was awkward and gag-inducing, the humor disgusting. But that is bad writing. The plot idea was fine – it was just executed poorly.
#122 –
Maybe, just maybe, because the new film deals less with social issues, and more with personal issues. Father/son. Father figure/son figure. Destiny. Choice of destinity. Maybe that’s why some of us love it. And as a bonus, it’s entertaining as F**K!!
I LOVE THIS MOVIE! THIS IS ONE OF MY FAVORITS!!
IT IS MY SECOND FAVORITE IN THE SERIES OF ALL 6 TOS
MY LIST GOES (IN ORDER FROM BEST-TO-LEAST)
1.The Undiscovered Country
2. The Wrath of Khan
3. The final frontier
4. The Voyage Home
5.the search for spock
6. The Motion Picture
my favoite Trek of all time is STAR TREK 09 !!!!!!!
WHATS YOURS?
LOL!!!! on my #124 post… i meant to put THE FINAL FRONTIER AS #2…AND TWOK as #3 !!!!!
List Fail,.
When I first saw Star Trek V, loved it (I think I’d been watching too much non-remastered TOS at the time). When I saw it again more recently, I was surprised at the relatively low quality of the special effects (maybe I’ve been watching too much Voyager), but having read this review, I think I’ll watch it again, more carefully.
i always likes star trek 5- i lacked the epic qualities of the other films but it spent time with the chatracters.
As for the VFX- I liked the model work- the one shot of the enterprise going into the barrier was pitiful but the shuttle bay scenes were wonderful.
As for shatners mythic ending that would have saved the film- a bunch of rockmen chasing kirk – i found the strange blob of light shooting lightning far more scary than i think a bunch of guys in rockman suits would have been.
I love the scenes of them in the shuttle- when they are trapped in the shuttle not really sure what is outside.
Just a point- it would have been nicer if shatner & bennet had let nichelle sing during Uhura’s fan dance.
it had that no money so use ure imagination feel to it that the original series had.
I always thought the tagline- “Adventure & imagination will meet st the final frontier” was vague and what i suspect was the main theatrical trailer was too light and focussed on the light hartedness of the film.
in the end- the big epic action scenes in most big movies loose their power & I have had more viewings of Trek 5 than some of the other films cause sometimes i just want to stend time with the characters.
I agree with 16 and 18. Maybe restore a few scenes, redo the effects, and you could have a great film. Ditto for Nemesis. Actually, I really would like to explore the (third?) five year mission, in the period between TFF and TUC. There’s a Peter David novel, The Rift, that captures the feeling I’d imagine those years have. Likewise for Spock’s World, by Diane Duane, which I think represents the feel of the five year mission after TMP.
The second animated series, anyone? :-D
an anamated series might work! lol.. idk.. i havent even watch TAS yet.
(My first post ever, be kind) I agree that V had some really wonderful moments, especially for the trinity. Certainly, McCoy’s “pain” scene was one of Kelly’s best moments. And I had really hoped that they might have gotten the guy who played young Sarek in V to play Sarek in ST09; he was a dead ringer. (But thumbs way up to Ben Cross in any event.) I actually really enjoyed seeing different types of Klingons (Sleeveless?) and Vulcans (emotional!?). Hey, cat lady was cool. For me, the only really awful thing was just the idea of Spock having this older brother. That, for me, was the worst thing about this movie. Period. He could have been anyone else–a stranger, a cousin, anyone other than a son of Sarek. But, for my money, the only unwatchable ST movie is Generations. I just cannot get through that thing.
I love this movie. Period. I have said it. It’s pure Star Trek.
Loved this movie. Don’t care what anybody says, don’t care, don’t care… love it.. haha.. guilty pleasure. Glad to see a few other supporters out tonight!
I saw ST5 during my own “search for God” phase (which sadly, I’ve never quite solved) and it is an incredibly human and insightful picture. Think of it like Goonies with more brain and less “one eyed willy”. I figure, watch it for the hell of it and it’ll reward you afterwards with something great to think about. Pick on ST5 all you want, this thing was one of my favorite adventures.
#84: “Nemesis was a franchise film too [...]”
Long after the franchise had squandered its cachet, undermining the usual benefits considerably.
“Out of curiosity, why do you describe TUC as “Just as embarrassing”?”
Because my embarassment for it (sympathetically speaking) was roughly equivalent.
#97: “I always liked this movie and believe it has received undue scorn from fans. A perfect film? No. But what Trek movie is?”
You know, I’ve never heard a single Star Trek fan heap scorn on this film citing “it isn’t perfect, and that is why I regard it with such scorn, for all other Star Trek films _are_ perfect.” In fact, I’ve never heard anything even remotely equivalent to that.
GIVE PROPS…
…THE FINAL FRONTIER at the very least gave us one of Kirk’s all-time greatest lines ever:
“Excuse me… but what does God need with a starship?”
The biggest problem with STV was it ventured into territory that was avoided by script writers as best as they could, and this goes for most Hollywood scripts. That is Religion and Proficiency. The fastest way to drive viewers away is to counter act what they view is their religious views. The only way it has been done to make a profit is in fantasy like with the Force as Lucus hints at in Star Wars.
I almost forgot the other one, The Exorcist. But that was more Terror than Religion and was not General Public/Family aimed. But the film did present many valid thoughts about GOD. Most stated how the movie is meant to prove there is no real GOD. Which kind of backs the Hollywood view. Maybe the only reason Hollywood did not accept it was it was not made by one of the Hollywood Demigods.
All I can say about this movie is that The SHAT believes he can direct as well as he can sing! As for THE SHAT’s latest career change – Priceline Negotiator!!!
#54
Well said. Same here.
#132
Ah, you’re not alone…;-)
#58: Well, yes, by virtue of having one at all :)
I think that is a very fair and honest review of V.
“especially Laurence Luckinbill’s brilliant performance as Sybok”
really? I guess he wasn’t bad. The movie was a collection of sketches rather than a coherent story. It seemed like a bunch of ideas scribbled on napkins after a three-spritzer lunch. “I love horses and rock climbing, so Kirk should too” “what if, uhura did a naked dance?” “What if we finally saw the damned toilet?” The same thing sort of happened with Insurrection — don’t let the talent write their own parts…
I realize we only have six films with the original cast members, but I’ll not be an apologist for Star Trek. That movie is just downright dreadful. I actually felt embarrassed for the actors and for myself, even though I was alone and watching on video.
Sorry, that’s my opinion. I love Trek, but not when it’s bad, and I hold it to pretty high standards.
Love on you all!
Captian shroom you are absolutely correct, just look at supermanII for years wb refused to acknowledge fan requests for a special edition of superman II. so a talented fan took it upon himself to edit togeather his own special edition, which was then talked about in EW(who also mentioned the fan was making free dvds availble for those who wanted one) which finally conivinced wb to let dick donner go and make HIS version of the film, from all the footage shot before he was fired back in the early 80s from superman 2
the same thing could happen if paramount doesnt give shat the chance to update the movie, there are a lot of very talented and ENTERPRISING star trek fans out there who could do such a thing
for the record i have always really enjoyed star trek v
USS TRINOMA ?
Shatner has been a part of priceline for many many years now. where do you get latest career change.
that company has made him a ton of money, and helped kept him in the public eye leading to his emmy award winning guest role on The Practice that in turn became a emmy award winning starring role on Boston Legal, His latest projects were BL and Shatners Raw nerve.
Other than a scene where the Enterprise is shown to have 89 decks, and getting to the barrier at the galaxy center (which is supposed to be over 20,000 light years away) in under a day, I liked this movie.
What #56 said!
Otherwise, it SHOULD have ended like this..
Kirk: Where am I?
Scotty: Sickbay, sir, along with Mr Spock, Dr McCoy , Uhura and Sulu. Sorry, but when I flooded the hangar deck with sleeping gas, there was no way to isolate you from the effects
Kirk: Oh. Right. Uh… Sybok?
Scotty: The Vulcan, sir? In the brig, along with the rest of them.
Kirk: Umm… the hostages on the planet…
Scotty: All sorted sir, Chekov took a security team down. They beamed back aboard a few minutes ago.
Kirk: Good. Right. Well. You seem to have everything under control, Scotty. Thanks.
Scotty: No problem, Captain. Now, unless there’s anything else (glares in direction of Sulu) I have a shuttlecraft to repair.
when you watch a movie and dont care about the villans (punk Klingons) then you end up with the same problem as insurrection (face Stretchers)
I wonder if bill and paramount got into a fight during the making of this film, and thus…paramount not letting bill have his way, not letting a better FX house do the effects (saving money) and the icing on the cake..not letting bill Re-edit and finish the film for DVD and Blu-ray. someone at paramount has a long memory, in my opinion. the film could be made better as well as nemesis( Patrick Stewart to replace Shinzon) and insurrection (better editing) The only other turkey that can’t be helped is TMP, No matter how long or short you make it, it’s boring.
This was the first Star Trek movie I ever saw as a little kid … I loved it at the time … and it only made me appreciate the others more when I saw them.
It had some great moments, and some embarrasingly bad ones too.
Good review.
I thought that ST09 was the first Star Trek movie NOT released around Christmas? Huh.
STV is the only Trek movie that I actually kind of partially like – mostly because it’s the only one that actually did the “exploring” part of the famous monologue. Whereas the other movies were simple, brainless “Kill the main Bad Guy to Save the Day and End the Movie,” STV actually was more like many TOS episodes, in that it didn’t have a central “villain,” per se, and the solution to the problem was deeper than merely offing whoever was the “bad guy” in this situation.
An “interesting” review. Highlighting the best of the worst and completely glossing over the worst of the worst.
That being said, as a story, I always found the film somewhat compelling. It did have many moments that stand apart from the other Trek films. And the music is incredibly sentimental in parts. As a kid, I often found myself whistling the Yosemite theme that played while we first saw Kirk climbing El Capitan. It is one of my favorite musical themes among all the Trek movies.
But overall, the production was sub-par. From the bland white bridge to the poorly acted Klingons. I usually fall asleep while the crew all stares at the poorly rendered “planet” at the center of the galaxy. And wake up again when the “devil” let’s out his first shreeking lightning bolt.
It’s a strange mess of a film, but, with new FX and some better editing (removing some of the stupider gags) they could make this a lot better! Go on, Paramount! Give Shatner a chance to fix what once went wrong for a Blu-ray release!
With all that William Shatner has done for Paramount, this movie deserves another shot.
It is my least favorite. But I will buy it if they do a “Special Edition”
Horrible movie, undeserving of any anniversary coverage.
RAMA
149.
Nope STII, STIII and STV were all released in June or May.
For what it’s worth, this movie *was* a part of my childhood. I remember the summer it came out very well. I had posters of Kirk, Spock and McCoy all over my room. I remember hunting down every single starlog magazine I could find to find out any spoilers. I remember standing in line during a hot afternoon waiting to get tickets. I remember cringing at some parts of the movie and getting all misty eyed during others.
I suppose I will always regard this movie with a certain amount of fondness. It was the end of my Wonder Years era. And even though there are parts of the movie I wish I could forget, it turns out I can’t. But that is okay. Because maybe, just maybe, we’re not supposed to forget.
For the longest time, I hadn’t seen this movie. I kept catching the end of it, from when they breach the barrier to the end, and it was Ok. Then one day I saw a used VHS tape of it (along with 3 and 4) and decided to load up with Star Trek movies. So I finally got around to watching this all the way through… and it was horrible. My response was that I wanted to rip my eyeballs out after watching it, it was that bad.
The effects are the least of its worries. The plot is ridiculous, there’s too much cute dialogue and for a long time, not very much happens. Like the writer states, it does get marginally better as you get familiar with it, as the bad stuff doesn’t take you by surprise, but there’s still a lot there: Scotty and Uhura. Scotty hitting his head. The way too long El Capitan scene.
This was the only one of the collector’s edition DVDs I didn’t go out and buy the first week it was out. I waited for a sale. The last time I watched it, leading up to ST11, I purchased the RiffTrax and listened to that. It helped immensely.
Happy Anniversary, Star Trek V. I’m sure you’ll understand if I plan on celebrating with Batman, instead.
PS: While listening to the beginning of my ST11 audiobook in my car, at the very beginning when Spock is born, I busted out a “I believe we are witnessing my birth.”
TFF looked cheesy, like someone snuck onto existing sets who didn’t know what the frak he was doing and made a crappy movie. Oh wait, that is what happened.
Having said that, there were a few good elements in the movie. I liked that Nichelle got to sing. I don’t think it was handled especially well, but I like her voice. I like the ship’s wheel. I like the idea of outfitting an assault team, although outfitting old men in assault gear looked silly. I can understand the scenes on El Capitan after reading Shatner’s books, but the execution doesn’t quite work. The idea of “Super Spock” flying in this movie is as jarring as seeing R2D2 fly after five movies of non-flight. In a word: Stupid! I lke the Romulan ambassador. No, I REALLY likey the Romulan ambassador. Chekov, Sulu, and Bones each got a few good lines. I like the periscope on the Klingons’ bridge.
But, overall, the movie is a mess. I think it was Gene Siskel who, after Roger Ebert commented on Scotty appearing drunk when he bangs his head adds that they all look a little drunk in this movie. The characters are ‘off.’ The humor is horrible. Please, no more fart jokes in movies unless they’re actually funny. The lighting is BAD; you can see the screw heads in the bridge displays for Shat’s sake. The blocking is stiff as hell. The special effects are NOT special. (Unless cat women are supposed to have strings.) Mostly, the plot is forced. Why does an audience need a movie about staships to meet God? ZAP!
I’ll occassionally watch the recut of this movie (the one that excises the fart jokes and the painful turbo shaft continuity errors) but I can’t say it’s one of my favorites.
Hi Anthony,
Brilliant review, you’ve articulated exactly how I feel about this film..
Superb site, thanks for all your efforts..
Mike
Sorry, or rather Bill Kowinski..oops……….
I find it amazing that so many can say this film is bad because of bad fx ,yet inexplicbly, accept them in TOS.
Is it really any surprise that most of the posters who dont get this movie and trash it without any real substantial reasoning are the very same posters who are, and were, always staunchly opposed to even the slightest possibility that Shatner might appear in jjs new trek?
I remember seeing this in the theater and wondering what had just happened. I give Shatner credit for trying to go with an idea that is obviously interesting, but could not be dealt with satisfactorily in a 2 hour movie. I remember seeing some concept art for the assault team scene. If I remember correctly, what they had in mind was actually even cooler than what was filmed, fully armored assault team with phaser rifles (never seen in any TOS movie). Obviously due to budget, they didn’t got with that. At the least, we got the best looking phasers ever (so far). Some nice character moments for sure, but def. the black sheep of the TOS movies.
I think Trek 5 is a classic. it had some wonderfull moments with Kirk Spock and Mccoy. De kelley did a fantastic job of acting and i think his acting was oscar materal. The story as a whole was actualy pretty good. but with some of the Fx and the ending hurt the film to much. I have seen this Movie a dozen times at least and every time i watch it it’s like im watching 2 different movies in one. part of it is just a fantstic journy and part of it is just so dissapointing. But all in all it was Tos Trek at it’s best and for that this will be a fav of mine.
@161 – hmm, stirring the pot, eh?
161. jonboc – June 13, 2009
Is it really any surprise that most of the posters who dont get this movie and trash it without any real substantial reasoning are the very same posters who are, and were, always staunchly opposed to even the slightest possibility that Shatner might appear in jjs new trek?
Oh please. lol That’s truly grasping.
I could live with the bad effects and other shortcomings of this film. What did V in for me was an absolutely ill-conceived and horribly executed storyline. How on earth that script ever made it to the big screen is beyond me….writers strike or no. I’d like to think that any one of us could have come up with something better than what was passed off as a Trek movie here. Some details – like the Uhura/Scotty romance and the scene in the turboshaft suggesting the Enterprise had nearly 100 decks were just embarrassing and more than awkward. With that said, there are a few really great moments in this movie – and I loved the new look to the bridge and the returned sense of vitality that that had been missing from the Kirk character for some time.
#84—”Out of curiosity, why do you describe TUC as ‘Just as embarrassing’?”
I actually concur with that statement. Although TUC is a far better film than TFF, both films (IMO) suffer from the cast just not being up to the task anymore. For one thing— Shatner, Doohan (RIP), Nichols, and Koenig were no longer fit (and they certainly didn’t fit well in those uniforms). And as much as loved seeing Shatner’s Kirk in a fight scene filmed in the 1960’s, he just didn’t have that kind of credibility to me anymore in 1991. The geriatric fistfight in the snow above Rura Penthe was just too much for me. Meyer would have done well, I think, to avoid putting Bill Shatner in such a scene by that point. I don’t know whose idea that was, but I did find it rather embarassing. But again, I occasionally won’t change the channel if its on (although I can’t remember the last time I went to the trouble of loading the dvd). That’s far more than I could ever say about the turd that preceded it.
#100—-”As long as we’re making TOS comparison’s – ‘Spock’s Brain’ was much worse and far more contrived.”
The difference is that “Spock’s Brain” was a weekly television episode. As bad as it was, it was followed a week later by “The Enterprise Incident”. TFF, on the other hand, was the first feature film in 3 years—and we would wait another 2 years after that before the original cast restored some of its dignity!
There are plenty of bad episodes—or “Trek farts”, if you will. But amongst the 6 original films, there is only one “Great Trek Turd Of ‘89″.
#122—”It’s interesting that ST V: has more social message than the new Start Trek out now…”
Does it?
You know, it’s funny to me that so many are accusing the new film of having no message or social commentary, etc. Sadly, I think that’s because, unlike in so much of past Star Trek, it isn’t totally spelled out in the dialogue for the audience. Maybe Star Trek fans (as a whole) aren’t as smart as they think they are.
I guess those fans missed the fatalistic/deterministic philosophical doctrines laced throughout the movie—-or ST09’s exploration of ‘the human condition’ through both of the film’s main characters. Either that, or those fans don’t consider a young man’s relationship to his father (alive or dead) to be very significant.
, but people love the new one to death for some reason.
133 – You’re comment on mine at 97 is about the silliest nit-picking piece of criticism I’ve read in any post. You just seem to love to stir it up.
# 164 , just making an observation. :)
Somebody posted this above but it warrants repeating… good or bad both STV and TMP are the only TOS trek films that follow the enterprises mission of exploring strange new worlds, seeking out new life… even if poorly executed.
We already know about time travel, and that the Klingons and Romulans are the bad guys… and how many vengeance stories ala TWOK can be done?
Now that trek 9 has changed our universe and the new actors are accepted as our heroes… let’s explore some new territory!
172 – Excellent points. The exploration is what I’ve been waiting for in Trek films for a while, too. And it is another thing that is commendable about Trek V.
I forgot to mention in an earlier post that another thing I love about Trek V is Kirk proclaiming the Enterprise crew is a family. That is one of the best, humanistic statements ever in the franchise.
#161—”Is it really any surprise that most of the posters who dont get this movie and trash it without any real substantial reasoning are the very same posters who are, and were, always staunchly opposed to even the slightest possibility that Shatner might appear in jjs new trek?”
What constitutes “substantial reasoning”?
And you don’t have to “not get it” in order to dislike it. Just because the story may have a well-intended point doesn’t mean the movie doesn’t stink up the theater.
—-The Enterprise-A is a lemon;
—-In a gross misallocation of personnel resources, Starfleet has inexplicably assigned three Captains and four Commanders to serve aboard the same ship;
—-The otherwise benevolent Federation has somehow allowed the so-called “Planet Of Intergalactic Peace” and its inhabitants to succumb to utter deprivation and despair;
—-The poorly casted/directed character of the Romulan Ambassador actually becomes so frightened that she literally seeks comfort in the arms of her human counterpart;
—-Spock suddenly has a half-brother, conceived by Sarek and a “Vulcan Princess” who has, by the way, also chosen to disregard Vulcan tradition (and that of his family), thereby diluting the impact of a substantial element of Dorothy Fontana’s wonderful backstory to one of television history’s greatest characters;
—-Despite being willing to sacrifice his own father’s life in order to be on the bridge when the Enterprise is merely “subject to possible attack” (”Journey To Babel”), Spock is willing to betray his captain rather than fire a weapon at his crazed half-brother;
—-The Enterprise is hijacked by a bunch of Sybok and his gang of misfits, and worse, control of the ship is only regained by the goodwill (and at the convenience) of the criminal perpetrators;
—-The Klingon warrior in command of the BOP ends up “apologizing” to Jim Kirk;
—-Kirk’s “I lost a brother once…” comment appears to ignore (or at the very least dilute the impact of) the fact that he actually did lose a brother in “Operation—Annihilate!”;
—-Kirk is suddenly an equestrian;
—-An overweight and out-of-shape Kirk is somehow able to dodge a photon torpedo (embarassing);
—-The goofy rock-climbing scene (embarassing);
—-The Enterprise Helmsman and former navigator are lost in the woods (embarassing);
—-Uhura’s fandance (embarassing);
—-Uhura and Scotty flirting like middle-schoolers (embarassing);
—-”Row, Row, Row Your Boat” (monumentally embarassing)
I don’t even care about the f/x. Good effects may dress it up some, but they cannot hide the poorly conceived storylines and scenes.
I also think that, while Shatner’s direction isn’t necessarily brilliant, it isn’t the worst I’ve seen. The scenes are actually fairly well shot. It’s just a shame that his screenplay is so bad that he didn’t give himself anything resembling decent material to direct.
And there are other things (like the technical dimension issues and the slapstick Scotty stuff) which bother others but don’t necessarily bother me. And any one (or even two, three, or four) of these problems alone probably wouldn’t ruin the movie. It is the culmulative effect of all of these negative aspects to the story which make STV an absolute turd, IMO.
Is that reasoning substantial enough? You’re entitled to disagree of course, but I think it is. I think it’s unfair to suggest that people who dislike it just feel that way because they “didn’t get it”.
Let’s just say it and get it over with. This was the worst of all the Star Trek movies.
There’s some good moments in Trek V, and I wouldn’t completely discard it from the collection, for the simple fact that we only have 6 feature films with the original cast. Maybe someday they will do a special edition and refit the effects and editing. I think the basic premise was classic Trek, it’s just the contrived, slap-stick jokes that really kills this movie for me.
175, yes definitely the worst of the films. In fact, really the only truly bad trek movie.
Responses to #274:
—-The poorly casted/directed character of the Romulan Ambassador actually becomes so frightened that she literally seeks comfort in the arms of her human counterpart;
I believe it was implied that she and the human played by David Warner were developing a romantic relationship. I got no problem with that. Good for him!
—-Kirk’s “I lost a brother once…” comment appears to ignore (or at the very least dilute the impact of) the fact that he actually did lose a brother in “Operation—Annihilate!”
I actually thought of this as a very nice reference to the old series. It seemed to me that at first, McCoy and Spock thought Jim was referring to Sam.
—-Kirk is suddenly an equestrian;
No problem there whatsoever. How many years of Kirk’s life did we not see because they weren’t depicted on screen? Most of them. He was raised in a rural area. A farm, according to some sources. And Generations later made it canon that Kirk was spending time in the Midwest with relatives, riding horses before returning to Starfleet in the early 2280’s. So Kirk on a horse? Why not? Works for me.
—-An overweight and out-of-shape Kirk is somehow able to dodge a photon torpedo (embarassing)
I thought Bill looked positively great in this movie. Certainly for a man of almost 60. Reviews I read at the time even remarked on this. One read, “McCoy looks old, Spock looks embarrassed, and Kirk looks great.” But I think the bigger issue is not what kind of shape Kirk was in, but rather that it’s questionable whether anyone should have been able to survive a photon from that proximity to begin with.
—-The goofy rock-climbing scene (embarassing)
I thought it was awesome. Beautiful music, beautiful cinematography, and seemed appropriate for Kirk. I didn’t expect to see him bird watching. It’s actually one of my favorite openings of any Star Trek movie, because it’s so unique (doesn’t begin in space).
—-”Row, Row, Row Your Boat” (monumentally embarassing)
Then human being must be embarrassing, because when friends and family members get together for celebrations or just to hang out, they sometimes do sing! A buddy and I were singing along to a Paul McCartney tune at a pub just last night. McCoy and Kirk were old friends and comfortable with one another. And it was true to Spock’s character, too, that he didn’t “jump in” when they expected him to.
#178—” I got no problem with that.”
I thought it was a poor portrayal of a Romulan.
“It seemed to me that at first, McCoy and Spock thought Jim was referring to Sam.”
Well then, since it eventually becomes clear that he was referring to Spock, why “once”? If Shatner actually did recall “Operation: Annihilate!”—then at the very least, the dialogue there was poorly written.The issue could have been completely avoided if the dialogue had read something like, “I’ve lost two brothers…but I was fortunate to get one of them back.” No?
But (and this is only my opinion) I think the correct explanation is probably the simpler one—they just wiffed on the whole Sam thing.
“I thought Bill looked positively great in this movie. Certainly for a man of almost 60. ”
Relatively speaking, sure.
“…I think the bigger issue is not what kind of shape Kirk was in, but rather that it’s questionable whether anyone should have been able to survive a photon from that proximity to begin with.”
Okay. But a man with 25 year-old reflexes being able to do it is silly enough, right? I just think that a 60 year-old man doing it is that much worse.
“I thought it was awesome. Beautiful music, beautiful cinematography…”
I had no problem with the music or the scenery. I actually give Shatner credit for overseeing those shots. Perhaps I should have said “goofy falling sequence with the rocket-boots”.
“…Generations later made it canon that Kirk was spending time in the Midwest with relatives, riding horses before returning to Starfleet in the early 2280’s. So Kirk on a horse? Why not?”
And in both instances, Shatner was given alot of creative control over the character. He chose to further develop Kirk along the lines of himself—the horses, the old dog….Kirk seemed (in GEN) to be living out Shatner’s dream in The Nexus…rather than what (prior to TFF) would have likely been my expectation for Kirk. My issue with it has nothing to do with canon. Everyone has there own ideas about who the guy should or should not be. The equestrian thing that Shatner added to the character in TFF and GEN just seemed more to me like Pike (”The Cage”/ “The Menagerie”) than James T. Kirk.
“A buddy and I were singing along to a Paul McCartney tune at a pub just last night. ”
If I had seen that, I probably would have smiled and thought nothing of it. I’m certainly not above that either.
However, if I had seen you and two friends sit down and start singing “Row, Row, Row Your Boat”—-that passing smile might have turned to awkwardness and a feeling of embarassment. I might have even suggested that the bartender stop serving you and call you a cab!
:)
By the way—-I just bought tickets to the 9:30 IMAX showing at The Edwards tonight for my nephew and I. Apparently, it is only back there for a week.
I would LOVE to re-edit this movie. I know I could make it better. There are a lot of good elements there to work with and the bad stuff is so obvious it wouldn’t be too difficult to “trim the fat” as it were.
Someday when I have a couple of weeks.
Tell you what, I’ll do it if Scott Gammans teams up with me fixes the all the Enterprise and Klingon ship shots.
: )
“teams up with me and fixes all the Enterprise and Klingon ship shots”
DUH.
I guess Scott will have to do the credits as well ; )
Well, Closettrekker, your list is substantial…I’ll give ya that. lol
#174 —-The Enterprise-A is a lemon;
The ship wasn’t a lemon, it simply wasn’t ready to go out on a mission yet. The crew and the ship were put out before they were ready. Drastic situations sometimes require drastic measures.
—-In a gross misallocation of personnel resources, Starfleet has inexplicably assigned three Captains and four Commanders to serve aboard the same ship;
And this is news to anyone after the ending of Trek 4? What were you expecting? Reality would have spread the crew to the winds. Wasn’t going to happen.
—-The otherwise benevolent Federation has somehow allowed the so-called “Planet Of Intergalactic Peace” and its inhabitants to succumb to utter deprivation and despair;
Do you also believe Trek 2 is poor movie because the Federation literally abandoned Khan and his crew after marooning them on Ceti Alpha 5? The Federation is not perfect, it shouldn’t ruin a movie for you.
—-The poorly casted/directed character of the Romulan Ambassador actually becomes so frightened that she literally seeks comfort in the arms of her human counterpart;
Ambassadors must be made of stone? SInce when?
—-Spock suddenly has a half-brother, conceived by Sarek and a “Vulcan Princess” who has, by the way, also chosen to disregard Vulcan tradition (and that of his family), thereby diluting the impact of a substantial element of Dorothy Fontana’s wonderful backstory to one of television history’s greatest characters;
Because he was never mentioned doesn’t mean he never existed. Sulu may have an uncle who runs a deli in El Paso for all I know.
—-Despite being willing to sacrifice his own father’s life in order to be on the bridge when the Enterprise is merely “subject to possible attack” (”Journey To Babel”), Spock is willing to betray his captain rather than fire a weapon at his crazed half-brother;
THIS I agree with. Makes no sense.
—-The Enterprise is hijacked by a bunch of Sybok and his gang of misfits, and worse, control of the ship is only regained by the goodwill (and at the convenience) of the criminal perpetrators;
The Enteprise had also been hijacked by the Scalosians, the Kelvins, the Space Hippies, the Klingons and Frank Gorshin, just to name a few. It’s a valid plot device. Do you hate all those episodes as well?
—-The Klingon warrior in command of the BOP ends up “apologizing” to Jim Kirk;
Never liked that either. But there are a lot of little lines I don’t like in all the movies. Spocks famous line from Trek 2 is awful. ” I have been and forever shall be, your friend.” What?? WHen did SPock start talking like the great guru from the mountain top? He never spoke like that in the TV show. But I still like the movie.
—Kirk’s “I lost a brother once…” comment appears to ignore (or at the very least dilute the impact of) the fact that he actually did lose a brother in “Operation—Annihilate!”;
Come on. It’s nothing but simple misdirection to make you THINK he is talking about Sam…then there is a beat…then Kirk makes it clear, to everyone’s surprise, including the audience, that he thinks of Spock as a brother. Great writing IMO.
—-Kirk is suddenly an equestrian;
Suddenly? WHo is to say Kirk hasn’t always loved horses? Again, just because he haven’t seen in, doesn’t make it not so.
—-An overweight and out-of-shape Kirk is somehow able to dodge a photon torpedo (embarassing);
Out of shape Kirk? He looked to be in great shape to me.
—-The goofy rock-climbing scene (embarassing);
I thought the opening was beautiful, especially with Goldsmith’s score. And it’s so totally “Jim Kirk” for him to be doing that. If you don’t realize that, then you really don’t “get” Jim Kirk and what makes him tick. What WAS embarrasing was the horrible green screen of Kirk falling. The live freefall stunt was fantastic. The green-screen stuff should have been scrapped,
—-The Enterprise Helmsman and former navigator are lost in the woods (embarassing);
That’s the whole point. It’s the last thing you expect. That is where the comedy of the moment is derived from. One type of comedy is being taken by surprise by something you don’t expect. The scene with Sulu and Chekov was fine. Scotty hitting his head…that was slapstick and THAT was bad comedy.
—-Uhura’s fandance (embarassing);
Not embarrasing at all. Men have different tastes, and Nichelle was not in poor condition. A fandance, to gain the attention from a bunch of women-starved men, given by the same officer who voluntarily flirted with evil-mirror universe Sulu to achieve the mission’s objective is neither surprising or embarassing. She got the job done.
—-Uhura and Scotty flirting like middle-schoolers (embarassing);
I didn’t like it either, but Sybok’s power at least explained it. And if I let little moments like that bug me, I’d never like any of the movies.
—-”Row, Row, Row Your Boat” (monumentally embarassing)
Funny what some find embarrasing others find quite human and touching. They were all three experiencing camping 101..thus the elementary level of the sing along. My guess is that those that dismiss this scene have never roasted marshmellos, told ghost stories, or sang around a campfire with friends.
Trek 5 (for the most part) rocks!
I started watching the DVD last night. Will probably finish it some time this weekend. Honestly? It’s not PAINFUL for me to watch, but overall it’s just not up to the standard one expects from Star Trek. Especially a movie helmed by someone so central to the franchise. Here are some thoughts in no particular order.
Other than Kirk, Spock and McCoy, the main characters were not served well by this script. The actors did a great job with the material they were given, but it just didn’t ring true to who they were. Chekov and Sulu getting lost in the forest just made me cringe. Uhura’s fan dance. Scotty’s pratfall. Thinking about these things right now just gave me a big shudder.
I agree about Luckinbill’s performance. Very robust, very vibrant. He really threw himself into the role. One of the movie’s bright spots.
Cynthia Gouw. Hmmmm…her audition stood out from all other actresses trying out for the role? Really?
As far as the ship being hijacked. Again. Please stop it. It was a dumb plot device during the series and it doesn’t get any smarter each time it’s written. Just…stop it.
The turboshaft thing? I’m going to streeeeeeeeetch my imagination and tell myself that “Deck 79″ means Deck 7, Corridor 9. Yeah. That’s what it means. Onward!
Isn’t the Great Barrier at the edge of the galaxy? Did “faith” get them through the barrier? In the book, I believe Scotty modifies the shields, but REALLY! Why didn’t he do this a long time ago if he knew how? And exactly how long does it take to get to the center? Did he modify the engines to make them go faster too?
I remember coming out of the theater thinking “that was great!” Subsequent viewings do reveal that its flaws are pretty major. But as one critic said, the franchise is almost director-proof. There’s enough built-in momentum to guarantee some entertainment value. It’s still a watchable movie for me.
Honestly, I think I knew there was trouble when I saw a teaser poster for it that showed a movie seat floating in space with a model of the ENTERPRISE behind it and it said “Why are theaters installing seat belts this summer?” It just smacked of, “how do we save this?”
Agreed with those who have said let Shat have his makeover of STV. I’d buy it.
I remeber seeing it for the first time and thinking, man that is a bad movie. Bad story, bad special effects, just bad. Over the years I did try find things to like.
I like (ok love) the music, Luckinbill is a great actor, the McCoy’s “dad scene” is very moving. and the opening scene at Yosemite is nice to look at. That is about it.
#182—-”What were you expecting? ”
Well, what I expected and what I would like to have seen are really two different things. Part of me thought that TVH should have been the end of the film series with that cast. I would have loved to see those characters recast and once again portrayed in their youth.
However, if they weren’t going to do that, I thought that the 5th film would have been the perfect time to introduce new (and definitely younger) faces aboard the Enterprise under Kirk’s command. Get rid of Chekov, Uhura, and Sulu for sure. Have McCoy remain aboard as Chief Medical Officer, and Spock (since they had to make him a captain)could have assumed another role with the Federation (yet still somehow been integrated into the story). Scotty (since they had to make him a captain too) could have moved on to either retirement or something else—like teaching at SFA.
But it was absolutely ridiculous to have all of these people (ranked Cmdr or even higher) in virtually the same positions as they had served in more than 15 years before (when some of them were ensigns and Lt.’s!).
And it is a legitimate problem with the story. For the record, I find Kirk’s rapid ascension from cadet to captain in ST09 equally problematic. The difference is, (IMO)ST09 actually has real merits about it with which to compensate for that.
“The Enteprise had also been hijacked by the Scalosians, the Kelvins, the Space Hippies, the Klingons and Frank Gorshin, just to name a few. It’s a valid plot device. Do you hate all those episodes as well?”
You forgot Khan. But the answer is no, and the difference is quite obvious. In each of those stories, Kirk is able to take back control of his own ship. I’m surprised that you don’t see the difference in a scenario where Kirk is only restored to command when the bad guy decides to give his ship back.
” The Federation is not perfect, it shouldn’t ruin a movie for you.”
As I indicated earlier, this alone would not ruin the movie for me. It is one of many things which combine to ruin the movie for me. Again, this is a legitimate story issue (as is the one you mentioned in TWOK).
“I thought the opening was beautiful, especially with Goldsmith’s score. And it’s so totally “Jim Kirk” for him to be doing that. If you don’t realize that, then you really don’t “get” Jim Kirk and what makes him tick. What WAS embarrasing was the horrible green screen of Kirk falling. ”
As I added in my next post, what bothered me about the sequence was the silly gravity boots thing. It had nothing to do with Jim Kirk climbing a rock. And I really don’t care about the green screen. The obvious stunt double in “Space Seed” didn’t ruin Kirk’s fight with Khan for me in engineering either.
“The scene with Sulu and Chekov was fine.”
I thought it was silly. And for that, I blame Paramount more than I do Shatner. The studio had him trying way too hard to duplicate the kind of laughs that TVH produced. The problem is that it didn’t work that way. You could tell he was trying too hard.
“Men have different tastes…”
Indeed. However, I don’t form my opinion based upon anything but my own. I thought Nichelle looked great for her age—-but that doesn’t mean I wanted to see any woman her age doing that.
“Funny what some find embarrasing others find quite human and touching.”
I sank in my seat in the theater.
” Trek 5 (for the most part) rocks!”
Only the toilet, as far as I’m concerned.
After all, it is The Great Trek Turd Of ‘89!
I love these characters as much as anyone. Unfortunately, I didn’t feel as though they were afforded much dignity throughout the better part of the film. It’s one thing to occasionall produce a light-hearted episode like “The Trouble With Tribbles”, or a wonderfully warm and funny feature like “The Voyage Home”—-where in both cases, the humor works well organically (and I think ST09 did a fantastic job of honoring and integrating that). But sometimes, it is forced and doesn’t work well at all.
I thought that the “jailbreak” joke, the “need a shower” joke, “Do you want me to hold him” and “not in front of the Klingons” are examples of where it worked okay to some degree—-and if that had been the extent of it, it wouldn’t have been so bad. But Paramount made the mistake of trying to turn TVH’s success into a formula for how to construct a Star Trek movie. The characters became caricatures as a result.
I’m glad that it still managed to find some fans who appreciate it. It would be really sad if it had not. But I think there’s a reason it fared so poorly compared to its 4 predecessors….It’s just not a good movie (the only one of the original films about which I feel that way).
I like the fifth movie very much. It is my favourite movie. The music score is beautiful, the interiors of the Enterprise A too. The visual effects are really very bad and for me, it´s the only negative thing on this movie. I think the movie failed only because of the bad effects. The plot was good (for me).
#182—I almost forgot.
“The ship wasn’t a lemon, it simply wasn’t ready to go out on a mission yet. The crew and the ship were put out before they were ready. Drastic situations sometimes require drastic measures. ”
A bit too often by that point—don’t ya’ think?
Virtually the same plot device had already been used twice (TMP and TWOK) in the four preceeding films—-in which the Enterprise, despite whatever handicap is conveniently allotted to it, is the only ship that can get there in time. And of course, in the other two films, the crew is still sufficiently handicapped!
By the time the same plot device was revisited in STV—-once again suggesting that a handicapped Enterprise is the only ship that can get there in time—-enough was enough for me with that.
As for playing loose with the term ‘lemon”—-if I had just got a brand new car and it had that many issues, I would be afforded protection under the law in my state. The Enterprise-A was a lemon!
#169 “I guess those fans missed the fatalistic/deterministic philosophical doctrines laced throughout the movie”
I’m a fan who says the new film has no social commentary AND I’m a fan who has growled repeatedly about what you so kindly refer to as “doctrines.” So, no.
“—-or ST09’s exploration of ‘the human condition’ through both of the film’s main characters. Either that, or those fans don’t consider a young man’s relationship to his father (alive or dead) to be very significant.”
Or we just know the difference between character relationships and social commentary. Even these writers, crudely cutting-and-pasting their script together from other people’s work (and giving it dialogue so hackish that every other line sounds like an introduction to a musical number), aren’t so clueless as to surgically remove character relationships from a basic brainless potboiler. So, no.
The Final Frontier makes Plan 9 From Outer Space look like Citizen friggin’ Kane!
#189—”I’m a fan who has growled repeatedly about what you so kindly refer to as “doctrines.” So, no.”
Then I suggest you look up fatalism and determinism. Those are philosophical doctrines. I have also noted that I don’t particularly agree with those doctrines (however, they do suit the writers’ goals), but they are— nevertheless—recognized philosophical doctrines….so….yes.
“Or we just know the difference between character relationships and social commentary.”
Um…What I said was—”…it’s funny to me that so many are accusing the new film of having no message or social commentary, etc.”
I didn’t identify that specifically as ’social commentary’ (although exploring the human condition could be viewed as such). I called it ‘exploring the human condition’. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with utilizing character relationships within a story to do so. A young man’s relationship to his father (alive or dead) is something that 48% of the World’s population can directly identify with, and something the other 52% can indirectly identify with—-so it certainly qualifies.
And for the record, I find no significant “social commentary” in TMP or TWOK either. Both films’ themes revolve around exploring “the human condition”—-’the search for meaning to one’s existence’ and ‘aging’, respectively.
Star Trek’s “social commentary” has always been quite elementary anyway. Trek was at its best when exploring the human condition. And though it isn’t spelled out for the audience within the dialogue of ST09—it’s there nonetheless, whether you choose to acknowledge it or not.
So growl away.
:)
Have a good weekend, TM readers!
188. Closettrekker – June 13, 2009
Virtually the same plot device had already been used twice (TMP and TWOK) in the four preceeding films—-in which the Enterprise, despite whatever handicap is conveniently allotted to it, is the only ship that can get there in time
- A plot point that is definitely overused, but hang on, not in this case. The Admiral confirms Kirk’s exclamation that there must be other ships available, but says he needs an experienced captain, he needs Jim Kirk.
The idea of Spock refusing to shoot Sybok is blasphemy pure and simple. Total betrayal of the character that was built up for 30 years. I have said that multiple times, and it is still true.
I would just like to go on record and say thank you to the Trekmovie staff for not slaughtering this movie like so many Trekkies do. It is by no means a terrible film.
And to reply to Harry’s above comment, Insurrection makes The Final Frontier look like Citizen frickin’ Kane!
#191: “Then I suggest you look up fatalism and determinism. Those are philosophical doctrines.”
Duh. Your generosity was attributing them as “doctrines” in the film’s context.
So, no.
“Um…What I said was—”
Oh, I noticed the straw-man addition of “message,” and I didn’t fall for it. Your response was to post 122, and I’m keeping you honest.
So, no.
#186 “I’m surprised that you don’t see the difference in a scenario where Kirk is only restored to command when the bad guy decides to give his ship back.”
Ah, but given enough time, Kirk would have gotten his ship back. Of that I have no doubt. Weren’t the Kelvans in control of the Enterprise for quite awhile? If Kirk had gotten control back before they reached the Great Barrier, the movie would’ve been over, right?
“As I added in my next post, what bothered me about the sequence was the silly gravity boots thing.”
I thought the scene was a good idea, they just didn’t have the $ or the fx in 1989 to do it right. The similar scenes where Nightcrawler saved Rogue in X2 … or Kirk saved Sulu in ST 09, were great. TFF had a great idea, it was just too early to do it right.
I had always felt that the character of Sybok would have been better served if he had not been Spock’s half-brother. A best friend? A mentor? A lunatic who attempted to portray a young Spock as the next Vulcan messiah?
I really like the idea of a best friend who at a younger age, after seeing Spock’s battles with emotions, begins to explore emotions himself and becomes “addicted” to it.
On another tangent, it could have been interesting to have the character of Sybock be a woman. Despite being betrothed to others, a young, female Sybock could have fallen madly in love with a young Spock. She would express her emotions to Spock who would of course reject them. A female Sybock at this point would feel such deep hurt that she would find it intoxicating and becomes addicted to it.
Of course, these are my own, “What If’s.” We could also wonder about the real, ‘What If’s” of the movie and how it would have turned out.
What I find most interesting about the shot of the shuttle above, is that the shot looks like it could have come out of a TOS episode. It does not look completely awful, but the lighting is too white and too bright and reminds me of special effects shots from TOS.
For me, what is most disappointing about the special effect shots in ST:V is that they are not as good as the special effects in TNG. When ST:V came out, we had already had two seasons of TNG under our belts. The effects on TNG were top notch and many times rivaled feature film effects of the day. With such a high standard set, I expected the film’s effects to be kicked up a notch from what I have seen on television. More so considering I paid to see these effects on the big screen. ST:V’s effects are sadly, at best, on par with what I could see for free on television with TNG.
#198: “I had always felt that the character of Sybok would have been better served if he had not been Spock’s half-brother. [...] I really like the idea of a best friend who at a younger age, after seeing Spock’s battles with emotions, begins to explore emotions himself and becomes “addicted” to it.”
Yeah, that’s groovy stuff! And I agree that there’s nothing wrong with the broad concept of Sybok … a well-meaning and ultimately sympathetic religious fanatic is an excellent choice for a foil … rich material waiting to be explored. Making him Spock’s half-brother just felt like a cheap contrivance to get the audience caring/curious about him … just cheap all around, and an unnecessary dilution of Spock’s own distinctions, as Closettrekker pointed out above.
I also more-or-less agree with the review that the actor did a good job with the material he was given … it’s just the material itself that didn’t hold up its end (and in this, I am reminded once again of our most recent franchise installment).
whoever said the Enterprise A was a lemon….
the Enterprise on the show was always breaking down, out of dilithium, circuits were fused, sensors inoperative, life support failing, no helm control, communications jammed, transporter down…. it always added to the suspense.
I thought the Enterprise A not being ready was one of the best surprises of the opening of ST V. Especially after the end of ST IV – another example of “(Sigh), Life is never easy.
182 you’re right about Sam… pure misdirection… the first time I saw it and her uttered the line “I lost a brother once” I thought “Sam” – then he refered to Spock. He was talking about the fact that he SPck and McCoy are family, a reference to the first campfire scene when Bones says “Other people have families” and Kirk replies “Other men Bones, not us”
As far as Starfleet’s waste of resources with 3 captains on a ship. Scotty is promoted to “Captain of Engineering” in ST III – whatever that means – -
-and there’s no reason not to accept it if you can accept that Worf is conveniently transferred from DS( to the Enterprise everytime there’s a TNG Movie
Paramount should really reconsider the special edition DVD. This film and Star Trek Nemesis would both have been classic movies if they’d been able to leave in the stuff they either couldn’t film or had to cut.
Trek V isn’t nearly as bad as people make it out to be. I believe it’s more of a series of hang ups with folks than anything else. The over all plot, Sybok being Spock’s half brother, et al. And of course those who can’t get past cheaper SFX.
But this movie had one of the warmest scenes between K/S/M ever filmed (and it must be remembered that McCoy is plastered and Kirk is certainly a couple of sheets in the wind. People do silly and yes embarrassing things when drunk and in company of loved ones. And comedy is born from embarrassment. It was a funny and then very touching scene.
And then we have McCoy’s scene with his dying father which is one of the finest moments of drama in Star Trek history.
And Lucinbill was very sympathetic and effective as Sybok.
Yes there were problems but honestly not any more than any of the Trek films.
I remember reading somewhere how the Klingons were bodybuilders but not really actors (Klaa had been an extra in Trek II and said he’d napped in teh captain’s chair during breaks). It was in Starlog or something at the time… teh lady Klingon talked about how she had to stop training her abs to get the tiny waist Shatner wanted and they’d eat cans of tuna before filming to get their muscles to look their best. I think Klaa went on to be the translator during the court scene in TUC.
Checked on IMDB. Todd Bryant, a stuntman in a TJ Hooker episode as well. Nice.
@182: “—-The goofy rock-climbing scene (embarassing)”
Interesting that people would criticize that, expecially in light of the fact that former President George Bush (Sr.) went parachuting again this week and he is 85!!!!!
@158: “Having said that, there were a few good elements in the movie. I liked that Nichelle got to sing.”
Hate to break it to you, but that was NOT Nichelle Nichols singing during the fan dance scene!!!
Nichelle had recorded tracks but someone (I sure as hell don’t know who) decided to substitute her voice with somone else’s. I read an interview with Nichelle after the movie came out and she was quite pissed–yet remained very lady-like about it. I would have raised holy hell if they had done that if I had been Nichelle.
As a 9-year old, this was the first Trek movie I saw in the theater, so it has a special place for me.
But it was bad.
The overall story wasn’t complete garbage, but there were technical flaws that bug me.
First, how many “decks” did the Trinity fly up on Spock’s boots in the turbolift? 93? That’s a darned tall ship.
Secondly, how long did it take to venture to the middle of the galaxy? With Earth’s position in the Milky Way, and say Voyager’s journey across the galaxy, I thought it would have taken a number of years to get there.
Yes, there were quality scenes, but a lot of cannon was messed up here, too.
My opinion of the movie varies according to my mood. When I first saw it, in a pre-opening day screening ( which theatres do to check film prints for flaws ), I hated it. Most of my friends who were at the screening with me were not ‘trekkies’ per se, but enjoyed Star Trek. As we left the theatre they looked at my tight-lipped, grim faced expression and said to each other.
” This is not good”. Some of them were versed enough in Trek to understand why I felt betrayed, but interestingly, even the people who weren’t Trek fans ( mostly theatre employees ) just thought it wasn’t a very good movie. In fact, the theatre manager said, as were were exiting the screening, ” Well, let’s hope we have better luck with “Batman”.
A few weeks later, another friend of mine, who is a devoted Trek fan and I took his mother ( a Star Trek devotee, and a big Shatner fan ) to see the film. He had seen the movie the week before and also was not impressed ( although he felt it was still better than TMP… he and i disagree on that point ). Neither of us was really looking forward to it, but a funny thing happened. About halfway through the movie , I leaned over to him and started to whisper to him,”Is it just me, or…”. ” Does the movie not seem so bad this time?” he finished. We were both surprised to find that we actually enjoyed the movie much more the second time we saw it, as did the full house we saw it with.
Of course, we shouldn’t have been that surprised ,since after having both seen it once, we had already gotten over our initial shock at some of the lesser / embarrassing elements of the film. We had lowered expectations and were able to relax and enjoy the things that did work.
Occasionally I will get the urge to watch this movie ( just as I will pull out “Spock’s Brain” once in a while ), and depending on my frame of mind, I will either enjoy it for what it is, or be hypercritical for what it is not. It will never be a great Trek film, but it is still part of the series…like it or not.
The one element that I will always love from this movie is Jerry Goldsmith’s theme for “The Mountain”, which is not only my favorite piece of music written for any Trek film, but is just an incredibly moving theme when listened to on it’s own. I wish the other two, more introspective arrangements of the motif ( first during the campfire scene – “I’ve always known…I’ll die alone.” and the second underscoring the “Cosmic thoughts, gentlemen?” exchange ) had been included on the soundtrack album. I’d love to have them to listen to free of sound effects and dialogue.
Wasn’t as bad as Insurrection or Nemesis…or Generations, or all of Voyager.
re: “The Fan Edit by Jack Marshall is actually really good.” (MSG 61)
Thank you, New Horizon, I didn’t know anything about that. I found it, downloaded it, and enjoyed it! It definitely makes the movie much better, albeit still not flawless.
Even before seeing that edit, I admit, unlike the other Scott here, I never hated ST V.. Despite it’s flaws, I still liked it better than ST:The Motion Picture or Nemesis. And at least as much as Undiscovered Country or Generations.
Though again, thanks to the Fan Edit lead, I discovered “Kirkless Generations” which substantially improves Generations. Ironically, perhaps, not because of the absence of Kirk per se, but because the absence of Kirk greatly reduces the nonsense of the Nexus, making the story somewhat more solid.
STV can’t be rescued with any amount of editing because Shatner, his direction, management skills, and his story are completly worthless. You can’t build a movie without a script. You could CGI a 1,000 foot tall rock monster in it and it would still be one of the worst ST movies, and movies of the 80s.
RAMA
I’ll also never forget the weekend after STTFF opened, on Saturday Night Live’s ‘Weekend Update” Dennis Miller ‘reported’ the following:
“Star trek V – The Final Frontier opened this weekend. Paramount has already announced the next movie will be Star Trek VI – The Apology”.
186. Closettrekker wrote:
Part of me thought that TVH should have been the end of the film series with that cast. I would have loved to see those characters recast and once again portrayed in their youth. However, if they weren’t going to do that, I thought that the 5th film would have been the perfect time to introduce new (and definitely younger) faces aboard the Enterprise under Kirk’s command.
In hindsight that’s what they should have done. However, when a film like TVH does as well as it did at the box office with the aging cast, how do you argue that it isn’t what the audience wants and what isn’t going to sell? Re-casting was never going to happen at that point. Besides, Shatner made his deal to direct and had a point to prove, especially since he managed to lead without throwing a single punch in TVH. So yes, I agree: almost every scene seemed forced, particularly the action & the humor. Only the drama seemed to ring true, because that is the essence of what is at the heart of Trek – the exploration of the human condition.
Also, TNG was already in the planning stages. As far as ego is concerned, Shatner and Roddenberry were well matched. This was finally Roddenberry’s chance to get it right, especially since Paramount had effectively taken him out of the loop for the films. So, introducing yet another replacement cast in the features was not going to happen either. Picard was the future of the franchise and it seemed like Shatner & the gang were going to be able to hang on long enough to make the transition.
So, while trying to expand the TOS universe to groom a new crew to take Kirk’s place and keep the franchise at the box office would have been a great idea, maybe even the same origins story we got in ST09 with Kirk & Co. teaching a new group of cadets at the academy (in much the same way ST:II began, but follow those cadets through with Kirk playing the Pike character), it was never going to happen.
I do disagree that ending the Shatner era on TVH would have been best. That film was far too silly a send-off for the crew. TUC was a much better farewell and was at its roots the best of what Star Trek had to offer, though like you I could have done without the fight scene on Rura Penthe – Shatner is simply from a different era … I blame him for not getting himself in shape to play the part properly. We are so used to actors who will take steroids, or starve themselves, or get fat to play roles. Shatner was from an era that simply did not work that hard and the modern cinema caught up with him and he refused to age gracefully as Sean Connery had done. But, had TUC followed TVH, I think it would have performed far better.
Perhaps it really did take the death of Roddenberry and the massive failure of Berman, his heir apparent, as well as a regime change to give Paramount the courage to finally do it. With no clear direction for the fanbase, it opened up the field for Paramount to do whatever they wanted, possibly for the first time in 40 years.
I will say this, from the box office evidence, ST09 seems to be performing similarly to TMP and based on current projections will gross about the same or less than it did worldwide. If one compares the adjusted gross for the other 9 films in the franchise, the other highest rated films made only 60% of TMP or less. Clearly a large part of that number represents the core fans. So if 60% of the current gross is just the fanbase, then Paramount was right to tread cautiously into these waters of change, something they were unwilling to risk with the success of a new TV series hanging in the balance in 1987.
212. RAMA – June 14, 2009
Funny. I think Shatner’s directing is one of the stronger points in this film. He filmed with a lot of creativity and scope. I think he really pulled through with the directing. His framing of many of the shots were excellent.
Despite its’ shortcomingas and compromises, this may be the trekkiest of all the films. A grand, philoshpical idea given dramatic form through some of the best portrayals of these characters(at least K, S, & Mc).
I don’t miss the attack of the rock-monsters.
It should have given Statner room to drill down deeper into the points he was trying to make, but the minor reconcilliation with the Klingons still plays into the larger mythos.
To this day, I always tear up at the music when Kirk says , “I’ve always known, I’ll die alone.”
I wish they would release that muisc.
#215
…agreed.
214:
“Perhaps it really did take the death of Roddenberry and the massive failure of Berman, his heir apparent…”
Berman was incredibly successful. It was less a massive failure, and more a lingering decay that led to VOY, the 3/4 failed TNG films, and ENT. One doesn’t spend 18 years with a series and deserve to be called a ‘failure.’
One can track the decay from DS9 season 4 to Enterprise. But Berman wouldn’t have lasted as long as he did if he wasn’t bringing in viewers. He just, at some point, lost his edge.
#196—”Your generosity was attributing them as “doctrines” in the film’s context.
So, no.”
It’s plain as day. Spock Prime even seems to take notice of it within the film. The writers do everything but spell it out (and given the fact that you’ve missed it, perhaps they should have!) for the audience—something Bob Orci has stated that he would not do.
“Oh, I noticed the straw-man addition of “message,” and I didn’t fall for it. Your response was to post 122, and I’m keeping you honest.”
Thanks, but I’m in no need of anyone to keep me honest. #122 suggested that STV has more “social message” than ST09. However, the poster fails to identify what he/she means by the term “social message”. My reponse is more broad (targeting those who, in general, assert that ST09 lacks any cultural relevance) than merely a retort to #122’s vague comment. STV makes no significant “social commentary” either.
Mankind’s tendancy to look for a ‘god’ in order to validate its existence is an exploration of the human condition—-as is ST09’s look at the phsychological importance of paternal relationships through both of the film’s two main characters.
Is it somewhat lighter/less controversial material? Sure—but it is certainly no less significant to “the human condition”.
#216
“but the minor reconcilliation with the Klingons still plays into the larger mythos.”
Very minor, given the plot of TUC. And given how quickly this film follows David’s death (8 weeks after TVH, if Kirk’s line about giving Scotty 8 weeks to get the ship in order is to be believed), it never sat well with me. Kirk chums around with Klingons like it’s no big deal so soon after David’s death, yet years later hates them so intensely he can’t even sit across a table from one?
#219
“One can track the decay from DS9 season 4 to Enterprise. But Berman wouldn’t have lasted as long as he did if he wasn’t bringing in viewers. He just, at some point, lost his edge.”
According to most everyone involved, Berman had next-to-nothing to do with DS9 after Season 1, and washed his hands of it by the time Voyager came out. I’d definitely not identify DS9 as part of Star Trek’s ‘decay’. as it went in more interesting directions than almost any other Trek series before and especially after it. In my opinion, the ‘decay’ began the minute they decided VOY should be a boring TNG clone.
#220: “It’s plain as day. Spock Prime even seems to take notice of it within the film.”
I believe you’re referring to the part where the writers ham-handedly use a character as their mouthpiece to attempt to excuse their lazy plotting. I didn’t miss it. I’m just not a … “good enough fan,” I suppose, that I can swallow that, and regurgitate it apologetically as a film espousing or exploring a “doctrine.” My hat is off to your superior skills at fannish apologetics. You picked exactly the right thread for it, that’s for sure.
“The writers do everything but spell it out”
I disagree. They do spell it out, with a big clumsy hammer that seems to be their sole writing instrument.
“Thanks, but I’m in no need of anyone to keep me honest.”
Then when you manage it on your own, you be sure and let us know.
As a popular internet fan edit of the film called ‘In Thy Image’ proved, Star Trek V suffered mostly from bad editing. Having watched this fan edit a long while back, this movie went from dead last of the 6 original cast films to suddenly 3rd or 4th best of the lot. It was that damn good in my opinion and arguably much closer in feel to an actual Star Trek episode than any of the other films. It also offered a glimpse of the never produced Star Trek Phase II series which never went to full production as this script was adapted from that 2nd series pilot.
Many of the clumsy gags are cutout, the 79 deck turbo-shaft scene…. gone. ANY and ALL reference to Sybok being Spocks half brother…. gone, the action is better paced throughout too. If you can find it, I highly reccomend a viewing. I found it in one of the Trek newsgroups.
20 years already? Damn.
I have to admit, for all it’s faults, I like this film…
Sadly, to my mind, William Shatner stopped playing James Kirk after TVH:STIV. In TFF in particular, it appears that he’s simply playing William Shatner. I quite like the idea that the whole of TFF is an alcohol induced dream round the campfire!
…too many posts to read… brain going into overload…
Ok, say what you will about Star Trek V, at least it is Star Trek, unlike a certain extended lousy television episode of TNG that was put onto the silver screen in 1998 (or what I call a lousy first attempt at a 9th Star Trek movie, which would make Nemesis a better second attempt at a 9th Star Trek movie, and thus ST09 would be the 10th movie and all is well with the even/odd rule!) Star Trek IX Take 1 – Rejection… er Insurrection had no redeeming value, served no purpose, and had no Star Trek in it.
Oh, and let’s not forget that this year is the 25th anniversary of Star Trek III.
I agree that this is the “worst” of the origional series films, but even then the “worst” of Trek is usually better than the average film.
This was not a great Trek movie, but after the garbage that was “The Voyage Home” nearly anything that tried to get back to being Trek was welcomed.
Excellent decision to bring back Goldsmith for the score. That was the best thing about this movie.
The SPFX were indeed pretty bad. Wish the request to have them redone was honored.
I loved that the “trinity” was honored. It was dearly missed in ST:IV. And nice to see the characters behave like themselves… Makes one wonder what drugs they were on when they made IV.
The story was indeed kind of flat. And while I agree with Nimoy and Kelly that Spock and Bones would never betray Kirk, I feel the others wouldn’t have either. Certain plot points I had issues with. But it did have its moments. And was nice to see Trek come back and improve after the worst Trek film ever could have killed the franchise.
#230
Wow. I think you’ll find you’re in the extreme minority with regard to your opinion on TVH. The biggest money maker nearly ‘killed the franchise’? What drugs might you be sampling? ;)
219. AJ wrote: Berman was incredibly successful. One doesn’t spend 18 years with a series and deserve to be called a ‘failure.’
I used the term “massive failure” in the sense that Trek never catapulted the franchise into the same kind of financial success TOS did at the box office or pulled the same kind of ratings that equalled top 10 performers on a major 3 network at the time. In particular, after two of the 4 films were box office flops, and 2 of his 4 series were flops. That’s a 50% success rate. But it’s also a 50% failure rate. Moreover, Nemesis and Enterprise were like bombs exploding they performed so poorly and all but killed the franchise. Massive. He’s a failure in the sense that he didn’t know when to walk away or re-tool and Paramount is equally guilty for not taking him to task. But the franchise was on auto-pilot and they all nearly let it crash despite the warning lights flashing all over the cockpit.
In that sense Abrams was a failure with ABC. That’s why his TV deal may be at Warner Bros. now, producing a show for FOX instead of the big 3. Alias quickly dropped from a top rated show to one that only Fox and the CW would envy. Lost has likewise dropped half it’s audience in the same amount of time. Combined with other critical and ratings failed series (six degrees, what about brian, the catch, even Felicity which dropped by half in the second season and never recovered), he’s probably better off moving into one-off features where he seems to excel at great individual ideas, rather than long-term execution.
#227: “Sadly, to my mind, William Shatner stopped playing James Kirk after TVH:STIV. In TFF in particular, it appears that he’s simply playing William Shatner.”
I agree with this, alas.
Other than the ridiculously poor scientific concepts and continuity issues, ST V is a greatly enjoyable movie. I’ve said many times, it was the first Trek film I watched over and over again, and really hooked me on the franchise. If I see it on Cable, I immediately drop whatever else is on and watch it.
My only lament is that Shatner was not allowed to do CGI fixes to the film. I think if nothing else, that J.J. Abrams could have done a little pulling at Paramount and given Bill the chance recently.
The “poor SFX” has nothing to do with why I despise this movie, more than the other mostly harmless TNG movies that didn’t mean anything in the grand scheme of things., This movie has Spock mutiny against his captain, the Enterprise getting captured by a bunch of rock shooting idiots and a plot line that you knew wasn’t going to payoff. Those who claim that people don’t like V because of the poor SFX really miss the point. Shatner used the poor SFX as an excuse on why the movie wasn’t his vision. Guess what he was the director and you basically allocate your resources in the manner, the poor SFX was Shatner’s fault. The Kirk from the TOS, or even Trek III, would have ordered that cargo bay to be gassed or something else. Instead he gimply allows himself to be captured, maybe because he was dumbfounded by the mutiny of Spock.
Looking back on it, I really think Trek V really burned a lot of bridges with the mainstream and regelated 90’s trek into a niche market. The niche market – and the constant need to rehash every fan favorite – is what killed Trek until this year.
any Trek V nods in the new film ythink?
-Kirk bashing his head
-Spock and Uhura
-Kirk climbing the ice
hmmm…pretty vauge i know
#231—”I think you’ll find you’re in the extreme minority with regard to your opinion on TVH. The biggest money maker nearly ‘killed the franchise’? What drugs might you be sampling? ;)”
Lol. Probably LDS.
#206—”Interesting that people would criticize that, expecially in light of the fact that former President George Bush (Sr.) went parachuting again this week and he is 85!!!!!”
Once again, my problem was never with the notion that Jim Kirk would be out climbing a rock. I just thought that the whole “rocket boots” thing and the subsequent rescue was ‘goofy’—-and that’s just an opinion.
#214—”Re-casting was never going to happen at that point. ”
Oh, I agree that it was an unlikely scenario, which is why I pointed out that “what I expected” and what I wanted were two very different things.
#223—”Then when you manage it on your own, you be sure and let us know.”
You are always free to disagree with my opinions, but the suggestion that I have ever been “dishonest” in any discussion on these threads is uncalled for. It simply hasn’t happened. And your constant sarcasm is a poor substitute for reason.
People need to get over this rumoured intention of Spock and McCoy mutinying against Kirk in the original story. That was never the case.
Shatner’s original idea was that Kirk, Spock and McCoy fall out, disagreeing about Sybok. It was supposed to be an argument which would stretch their friendship to the limits and ultimately bring them closer together as they fight their way back across the River Styx while Satan and his fallen angels try to drag them into Hell.
In what’s left of the original plotline, the remark ‘I lost a brother once’ resonated to me that Kirk lost Sam and gained a new brother in Spock.
Just finished watching it. You know, for all its flaws it does have its charms. It was what it was, and the fact that it still holds some entertainment value says something about the built-in strength of Trek.
#241—”In what’s left of the original plotline, the remark ‘I lost a brother once’ resonated to me that Kirk lost Sam and gained a new brother in Spock.”
That might have worked if he had said something like “Yes…I lost a brother once. I was lucky to get one back.”
But he didn’t.
What he did say was—”Yes… I lost a brother once. I was lucky I got him back.”
That’s a completely different statement. It’s quite clear that he’s talking about Spock the whole time. Either Shatner failed to recall that Kirk lost a brother in “Operation: Annihilate!”, or Shatner believed that Sam’s memory wasn’t worth much to the character at all by that point. I think it was the former.
#243…You’re thinking WAY too hard about that line of dialogue, Closet. For many of us, it worked just fine.
#244—”You’re thinking WAY too hard about that line of dialogue, Closet. ”
Prime, I think you’re overestimating the amount of thought necessary to see the obvious difference in intent.
“For many of us, it worked just fine.”
I hear ya’. And of course, that by itself wouldn’t be a big deal to me either. In fact, if you could only take away the Sybok issue (my pain)—-STV wouldn’t bug me half as much as it does.
I see. So instead of TGTT, it would only be the small pellet circling the drain, eh? ;-)
#241
“People need to get over this rumoured intention of Spock and McCoy mutinying against Kirk in the original story. That was never the case.”
You’ll have to take that up with Shatner then, as in Star Trek Movie Memories he makes it clear the intention WAS for Bones & Spock to join Sybok against Kirk, and it was only changed after Leonard flat out refused to play it, with Dee joining him.
“Shatner’s original idea was that Kirk, Spock and McCoy fall out, disagreeing about Sybok. It was supposed to be an argument which would stretch their friendship to the limits and ultimately bring them closer together as they fight their way back across the River Styx while Satan and his fallen angels try to drag them into Hell.”
And thank god we never got that, because it very well might have been more unintentionally comical than what ended up being shot! :)
“In what’s left of the original plotline, the remark ‘I lost a brother once’ resonated to me that Kirk lost Sam and gained a new brother in Spock.”
That never came across to me. In fact, given the looks of surprise on Spock & McCoy’s faces, it seems far more likely he’s referring to Spock’s death and resurrection, not losing Sam then gaining Spock. Otherwise, they were both present when Kirk found Sam dead, and they shouldn’t have found the remark surprising in the least.