at the time VI was considered better than II

[Vger23]

Star Trek VI is nice, but has way too many glaring problems to be one of the best. It suffers greatly from an extremely rushed production on a very thin budget. The plot is very paper-thin and, as another poster pointed out, it lacks a certain energy- especially in the middle acts. It's also heavy on pretentious and obvious attempts to be literate (even the title "The Undiscovered Country" is a massive stretch). Chang is a dull villian who belongs mor in a 1940s movie than as a Klingon leader. It is also horribly edited and paced.

There are some great moments in it as well, though. Kirk and McCoy's discussions about prejudice, the assassination sequence, and the battle in space over Khitomer at the end are all quite good.

Otherwise, it is incredibly sloppy. It was good, but I even prefer Trek V to VI at this point.

 

[Vger23]

Re: at the time VI was considered better than II?

TUC *** ¾ ... one of the greatest space battles ever committed to celluloid")

This could only be true if there were no Star Wars movies. And no other Trek films, if it comes to that. TWOK, TSFS, hell, even NEM has more tension in its ship-to-ship confrontation.

Agreed. Although I always liked the Trek VI battle, it is really not that tense or satisfying. Having Chang randomly quoting Shakespeare throughout rips me out of the realism of the scene every time.

 

[Memory Alpha]

Re: at the time VI was considered better than II?

I was in 7th grade when it came out, and to me it wasn't "better" than ST II, but it was "bigger." It certainly felt bigger. ST II was tightly focused and as such was very well written. I think it was the best movie. St VI, though, was on a bigger, broader scale, and had a great ending. So in 1991-92 it was a blockbuster and a rewarding Star Trek movie is what I mean. Time, though, has exposed many of its flaws.

 

[CorporalClegg]

I'm a huge TWoK fan. It's my favorite film of the entire franchise, but in some ways 6 is better than 2. The story itself is much grander & more cohesive. TWoK's story seems a little piecemeal in comparison. It all comes together wonderfully, but it spends a lot of time with varied threads muddled about. It's the excellent character interrelations that make TWoK the greatest. Even the villain has personal history.

What I recall about 6's reception is that people were enthusiastic again, after the poor critical reception of 5, & 4 being fun but not very substantial. I don't recall anyone specifically heralding it as the best of the franchise, but certainly one of the best, a perfect swan song

TUC story cohesive? It's a fracking mess. It's full of holes and inconstancies. And the villain literally doesn't have an idea or thought of his own.

 

[DWF]

TUC did have some plot holes but I thought it was a good enough movie to end the TOS movies on. And there was some social commentary on the end of the USSR. And personally I liked Christopher Plummer as Chang, the trial made great use of his theater voice and Chang realined true to his ideals.

 

[Cyke101]

You clearly missed the point...

C'mon, don't be so literal.

Not to single you out, but I feel like you missed one's joke but want some leeway with your own post.

---

Anyway, about 10 years ago, I came to the realization that TWOK had better craft all around, but TUC could at times be more fun. However, at the end of the day, the general consensus is that TWOK comes out on top. We could also get some hindsight here, too -- after TFF, anything could look as good as TWOK

 

[JediKnightButler]

None of the ST movies IMHO were as good as the TOS "Genesis Arc" (Star Trek II-IV) but Star Trek VI was, as I remember it, enthusiastically received as a "breath of fresh air" and a great finale for the TOS crew after the Star Trek V debacle. There was, justifably IMHO, a sense that Star Trek was finally "back on track" at the time of its release. I don't know that I ever heard anybody say it was better than TWOK, though.

 

[EnriqueH]

You clearly missed the point...

C'mon, don't be so literal.

Not to single you out, but I feel like you missed one's joke but want some leeway with your own post.

Yeah, writing humor can be a tricky thing. I ran into some trouble in another post because of misinterpreted humor. Sometimes, it's hard to convey voice inflection and humor. And sometimes when you do drop the ball, you end up with egg on your face.

 

[TheAlmanac]

I'm a huge TWoK fan. It's my favorite film of the entire franchise, but in some ways 6 is better than 2. The story itself is much grander & more cohesive. TWoK's story seems a little piecemeal in comparison. It all comes together wonderfully, but it spends a lot of time with varied threads muddled about.

This is basically how I feel about ST VI compared to ST II. To this day, I like VI better, and I think it holds up just fine.

I don't know how you could consider the editing "sloppy" in the later film--and anyone who wants to complain about plot holes forgets how no one on the Reliant could count to six. And I say that as someone who also really likes Wrath of Khan.

 

[JarodRussell]

Chang's love for quoting Shakespeare hasn't aged well with me. All it took was a 5 second mention that Chang likes to study his enemy's culture (or maybe even directly Kirk's interests, Kirk being the empire's greatest enemy, and the biggest prize to a Klingon warrior).

I like it just as much as TWOK.

I also liked the subtle Space Seed parallel in the dinner scene. In Space Seed, Kirk needs to calm Spock down in the presence of Khan, and in TUC, Spock needs to calm Kirk down in the presence of the Klingons.

 

[EnriqueH]

Chang's love for quoting Shakespeare hasn't aged well with me.

I know what you mean.

I like most of the quoted Shakespeare, *BUT*...

"I am as constant as the Northern Star." was overkill.

Although it was probably said so that McCoy could give his line, which was classic McCoy. So I guess it was a good tradeoff. Chang overdoing it so we can get another classic Bones quote.

 

[horatio83]

I still consider TUC to be better than TWOK. Its grand politics, its about the enemy in your own ranks, it is about the thin line between the good and bad guys (Kirk nearly being devoured by his racism) and above all it has Shakespeare lines. Everything becomes better if you "bard" it a little.
TWOK is about Kirk having to face the repercussions of his mistake, namely death, as well as about life and death in general which is good stuff but for me not as good as TUC. I also don't appreciate that they had to shoot another, fairly lackluster move, to finish the story from TWOK.

 

[PCz911]

Agree. Valerie's suffers from the "oh look, a new major character in the crew so something must happen to them"

Just like Saavik?

Sorry if I implied that the observation was to be universally applied. I suppose it's like the red shirt phenomena. They do t always die on away teams (or landing party's )but it does happen enough to warrant a comment.

But I do recall that another example of this was when lietennant hawk was added, and subtracted, pretty quickly.

Not to mention scotty's nephew in TWOK.

 

[EnriqueH]

Oh, yeah, Lt. Hawk.

You just knew that guy had "red shirt" written all over him.

 

[CorporalClegg]

Yeah. If you're going to have a red shirt, it may as well be Neal "Poolside" McDonough.

 

[EnriqueH]

When they gave him a name and Picard forcefully said, "Lt. HAWK, pursue course." I knew immediately it was a setup. They're making us care about this Lt. Hawk guy, giving him a name, because they're going to assimilate his ass before the movie is over.

 

[Tosk]

But not not Perim or Daniels or Curtis or Adislo or Foster or Styles or Morrow...

So the two options are:

Any new character will have something major happen to them.
Any new character won't have something major happen to them.

Is it really "a thing" when both options happen?

 

[PCz911]

But not not Perim or Daniels or Curtis or Adislo or Foster or Styles or Morrow...

So the two options are:

Any new character will have something major happen to them.
Any new character won't have something major happen to them.

Is it really "a thing" when both options happen?

Fair points, so let me modify my comment:

In star trek movies, if a character joins the enterprise crew as a character of note, the odds are that the plot will somehow revolve around them , often resulting In Their death

TMP: decker and Ilia (both "die", if you will)
TWOK: saavik (lives) , Scotty's nephew (dies)
Tsfs: saavik (lives but is transformed into another actress. )
Tvh : no character added
Tff: no character added
Tuc: valeris (villain)

And I don't recall tng movies that well to comment off the top of my head. So, 4 out of 5 added characters are either killed or used as plot points.

Ok, to be fair, Scotty's nephew was a MINOR character...but I can cheat and add him to support my hypothesis for no apparent reason other thanit supports my hypothesis.

Let the debate continue.....

 

[PCz911]

Yeah. If you're going to have a red shirt, it may as well be Neal "Poolside" McDonough.

Was that nickname from his Cadillac commercial...it was him in that one walking through his house wasn't it?

 

[CorporalClegg]

Yes.