# was just watching "star trek V" on sat....



## jrjcd (Apr 23, 2002)

....and regardless of the naysayers, there's a LOT i like about this film(and a lot i don't like, for sure)....

weak spots-The "god of shakaree" is lame to the extreme, and would have been much better utilized if it turned out to be gary mitchell, the antigonist from the second pilot...scotty walking into the low hanging beam and the subsequent come on by uhura in sickbay-what's THAT all about?????....the gag about chekov and sulu getting lost in the woods(the navigator and the pilot)...the obvious lack of funds to have a slam bang end on the planet...spock's "older" half brother-i guess full vulcan genes age better than the half variety, as nimoy is obviously much older than laurence luckenbill....

but what i REALLY like about this film:

aside from the brother aspect, i really enjoy luckenbill's performance as sybok-probably some of his best work in an illustrious career...

the camaradirie and affection presented by all the primary ST characters and primarily between spock, mccoy, and kirk is the best in any of the films...

i like the fact that, except for a passing reference at the end of the film, it doesn't play like an extended sequal to star trek II...

it is the most star trekish(i say that in the most positive sense) of all the films, and if one gets past whatever baggage they might have about william shatner, about three fourths of a well directed film-and the codas to the film actually work for me-i can see these guys hanging together off the ship...

we actually see more of the enterprise in the film than any other-it is actually a well designed film...

the director shatner pulls out fine performances from all his actors and seems to be able to reign in the worst aspects of shatner the actor-shatner the director even seems more "giving" of time to his fellow mates than shatner the actor seems to be able to...

and no-it's not the best trek film, but it's just not as bad as it's reputation carries...

then again, "on her majesty's secret service" is my favorite bond, so what do i know...lol


----------



## TNGTony (Mar 23, 2002)

The only thing that sticks in my head about this movie is McCoy, Spock and Kirk singing "Row, Row, Row Your Boat" around the campfire. It makes me CRINGE just thinking about it.

Then if I try to remember the movie some more (I have it blocked from memory) Kirk free-climbing El Capitan come to mind and I CRINGE some more.

Then I remember Spock's anti-grav boots and shooting up the turbolift with the numbers on the doors GOING UP!!!! Deck 1 (not 78) is where the bridge is and the bridge is on top of the ship. Okay, a dweebism here.

Then...the increadibly BAD plot-line comes to mind....and that is where I remember why I try to block that film from memory. I beleive "Nemisis" will be the next movie I block out. 

And I've yet to see "On Her Majesty's Secret Service". Not because I don't want to...I haven't had the oportunity. 

See ya
Tony


----------



## gcutler (Mar 23, 2002)

The humor that existed in "ST4:The Voyage Home" seemed to me to be genuine, the humor in "ST5:Should Have Let Nimoy Direct It" seemed forced at almost every turn.


----------



## Chris Blount (Jun 22, 2001)

I enjoyed Star Trek V. True, it wasn't the best Star Trek movie but it marked the return of Jerry Goldsmith's music to the franchise (I'm a big film score fan). Also, the book has much more information that was left out of the movie for cost reasons. The studio just didn't want to give Shatner enough money to make the movie he wanted to make so I don't fully blame Shatner for the failure of the movie. 

I do agree with jrjcd on some of his points. The movie was well designed and the main character interaction was quite fun. The special effects were also top notch for the time.

In short, I wouldn't come down too hard on ST V. There are a lot worse movies.


----------



## djlong (Jul 8, 2002)

It had ONE redeeming bit..

It had the line:

"What does God need with a starship?"


----------



## jrjcd (Apr 23, 2002)

"you doubt me TOOOOOOO?".....


----------



## cnsf (Jun 6, 2002)

Not to harp on the "bad" aspects of the film, but it was quite a quick trip to the end of the galaxy.

Shatner's personality came through in the direction, rushed and fragmented. The movie really lacked focus and tried to cram in too much in too little time.

The main characters' flashbacks were a little bit of a surprise too. Where did the McCoy and his dad issue come from? 

And what was with the overdubbing of the Romulan ambassdor's voice? Seemed out of sync the entire movie. David Warner was wasted. Good thing he came back in VI.


----------



## jrjcd (Apr 23, 2002)

like i said-it's certainly not the best trek film-it's just not as bad as people claim it to be...

btw-for purists, the great barrier in the series was at the outskirts of known space, whereas for some reason, in ST V, it appears to be at the centre of the universe(whereever THAT is???)


----------



## waydwolf (Feb 2, 2003)

Star Trek has to be taken with a dose of creative fill-in-the-blanks self-interpretation based on other materials within the millieu.

For instance, they establish that the Cytherians exist near the center of Earth's galaxy in ST:TNG. It's an astronomical fact that the oldest stars and thus systems are found the closer you get to the center of the galaxy. Not too hard to suppose that an advanced alien race wishing no contact with the lesser advanced might create a barrier to keep people away as well as possibly exiling something they didn't want found to an otherwise dead world within that area where it was both no longer a nuisance as well as close enough to keep watch on. It could plausibly have leaked enough info telepathically to trick the lessers from the younger area of the galaxy into thinking it was the supreme being and in need of getting to.

Look at just about everyone to play a Vulcan. They damn near all look related. Even without makeup Mark Leonard and Leonard Nimoy looked close enough to buy as father and son. Now look at Sybok. Nothing like the other Vulcans beyond the ears. Even Tuvok on ST:V looked more Vulcan. Easy enough to suspend disbelief and accept him being a half-breed. Also, the Vulcans are a joyless lot and that does create worry lines they say and Vulcans all seem to have them other than the resident sexpot on Enterprise. Sybok on the other hand is jovial and has the look of a middle aged good natured guy.

The pass at Scotty was priceless and seemed to be the otherwise sedate and reserved Uhura freed of her usual Starfleet encouraged control and being more passionate. Nichelle Nichols is certainly not a passionless woman and she came off more as a human than the flesh android she seems to play the rest of the time. Her almost nude dance was priceless and she has frequently sung at conventions when they have star cabarets.

The getting lost was natural. Chekov and Sulu are trained for space which means three co-ordinate systems, not the east-west and elevation of a planet's surface which is a wholly different thing. Like asking a Navy navigator to be perfectly at home in the Adirondacks on sight and dead reckoning during the day without the stars they're trained to use at sea when needed(one of the reasons mankind kept to coasts for so long instead of open ocean was need to stay in sight of certain constellations).

I for one liked it. It was pleasantly goofy.


----------

