Just watched TSFS again

[2takesfrakes]

The implication was, as evidenced through McCoy's bar scene, that not even a low-life, bottom feeding charter vessel was willing to go to Genesis, which is absolutely absurd!

I don't get it. Why is it absurd? The guy with the earrings said it best. "Genesis is planet forbidden!". In the Trek universe, people aren't breaking regulations all the time, I guess, other than Harry Mudd and Cyrano Jones. And they don't need a blockade of Federation craft with shoot-to-kill orders to be willing to follow the rules.

Harry Mudd and Cyrano Jones are but two of the MANY shady contacts McCoy had to drive him to Genesis and were relatively trustworthy compared to Yoda the Second, here, with the ghostly pallor, big ears and even bigger mouth! The script needs McCoy contained and out of the way, so he doesn't have to keep acting flakey, onscreen. And the bar scene conveniently kills 2 birds with 1 stone by reminding the audience that this movie won't let ANY of the good guys get to GENESIS without hot-wiring the ENTERPRISE. Then making off into the inky void just like Thelma & Louise ...

 

[Maurice]

...until a Vulcan of all people (Sarek) has the gaul to step up to the challenge.

Sarek had the ancient region in western Europe, including the modern areas of northern Italy, France, Belgium, and the southern Netherlands to step up? Wow, who'da thunk!

The word is "gall".

 

[phredy]

As a movie by itself, I enjoyed TSFS; as a sequel to TWoK I didn't like it nearly as much. Two major issues. First, Kirk still hasn't faced his Kobayashi Maru; he continues to cheat death. The lessons of TWoK are thus swept away. Second, I was hoping to see more of David and Saavik in later movies. I thought they would move to the forefront with Kirk and Spock transitioning into mentor roles; instead there is a certain blandness to the characters like they had been given up on already.

On the plus side, this is about as influenced by Joseph Campbell as a movie can get. You met the man in TWoK, now see the demigod Kirk as he rides his noble steed into hell, snatches up his dead friend, captures the roc, and hastens to the temple for a dawn resurrection. 180 proof mythology, and it's good stuff.

 

[Timo]

The word is "gall".

Which, as is obvious to anybody with a passing familiarity with the French, has "gaul" as the root word.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[mos6507]

As a movie by itself, I enjoyed TSFS; as a sequel to TWoK I didn't like it nearly as much. Two major issues. First, Kirk still hasn't faced his Kobayashi Maru; he continues to cheat death.

That's kind of a misread, IMHO. The film starts out by setting Kirk up as the one who has to deal with his mortality, but the pivot at the end is for Spock to fall on his sword instead, as epitomized by the iconic line "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one." So Kirk doesn't have to go down with the ship because he's surrounded by friends who value preservation of life, even if Spock can't articulate it the way you'd hope.

In Search for Spock, Kirk doesn't sacrifice his life either, but he does sacrifice just about everything else that is nearest and dearest to him, being his professional reputation in Starfleet, David (if you want to include that), and the Enterprise itself, in pursuit of Spock. Even though the line is reversed at the end on Vulcan, the common theme is one of sacrifice, whether it's for the needs of a group or a personal friend.

 

[Hypaspist]

I thought it was a good follow-up to Wrath of Khan and it would make a for a great part of a trilogy if part IV didn't suck.

A whole movie about getting Spock back is good simply because it doesn't cheapen his death in the first place, and the idea that Kirk would sacrifice his career for a friend is powerful.

Overall I thought it had a good mix of everything. We get to see all of the characters in their role and their loyalty to each other.
The three main characters and the dynamic between them is good. The Vulcan mysticism is necessary because, after all, we're dealing with a resurrection plot. I'm also happy for any chance to see more about Vulcans, because they are seriously underused in everything in the TNG era.
There is comedy, action, and drama in equal measure. None of them is overpowering.
Klingon antagonists...great! Also it's punctuated with a great personal loss to Kirk.
The new Saavik does a fine job.

Really I never understood the whole 'odd movie thing.' Only 5 was actually bad. Even if you like part 4, it's hard to pass it off as a good movie and then to nitpick 3 to death. It goes the other way too. Remember Sulu flying a helicopter with no training? That is the kind of thing you can't wave a wand over.

 

[urbandefault]

Remember Sulu flying a helicopter with no training?

"I flew something similar in my academy days."

 

[Hypaspist]

"I flew something similar in my academy days."

Which is one of the worst explanations ever and why I picked this copout over all of the other dreadful scenes in that movie. Even helicopter pilots have such a great deal of trouble learning a new platform that they normally can't get it off the ground on their first try.

God how I hate the one with the whales.

 

[urbandefault]

"I flew something similar in my academy days."

Which is one of the worst explanations ever and why I picked this copout over all of the other dreadful scenes in that movie. Even helicopter pilots have such a great deal of trouble learning a new platform that they normally can't get it off the ground on their first try.

God how I hate the one with the whales.

Compared to a BOP, a Huey is probably a piece of cake.

"Reading Klingon, that's hard."

 

[Hypaspist]

Well maybe. It would stand to reason that, by the 23rd century, all of the major powers are using comparative technology after years of cross-pollination.
I don't think parts like that will ever fit in, but my point is that 3 gets nitpicked to death while 4 gets a pass because it was financially successful. I mean I like that the movie was a success, I just didn't like the movie at all. The most frustrating thing is that the argument usually goes: It made more money so that makes it good.

 

[urbandefault]

Well maybe. It would stand to reason that, by the 23rd century, all of the major powers are using comparative technology after years of cross-pollination.
I don't think parts like that will ever fit in, but my point is that 3 gets nitpicked to death while 4 gets a pass because it was financially successful. I mean I like that the movie was a success, I just didn't like the movie at all. The most frustrating thing is that the argument usually goes: It made more money so that makes it good.

So, nearly 30 years later, how would you have done IV that would make it better? Keep in mind that it's on a budget, limited to a two hour screen time, and you're trying to draw the largest audience possible.

Monday morning quarterbacking is fun, but doesn't often produce better results.

 

[Hypaspist]

I'd give it an interesting story and make it not suck. Wrath of Khan told a more traditional Star Trek story on a limited budget, and it was a success. In fact, I'd say that Wrath of Khan and TUC were the best examples of 'playing it safe' of any of the movies. They were more about character interaction and really didn't try to break any new ground or to draw in new groups.

There are plenty of other stories that could have been used. I offer opinions here and there in threads where they belong.

 

[Shat Happens]

Sulu mastering the 20th Century helicopter just by "asking a few questions" was really incredible. And how in blazes he managed to borrow it? or did he steal it? (ALSO whatever he flew in the academy didnt seem to have a windshield wiper -- ALSO what did he need at that time instead of the windshield wiper? something important? if so, how did he manage without it?)

AND, when he got back to the Bird of Prey he he said he had forgot how to fly it because "he got used to the Huey"?? WTF

We canon maniacs really have work to do.

 

[Nebusj]

On the plus side, this is about as influenced by Joseph Campbell as a movie can get. You met the man in TWoK, now see the demigod Kirk as he rides his noble steed into hell, snatches up his dead friend, captures the roc, and hastens to the temple for a dawn resurrection. 180 proof mythology, and it's good stuff.

I hadn't thought of it that way, but, you're right. That's about as literally mythical as you can get, and it even sets up the Generations fate of Kirk as dead-but-not, in principle recoverable when he's truly needed. (OK, Generations fumbled the idea badly, but that's Generations for you.)

 

[urbandefault]

I'd give it an interesting story and make it not suck. Wrath of Khan told a more traditional Star Trek story on a limited budget, and it was a success. In fact, I'd say that Wrath of Khan and TUC were the best examples of 'playing it safe' of any of the movies. They were more about character interaction and really didn't try to break any new ground or to draw in new groups.

There are plenty of other stories that could have been used. I offer opinions here and there in threads where they belong.

So, no real suggestions to make a better movie?

Sulu mastering the 20th Century helicopter just by "asking a few questions" was really incredible. And how in blazes he managed to borrow it? or did he steal it? (ALSO whatever he flew in the academy didnt seem to have a windshield wiper -- ALSO what did he need at that time instead of the windshield wiper? something important? if so, how did he manage without it?)

AND, when he got back to the Bird of Prey he he said he had forgot how to fly it because "he got used to the Huey"?? WTF

We canon maniacs really have work to do.

Ever drive a rental car for several days, then get back into your own car and have to think about where things are? It's not out of the realm of possibility.

Yeah, you canon dudes have a long way to go to get anywhere near living in the real world.

 

[T'Girl]

while 4 gets a pass because it was financially successful

Personal opinion, but I very much doubt that most people judge the enjoyability and worthiness of a movie based primarily on how much the box office was. You get that kind of foolishness from supporters of the last two Trek movies.

It would have been nice to have John Winston back for TSFS with another cameo

The novelization said that Khan used the Ceti worms to control twenty of the Reliant crew, to help run the ship. As a well experienced officer, Kyle might have been one of the people kept aboard the Reliant and killed when the Enterprise attacked or when Khan set off the Genesis Device inside the Reliant.

Wouldn't they have notified Sarek of Spock's death first, and ask him what his wishes would be for Spock's body?

No. They would have followed Spock's wishes as to the final disposition of his remains. If his spoken wishes to place his body on a living planet, that's what Kirk would have done. Kirk, Spock and McCoy might have spoken of this matter through the years. There as a early novel where a crewmember's last will specifically mentioned being left (in his case buried) on a living planet.

If part of Kirk's "mission" was first to go retrieve Spock's body -- what made them think there was a body to retrieve?

If Kirk ordered the casket/torpedo to be programmed to "soft land" on Genesis, then he would know that the corpse was likely simply sitting on the surface within a certain area.

At this point in the story only Grissom knew that the casket had soft-landed.

Unless it soft landed at Kirk order, respecting Spock's wishes.

 

[Shat Happens]

Of course not. My car is awesome.

 

[Hypaspist]

the funny thing is that it was a pilot (in the real world) who pointed out how difficult a Huey is to fly compared to other helicopters. Touchy, but a bird for experts.

I hadn't thought of it that way, but, you're right. That's about as literally mythical as you can get, and it even sets up the Generations fate of Kirk as dead-but-not, in principle recoverable when he's truly needed. (OK, Generations fumbled the idea badly, but that's Generations for you.)

I think the whole setup was as good as it could have been. It's why I find Nemesis with its blatant copy of TWoK's ending to just be so bad.
The Genesis planet is a pretty well done scene as well. Really the only problem I have with the movie at all is some of the terrible acting back around Starfleet...but you can look at it as camp, so it's not so bad. That and the special effects don't all hold up well, but I don't think Trek fans care about that.

Personal opinion, but I very much doubt that most people judge the enjoyability and worthiness of a movie based primarily on how much the box office was. You get that kind of foolishness from supporters of the last two Trek movies.

Oh I definitely agree. It isn't a position that should be taken seriously, but it is thrown around a lot these days. Actually it is a pretty big part of reasoning about anything these days, especially with youtube channels, movies, and more. That and jealousy. It's not really an argument at all because it doesn't use logic, but I see it a lot.

On another note, I support Trek whatever the movie is. I liked the 2009 one and I didn't hate Into Darkness, I just think its plot was bad. If more people like it, then great. I don't think they're ever going to do Star Trek that I would picture it in the near future.
I would take a reboot that leans towards 'what sells' than Enterprise, which was totally devoid of creativity and full of missed opportunities.

So, no real suggestions to make a better movie?

Sure, for people who aren't argumentative for its own sake.

 

[Timo]

Sulu mastering the 20th Century helicopter just by "asking a few questions" was really incredible.

Well, that's just a case of us simpletons realizing how incredible such things are when presented with a 20th century example. We don't make a single noise when Sulu does the exact same thing in the 23rd century context, though. Which means ST4 is not to blame, but either Star Trek in general, or then the audience.

At this point in the story only Grissom knew that the casket had soft-landed.

With Captain J. T. Esteban in command, and broadcasting his bowel movements to Starfleet for official approval, I guess we can safely say that everybody would have known.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Commishsleer]

"I flew something similar in my academy days."

Which is one of the worst explanations ever and why I picked this copout over all of the other dreadful scenes in that movie. Even helicopter pilots have such a great deal of trouble learning a new platform that they normally can't get it off the ground on their first try.

God how I hate the one with the whales.

While I also have a problems with the keyboard scene and the invisible BOP not being noticed in a park I don't have a problem with the helicopter scene. Sulu is a trained pilot with 23rd century training - maybe he learns how to fly all sorts of Federation craft. In STID we saw Khan in some 23rd century helicopter type craft - so they did exist then.