RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 135,693
Posts: 5,213,485
Members: 24,208
Currently online: 740
Newest member: meshman63


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek Movies > Star Trek Movies I-X

Star Trek Movies I-X Discuss the first ten big screen outings in this forum!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old August 20 2013, 05:32 AM   #16
Dukhat
Commodore
 
Dukhat's Avatar
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
Re: What happened to Star Trek III: TSFS?

Of all the Trek films, there are only four that I could watch over and over again without getting tired of them: STII, STIII, STIV, and Star Trek (2009). And if I had to choose just one of those four, I'd choose STIII.
__________________
“Don’t believe everything you read on the internet.”
– Benjamin Franklin
Dukhat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 21 2013, 10:42 PM   #17
xvicente
Commander
 
xvicente's Avatar
 
Re: What happened to Star Trek III: TSFS?

has something happened?
__________________
-----------------------------------------------------------

I am here to talk about Star Trek and chew bubble gum.
and I'm all outta bubble gum.
xvicente is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 26 2013, 12:28 AM   #18
Mr_Homn
Captain
 
Mr_Homn's Avatar
 
Re: What happened to Star Trek III: TSFS?

Dukhat wrote: View Post
Of all the Trek films, there are only four that I could watch over and over again without getting tired of them: STII, STIII, STIV, and Star Trek (2009). And if I had to choose just one of those four, I'd choose STIII.
I can't agree about ST2009, but ST2, ST3, and ST4 are the original trilogy of the Star Trek universe. I agree they are the best 3 star trek movies, taken as a whole. I never get tired of them either. Star Trek 2 is the most serious, Star Trek 4 is the most light hearted, and Star Trek 3 is the most well rounded IMO. It has a great balance of fun and drama. Star Trek 2, having the more skilled director, definitely feels the most "cinematic" though.
__________________
"Thank you.. for the drinks."
Mr_Homn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 28 2013, 01:55 PM   #19
Robert Comsol
Commodore
 
Robert Comsol's Avatar
 
Location: USS Berlin
Re: What happened to Star Trek III: TSFS?

Because of several and parallel related Trek Tech threads, I rewatched parts of ST III.

IMHO, the film is a mixed bag. - SPOILER / SPOILING ALERT -

It has great VFX cinematography and the whole "Escape from Frisco" sequence is a ST milestone: fast paced, excellently edited with witty dialogue and memorable lines (which I like to quote up to this day). I never get tired of seeing it.

Where the film sucks is the entire Klingon storyline which has more plot holes than ST VI (which I nevertheless enjoy watching because it has many of the elements that made the "Escape from Frisco" sequence so great).

Their and in particular Kruge's portrayal was grotesque and goofy.
  • He kills Valkris for no good reason, especially since she is apparently devoted and loyal to him.
  • He kills his gunner for screwing up and almost shot Torg as if he had an abundance of crew members.
  • He desperately wants to learn the secrets of Genesis but doesn't mind killing the very scientist who has the answers he's looking for (or is he really that stupid assuming that Kirk has all the answers?) - Kill first and ask questions later?
  • He thinks he can take over a Federation starship with full crew with only a handful of people (who's piloting the Klingon Bird of Prey next?)
  • And most of all: What did he actually expect Kirk to do when he ordered him several times "to hand over Genesis". Kirk didn't even flash a data device or anything like that as bait. Did Kruge expect Kirk to pull the Genesis Device out of his pocket Stanley Ipkiss (The Mask) style?!?
He could have learned a couple of lessons from Kirk's previous antagonist Khan: First let me see and evaluate the data and then I decide what to do next. As a follow-up antagonist the character of Kruge was a dismal failure, IMO.

And the whole thing with Spock's soul (despite many great moments revolving around "Dr. McSpock") was pitiful mumbojumbo. As an automaton repairing the Enterprise's main energizer in ST II I would have bought the concept. But this Spock automaton apparently had empathy and memories which I think belongs to the soul. Better not to try to make sense of it and rather let it be forgotten.

And I almost forgot: So Dr. Carol Marcus, concerned about microscopic lifeforms in ST II, was essentially a fraud and the whole Genesis stuff was a hoax because they used unstable matter? Here the subsequent movie obviously created a twist at the expense of previously introduced characters and what the screenplay writers had tried to establish in ST II.

The film had good entertainment value, but nothing more and nothing less, IMHO.

Bob
__________________
"The first duty of every Starfleet officer is to the truth" Jean-Luc Picard
"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."
Albert Einstein

Last edited by Robert Comsol; August 28 2013 at 02:12 PM. Reason: Genesis stuff
Robert Comsol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 28 2013, 02:02 PM   #20
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: What happened to Star Trek III: TSFS?

I always felt that the production design of TSFS was intentionally closer to the style of TOS. Brighter sets, more colorful sets, the artificial studio landscapes, all that. The fight between Kirk and Kruge felt so 60s, it only lacked the Amok Time fight music.
__________________
lol
l
/\
JarodRussell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 28 2013, 03:28 PM   #21
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: What happened to Star Trek III: TSFS?

Robert Comsol wrote: View Post
And I almost forgot: So Dr. Carol Marcus, concerned about microscopic lifeforms in ST II, was essentially a fraud and the whole Genesis stuff was a hoax because they used unstable matter? Here the subsequent movie obviously created a twist at the expense of previously introduced characters and what the screenplay writers had tried to establish in ST II.
I got the impression David used the protomatter cheat without the knowledge of Carol or the others.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 28 2013, 05:12 PM   #22
jpv2000
Captain
 
jpv2000's Avatar
 
Location: Georgia, United States
Re: What happened to Star Trek III: TSFS?

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
Robert Comsol wrote: View Post
And I almost forgot: So Dr. Carol Marcus, concerned about microscopic lifeforms in ST II, was essentially a fraud and the whole Genesis stuff was a hoax because they used unstable matter? Here the subsequent movie obviously created a twist at the expense of previously introduced characters and what the screenplay writers had tried to establish in ST II.
I got the impression David used the protomatter cheat without the knowledge of Carol or the others.
Same here. I can't remember if I got that impression from the movie itself or the novel of the movie which I read.
jpv2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 28 2013, 09:16 PM   #23
Workbee
Commander
 
Re: What happened to Star Trek III: TSFS?

Captain Nebula is asking the wrong question here. It isn't what happened to TSFS... the question is what happened IN TSFS. When I watch it now, I feel like there is this epic and intense story going on during the movie that we never see outside of some cryptic comments by certain characters.
Workbee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 29 2013, 03:02 PM   #24
Robert Comsol
Commodore
 
Robert Comsol's Avatar
 
Location: USS Berlin
Re: What happened to Star Trek III: TSFS?

DAVID: I used protomatter in the Genesis matrix.
SAAVIK: Protomatter. An unstable substance which every ethical scientist in the galaxy has denounced as dangerously unpredictable.
DAVID: But it was the only way to solve certain problems.

Yes, ST III makes David take the blame and responsibility. Still, according to ST II, his mother was in charge of the Genesis Project, and I have a hard time imagining her not to know what materials had come into use for the Genesis Matrix.

That was her responsibility and ST III made her look incompetent in a debatable retcon manner.

I sympathize with the efforts for rationalization of this mess, but this was really bad script writing, apparently as an excuse to have Spock age during the movie's running time and to have protagonist and antagonist fight it out on a planet that's falling apart.

Bob
__________________
"The first duty of every Starfleet officer is to the truth" Jean-Luc Picard
"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."
Albert Einstein
Robert Comsol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 29 2013, 03:28 PM   #25
Mario de Monti
Commander
 
Mario de Monti's Avatar
 
Location: Heidelberg, Germany
Re: What happened to Star Trek III: TSFS?

@ Robert

I agree with every point you made about the movie in your post #19 (didn´t want to quote it all ). Whenever I watch the movie, I make it through the first half, knowing that the "great escape" and more shots of Grissom and Excelsior are still to come. I usually switch off as soon as the Enterprise sets course for Genesis ... everything after that I find just barely watchable.
Especially the refusing-Spock-with-his-Katra bit makes no sense at all: first, they tell Sarek that it hasn´t been done in ages and then really only in legend (which means: never). Then, after Sarek tells them he´s not quite sure of his logic anymore (!) they´re like, "well ok, if it´s your son then we go right ahead and do it". As if Sarek was the first Vulcan ever to lose someone close Also, if this procedure has never actually been done before and was thus not really an option, why was Sarek so upset with Kirk for not bringing Spock´s body to Vulcan? Or why would Spock store his Katra in McCoy in the first place? What makes Spock and/or Sarek soooooo special that they get the once-in-ages-super-special-VIP-treatment???
BTW, how would the Vulcans even know how to perform this refusion, if no one in living memory ever attempted to do it?

Mario
__________________
"Do you give me attitude, Spock?" - "I´m expressing multiple attitudes simultaneously, Sir. To which are you referring?"
Mario de Monti is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 2 2013, 02:22 PM   #26
Kinokima
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: What happened to Star Trek III: TSFS?

^ Spock put his soul in McCoy so it would be brought to Vulcan. I don't think he had any thoughts at the time of coming back to life.

This is also what Sarek originally came to Kirk about not about bringing Spock back to life.

However Spock was a special case due to genesis he did have a chance to come back to life. That was the ritual that had not been done for a long time (dead Vulcan bodies don't fall on Genesis every day)

Of course that is t to say there wasn't a lot of mumbo jumbo in the episode. How Spock came back is more fantasy then good science fiction but oh we'll the scenes with McCoy as Spock are great so who cares.
Kinokima is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 3 2013, 10:09 AM   #27
Mario de Monti
Commander
 
Mario de Monti's Avatar
 
Location: Heidelberg, Germany
Re: What happened to Star Trek III: TSFS?

Kinokima wrote: View Post
^ Spock put his soul in McCoy so it would be brought to Vulcan. I don't think he had any thoughts at the time of coming back to life.

This is also what Sarek originally came to Kirk about not about bringing Spock back to life.
Ok, point taken. But that would suggest, there´s some sort of "soul graveyard" on Vulcan, where all the souls of the deceased are ... living happily ever after? Still sounds like mumbo jumbo
__________________
"Do you give me attitude, Spock?" - "I´m expressing multiple attitudes simultaneously, Sir. To which are you referring?"
Mario de Monti is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 3 2013, 12:29 PM   #28
C.E. Evans
Vice Admiral
 
C.E. Evans's Avatar
 
Location: Saint Louis (aka Defiance)
Re: What happened to Star Trek III: TSFS?

neoworx wrote: View Post
Wow. I saw an entirely different movie. Loved it then, love it now. Watching when it first came out gives one a totally different experience than someone watching it years later after so much Star Trek has been produced. TSFS gave Trek tons of stuff that would carry through for decades.
I couldn't agree more. I loved everything about Star Trek III.
__________________
"Everybody wants to rule the world..."
C.E. Evans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 3 2013, 01:07 PM   #29
Stoo
Captain
 
Stoo's Avatar
 
Location: circle of the tyrants
Re: What happened to Star Trek III: TSFS?

I come away from STFS a bit confused about Katra-storage, ie is it a routine procedure for Vulcans (even if it's not normally put back in a cloned body!) and if so, why isn't Starfleet more aware.

Robert Comsol reminds me that Kruge's actions don't make a whole lot of sense. Still one of my favourite Klingons though, ruthless and a bit psychotic.

The bit about Protomatter was kind of un-ncessary. We could have believed Genesis was unstable - especially in a first uncontrolled planetary scale test without some secret forbidden ingredient. Maybe the writers wanted to give David a rash\risk taking side like his father?

Overall though I still find the film quite watchable. And maybe since I'm more aware of WoK's flaws these days (great film still, but, not great pacing) I find they fit together pretty well.
Stoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 3 2013, 01:41 PM   #30
C.E. Evans
Vice Admiral
 
C.E. Evans's Avatar
 
Location: Saint Louis (aka Defiance)
Re: What happened to Star Trek III: TSFS?

Stoo wrote: View Post
I come away from STFS a bit confused about Katra-storage, ie is it a routine procedure for Vulcans (even if it's not normally put back in a cloned body!) and if so, why isn't Starfleet more aware.
Katra-storage was not a routine procedure and katra-transference to someone else even less so. Until the 22nd-Century, many Vulcans even believed it was just a myth left over from ancient times.

And although Vulcans are one of the founding members of the Federation, not everything about them is known to non-Vulcans.
__________________
"Everybody wants to rule the world..."
C.E. Evans is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
star trek iii, tsfs

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:02 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.