Is Wrath of Khan Overrated - Page 8

Use of Time · September 5 2012, 06:27 PM

CorporalClegg wrote:

Use of Time wrote:

What seperates Kahn's villian character to others is simply the performance of Montalban. It was flawless.

It was hardly flawless.

It was one huge slice of ham (even bigger than Shatner's) smothered in glaze. Thing about ham smothered in glaze is it's really effing tasty.

From a technical, "craft" standpoint, Hardy, McDowell, and Lloyd all did a better job. Unfortunately, Hardy's script was shit, McDowell's character was uninteresting, and Lloyd had certain preconceptions hanging over his head that made it hard for people to take him seriously.

You can even give Krige some merit in that she was actually able to whittle some nuance into her character, which is really something all the other actors failed to do. This is especially significant because her character was so one dimensional.

NrobbieC wrote:

I think your reaching a little to find similarities in FC, I just don't see it.

Bill is just reaching.

The "Star Trek film formula" has nothing to do with TWOK--it was just the first in the franchise to use it. The "intrepid adventures square off against uber evil set on destruction and revenge" has been the industry standard for genre films for 40 years. It was conceived and put into play years before TWOK. Paramount was (and has) simply towing the line.

Berman's endless need to emulate TWOK as answer to that says a lot more about him than it does the film.

I'll accept that McDowell, Hardy and Lloyd did a better job but you are going to have to do better than just telling me they did. Don't forget that the acting style of 1982 is drastically different than 1994 and 2003. I don't think that Lloyd did anything that could possibly outshine Kahn with his portrayel of Kruge. He was adaquete but ultimately forgettable.

I think McDowell's character was hindered by the writing. He would have been much more of a sympathetic character had he not come across as such an asshole when calling Geordi "not normal." The audience never really had a need to understand his motivation, he was simply a selfish bad guy.

gottacook · September 6 2012, 01:23 AM

TWoK has remained popular in part because of the thirty-year-old yet still radiant glory of its theatrical release. I know this (or at least suspect it) because I was among the first-night audience, and it was totally involving, from the cheer that went up at the first notes of the Courage fanfare to the Nimoy voice-over at the end (which told us that Spock could never really be permanently dead).

For the fans, no other Trek movie had such a welcome theatrical run, and the regard in which TWoK is still held today depends in part on this.

EDIT: Jeez, I'm still only a lieutenant commander?!

BillJ · September 6 2012, 01:37 AM

gottacook wrote:

EDIT: Jeez, I'm still only a lieutenant commander?!

You got a long way to go...

AllStarEntprise · September 29 2012, 08:04 AM

With the reveal of the title of "Into Darkness", does anyone else fell that JJ is going to make his second Trek film the WOK of his franchise? We know Benedict Cumberbatch isn't playing Khan since it's constantly being denied that he is. However with a title like "Into Darkness" it seems like JJ is attempting to make a correlation with the Trek franchises most renowned film.

Now one could argue that Star Trek XI has more in common with TWOK, but who is to say JJ won't lift for ideas from TWOK and possibly "Empire Strikes Back" for his second space opera film.

Xhiandra · September 29 2012, 11:45 PM

Yes, I do think so.
It's not as stupid as The Voyage Home, Generations or AbramsStarWars, not as messy and silly as Insurrection, not as amateurish as TFF, not as boring as TMP and TSFS, but it doesn't approach the quality of First Contact, The Undiscovered Country or even (and I'm going to get doused in gasoline for daring these words*) Nemesis.

I just don't get this movie's appeal:
- the creatures manipulating Chekov&that other guy are such a cliché. And frankly, one too gory for Trek (same two reasons I hated "TNG: Conspiracy").
- as someone alluded to, Khan's "genius" is oft-mentionned by never displayed. In fact, he seems a simpleton all things considered. He's all bravado, no brains from what we see. The whole "Khan is smarter, but Kirk is more experienced/more in control of his emotions" theme is rather ruined by that element.
- Khan's last words are brilliant, but they're from Moby Dick...
- Visually, the final confrontation is pretty bad, and I don't mean the effects (they've not aged that bad, especially compared to TFF). The whole thing about the Enterprise moving vertically as if a submarine doesn't make sense on any level.

*then again, not liking AbramsStarWars probably qualify me for the kerosene already. Oh, well, the fire god taketh and the fire god taketh.

horatio83 · September 30 2012, 12:15 AM

It is a good movie but it is not Meyer's best and certainly not the best Trek movie. Sure, it is thematically rich but cinematically it is weaker than TMP and TFF. When you watch it today it has pretty strong 'eighties trash' vibes.

BillJ · September 30 2012, 02:07 AM

Xhiandra wrote:

I just don't get this movie's appeal:
- the creatures manipulating Chekov&that other guy are such a cliché. And frankly, one too gory for Trek (same two reasons I hated "TNG: Conspiracy").

Umm... First Contact is probably the goriest of the Trek films.

Worf chopping off a Borg arm, watching the folks turn from human to zombie, watching the one guy who had his arm cut off getting a new appendage and watching the Borg flesh melt away when the chemicals are released in Engineering then Picard snapping the neck of what was left of the Borg Queen.

Might want to watch it again...

BillJ · September 30 2012, 02:09 AM

horatio83 wrote:

When you watch it today it has pretty strong 'eighties trash' vibes.

What does this even mean?

CorporalClegg · October 1 2012, 05:34 AM

Xhiandra wrote:

Yes, I do think so.
It's not as stupid as The Voyage Home, Generations or AbramsStarWars, not as messy and silly as Insurrection, not as amateurish as TFF, not as boring as TMP and TSFS, but it doesn't approach the quality of First Contact, The Undiscovered Country or even (and I'm going to get doused in gasoline for daring these words*) Nemesis.

I just don't get this movie's appeal:
- the creatures manipulating Chekov&that other guy are such a cliché. And frankly, one too gory for Trek (same two reasons I hated "TNG: Conspiracy").
- as someone alluded to, Khan's "genius" is oft-mentionned by never displayed. In fact, he seems a simpleton all things considered. He's all bravado, no brains from what we see. The whole "Khan is smarter, but Kirk is more experienced/more in control of his emotions" theme is rather ruined by that element.
- Khan's last words are brilliant, but they're from Moby Dick...
- Visually, the final confrontation is pretty bad, and I don't mean the effects (they've not aged that bad, especially compared to TFF). The whole thing about the Enterprise moving vertically as if a submarine doesn't make sense on any level.

*then again, not liking AbramsStarWars probably qualify me for the kerosene already. Oh, well, the fire god taketh and the fire god taketh.

I like you.

ssosmcin · October 1 2012, 08:56 PM

"Is Wrath of Khan Overrated?"

Nope.

mos6507 · October 8 2012, 11:00 PM

Gee, this thread is all over the map.

For the record, Khan was the first VHS tape I ever bought circa 1983 or so and I practically wore it out, so I've got strong opinions about it. I have a hard time watching it since I've watched it too much and have almost every frame and every beat of the soundtrack memorized, but I still hold it in high regard.

As a kid who say TMP at age 9 and Khan at age 12, the reason Khan matters so much is that it restored something to Trek that was lacking in TMP.

You know what that is???

FUN!

What makes Khan fun? It's things like the turbolift doors opening and McCoy saying "Who's holding up the damn elevator?...Did she change her hairstyle???" Absolute perfect comedic delivery. It's like watching an Olympic athlete nail a 10. The characters were spot-on, exactly the way we wanted them to be.

And there's a problem with the MacGuffin? Do you have a problem with the Ark in Raiders? The Genesis device and the Ark in Raiders are really not that different as a MacGuffin. Both films are action romps, and both very successful and well-remembered. So why all the hate lavished at Khan? The film came out at a time when it had to compete with E.T. and Poltergeist and it did pretty well while single-handedly saving the franchise. Despite ILM, it did it on mostly a shoestring. It has a very TV or Star Wars: ANH ricketyness despite the blockbuster status it now has. Montalban shed his Mr. Roarke typecasting which was no minor accomplishment at the height of Fantasy Island. Aside from "Khaaan!" Shatner gave his most buttoned-up performance as a by-the-book-Admiral-with-a-wild-streak Kirk. Compare that to Shatner mostly just playing himself in Trek IV (effectively--for laughs) and V (ineffectively). Give this film credit where credit is due.

Trek doesn't have to be just one thing. If you're in the mood for the cerebral, Trek's got you covered. Heck, The Cage was rejected for being too cerebral, and TMP kind of mirrored the initial commercial issue with Gene's way of thinking. But TMP IS a valid expression of Trek, just as Montalban 'overacting' and Shatner screaming 'Khaaaan!' is perfectly valid, just as a flat-out comedy ala Voyage Home was perfectly valid. It's the combination of all of these things that makes the Trek franchise as rich as it is.

Sometimes fans are so fickle that the only thing they truly enjoy is nit-picking the stuff they say they love. Seriously...

Grant · October 8 2012, 11:20 PM

Mr. Spook wrote:

"Is Wrath of Khan Overrated?"

Nope.

Sums it up.

But alas, bad taste is everywhere.

Grant · October 8 2012, 11:22 PM

mos6507, that's the long version of the truth about the movie. 100% agree.

Mr. SPOCK did the short version very well.

gottacook · October 8 2012, 11:35 PM

Yes, but Kirk screamed "Khaann!" as part of the fake-out of Khan; he screamed as if truly marooned underground, despite knowing that he was coming up on his phone call with Spock at the 2-hour mark.

I agree, though, with mos6507 that TWoK is Shatner's best performance as Kirk among the seven movies.

TWoK was the first VHS tape that a lot of people bought, because it was the first one with a "reasonable" price; for years afterward, some VHS movies remained costly (often $70-80). TWoK was the pioneer low-priced tape (about $40) and a successful gamble for Paramount.

Revolution · October 9 2012, 02:29 PM

No, I do not believe so. I adore TWOK, I think it's near on perfect. Very clever, engaging and with a great 'on screen' dynamic between the protagonist and antagonist.

And of course, I instantly picked up on it as my favourite as a kid because of the action, which I still think is pretty thrilling. Especially in the first Reliant/Enterprise meeting, and all the scenes in the destroyed engineering block, scrambling under doors and smoke and fire. Brilliant.

September 6 2012, 01:23 AM	#107
gottacook Commander Location: Maryland	Re: Is Wrath of Khan Overrated TWoK has remained popular in part because of the thirty-year-old yet still radiant glory of its theatrical release. I know this (or at least suspect it) because I was among the first-night audience, and it was totally involving, from the cheer that went up at the first notes of the Courage fanfare to the Nimoy voice-over at the end (which told us that Spock could never really be permanently dead). For the fans, no other Trek movie had such a welcome theatrical run, and the regard in which TWoK is still held today depends in part on this. EDIT: Jeez, I'm still only a lieutenant commander?!

September 29 2012, 08:04 AM	#109
AllStarEntprise Commander	Re: Is Wrath of Khan Overrated With the reveal of the title of "Into Darkness", does anyone else fell that JJ is going to make his second Trek film the WOK of his franchise? We know Benedict Cumberbatch isn't playing Khan since it's constantly being denied that he is. However with a title like "Into Darkness" it seems like JJ is attempting to make a correlation with the Trek franchises most renowned film. Now one could argue that Star Trek XI has more in common with TWOK, but who is to say JJ won't lift for ideas from TWOK and possibly "Empire Strikes Back" for his second space opera film.

September 29 2012, 11:45 PM	#110
Xhiandra Lieutenant Commander	Re: Is Wrath of Khan Overrated Yes, I do think so. It's not as stupid as The Voyage Home, Generations or AbramsStarWars, not as messy and silly as Insurrection, not as amateurish as TFF, not as boring as TMP and TSFS, but it doesn't approach the quality of First Contact, The Undiscovered Country or even (and I'm going to get doused in gasoline for daring these words) Nemesis. I just don't get this movie's appeal: - the creatures manipulating Chekov&that other guy are such a cliché. And frankly, one too gory for Trek (same two reasons I hated "TNG: Conspiracy"). - as someone alluded to, Khan's "genius" is oft-mentionned by never displayed. In fact, he seems a simpleton all things considered. He's all bravado, no brains from what we see. The whole "Khan is smarter, but Kirk is more experienced/more in control of his emotions" theme is rather ruined by that element. - Khan's last words are brilliant, but they're from Moby Dick... - Visually, the final confrontation is pretty bad, and I don't mean the effects (they've not aged that bad, especially compared to TFF). The whole thing about the Enterprise moving vertically as if a submarine doesn't make sense on any level. then again, not liking AbramsStarWars probably qualify me for the kerosene already. Oh, well, the fire god taketh and the fire god taketh.

September 30 2012, 12:15 AM	#111
horatio83 Commodore	Re: Is Wrath of Khan Overrated It is a good movie but it is not Meyer's best and certainly not the best Trek movie. Sure, it is thematically rich but cinematically it is weaker than TMP and TFF. When you watch it today it has pretty strong 'eighties trash' vibes. __________________ The illegal we do immediately; the unconstitutional takes a little longer. - former US Secretary of State and unconvicted war criminal Henry Kissinger

October 1 2012, 08:56 PM	#115
ssosmcin Commodore Location: New Yawk	Re: Is Wrath of Khan Overrated "Is Wrath of Khan Overrated?" Nope. __________________ "Tranya is people!"

STAR TREK

CSI

ABOUT US

October 8 2012, 11:00 PM	#116
mos6507 Commander	Re: Is Wrath of Khan Overrated Gee, this thread is all over the map. For the record, Khan was the first VHS tape I ever bought circa 1983 or so and I practically wore it out, so I've got strong opinions about it. I have a hard time watching it since I've watched it too much and have almost every frame and every beat of the soundtrack memorized, but I still hold it in high regard. As a kid who say TMP at age 9 and Khan at age 12, the reason Khan matters so much is that it restored something to Trek that was lacking in TMP. You know what that is??? FUN! What makes Khan fun? It's things like the turbolift doors opening and McCoy saying "Who's holding up the damn elevator?...Did she change her hairstyle???" Absolute perfect comedic delivery. It's like watching an Olympic athlete nail a 10. The characters were spot-on, exactly the way we wanted them to be. And there's a problem with the MacGuffin? Do you have a problem with the Ark in Raiders? The Genesis device and the Ark in Raiders are really not that different as a MacGuffin. Both films are action romps, and both very successful and well-remembered. So why all the hate lavished at Khan? The film came out at a time when it had to compete with E.T. and Poltergeist and it did pretty well while single-handedly saving the franchise. Despite ILM, it did it on mostly a shoestring. It has a very TV or Star Wars: ANH ricketyness despite the blockbuster status it now has. Montalban shed his Mr. Roarke typecasting which was no minor accomplishment at the height of Fantasy Island. Aside from "Khaaan!" Shatner gave his most buttoned-up performance as a by-the-book-Admiral-with-a-wild-streak Kirk. Compare that to Shatner mostly just playing himself in Trek IV (effectively--for laughs) and V (ineffectively). Give this film credit where credit is due. Trek doesn't have to be just one thing. If you're in the mood for the cerebral, Trek's got you covered. Heck, The Cage was rejected for being too cerebral, and TMP kind of mirrored the initial commercial issue with Gene's way of thinking. But TMP IS a valid expression of Trek, just as Montalban 'overacting' and Shatner screaming 'Khaaaan!' is perfectly valid, just as a flat-out comedy ala Voyage Home was perfectly valid. It's the combination of all of these things that makes the Trek franchise as rich as it is. Sometimes fans are so fickle that the only thing they truly enjoy is nit-picking the stuff they say they love. Seriously...

October 8 2012, 11:22 PM	#118
Grant Fleet Captain	Re: Is Wrath of Khan Overrated mos6507, that's the long version of the truth about the movie. 100% agree. Mr. SPOCK did the short version very well.

October 8 2012, 11:35 PM	#119
gottacook Commander Location: Maryland	Re: Is Wrath of Khan Overrated Yes, but Kirk screamed "Khaann!" as part of the fake-out of Khan; he screamed as if truly marooned underground, despite knowing that he was coming up on his phone call with Spock at the 2-hour mark. I agree, though, with mos6507 that TWoK is Shatner's best performance as Kirk among the seven movies. TWoK was the first VHS tape that a lot of people bought, because it was the first one with a "reasonable" price; for years afterward, some VHS movies remained costly (often $70-80). TWoK was the pioneer low-priced tape (about $40) and a successful gamble for Paramount.

October 9 2012, 02:29 PM	#120
Revolution Ensign	Re: Is Wrath of Khan Overrated No, I do not believe so. I adore TWOK, I think it's near on perfect. Very clever, engaging and with a great 'on screen' dynamic between the protagonist and antagonist. And of course, I instantly picked up on it as my favourite as a kid because of the action, which I still think is pretty thrilling. Especially in the first Reliant/Enterprise meeting, and all the scenes in the destroyed engineering block, scrambling under doors and smoke and fire. Brilliant.