TUC - not aged well
- Thread starter Computer Voice
- Start date
As shown by the self-selected poll of those who thought STID was the worst Star Trek film in a biased panel discussing why, this thread could be self-selected by its title, and the number of respondents certainly do not represent a fair sample. I'm sure someone (BillJ) could dig up a graphic that shows the real "truth" of it. But as a preview, RottenTomatoes show 83% for TUC versus 21% for TFF versus 87% for STID. Not shabby.
I think it is more a matter of where you were at when the film hit you and the nostalgia that comes along with it.
I freely admit nostalgia goggles with this film by virtue of the fact that I was ten when I first saw it and really engaged with it in a way that the previous films had not done, save maybe TSFS. TUC was the film that felt the most like some of the TOS episodes I had seen before, and the Romulan ale, and the mystery plot, and the politics of it just kind of grabbed me.
Being older now, I can appreciate the clear 1-to-1 ratio of the storytelling beats, but, honestly, I don't care. I read enough of the BTS, and the novel, and the like to film in what few plot holes are egregious enough to garner my attention.
From a strictly character point of view, I enjoy it. I like Kirk's arc, it is very simple, and the change he goes through is interesting. I enjoy Spock's self-reflection moments, and his comment to Kirk about becoming old. Sulu as captain of the Excelsior is fantastic.
The, fairly, obvious political commentary works for me because of my age. I was just old enough to remember the Berlin Wall coming down, and the Cold War era that it would represent. To me, the history works given the Klingons development as a Soviet counterpart in Star Trek.
Obviously, mileage will vary, but this film hit me at the right age and the right time
I think for the most part it's not actual dislike, just disappointment at the flaws. Perhaps the flaws stand out more given the high reputation TUC has enjoyed.
I don't know what this means.
The fact that Meyer did not adjust the story beyond the bare trappings in his adapting the Berlin Wall coming down. Chernobyl is used for Praxis' event causing the Klingon Empire to face economic collapse, resulting in more open to negotiation, just like the Soviet Union.
It may be more apparent to those who live through that time period, especially in the United States, but I know that others have commented on how obvious it is.
I don't think it is bad, but I love the character moments in TUC
Except the Chernobyl disaster did not cause the collapse of the USSR or the fall of the Berlin wall. Nor did it cause the implementation of glasnost, or the adoption of a new conciliatory international posture, or the population of the USSR to move en masse to live next door to the USA. The historical events are connected in TUC for story-telling purposes, but the connection doesn't have a real-world parallel.
Not in the same way in terms of events, but the moments, which are fixed in the mind as resulting in the dominoes falling leading to the Berlin Wall are part of the popular imagination and are used, as you said, for story-telling.
I didn't mean to say the events are being created perfectly, but that each event in the film has an historical, real world, parallel.
It never diminished my enjoyment of the film, but it enhanced it in a way as I got older.
I'd also argue that for both that a lot of the perceived flaws require "inside baseball" Trek familiarity, which don't impact the general audience, who are just enjoying a good movie.
For instance, with TUC the general audience doesn't care that Chekov and Uhura are presented as morons, or that Kirk is now an old grandpa racist, nor for STID do they care about the "WOK rip-off" complaints (shoot, I'd bet that a huge percentage of the general audience has never even seen WOK).
That really rankled with me too but in fairness, if you watch TWoK, TVH, & TFF, Chekov clearly bought his pass grade from Security school off ebay. He's so consistently bad at security that it's TMP that stands out as the oddity. In my head, he was weapons officer, not security chief. Wesley Crusher would make a better security chief.
I always thought of him as the educated idiot. He's super smart with a wide knowledge base but has no common sense. Sadly, Spock is the smartest one in the room so Chekov was eventually relegated to just having no common sense.
He could have transferred to something else long ago before landing the job as XO on Reliant. After that he's doing just about everything else that isn't security. Acting Science Officer. Acting Communications Officer. Navigation's Officer, Acting Captain, and maybe Weapons Officer.
If it has been that long, something like 15 years, since he was a Security Chief on Enterprise, the probably have changed the regulations a few times since then. The phaser thing is likely new, for example, and just never came up since the loss of the original Enterprise.
If it has been that long, something like 15 years, since he was a Security Chief on Enterprise, the probably have changed the regulations a few times since then. The phaser thing is likely new, for example, and just never came up since the loss of the original Enterprise.
Theoretically, the TOS ship already could have had that feature. All the kill-setting phaser firings aboard the ship in that show either were fully authorized, or took place during an ongoing alert already!
Yet I really doubt Chekov had any Security Chief credentials in ST:TMP. The crew for that mission was in all likelihood thrown together at the last moment, with key personnel left ashore either because of the extreme hurry or because Kirk insisted on his own men and women. Chekov sitting at the weapons console might be the one element of duty assignment that did go as planned - him rushing belowdecks to see Ilia naked in the shower would be pure improvisation, though.
Timo Saloniemi
Yet I really doubt Chekov had any Security Chief credentials in ST:TMP. The crew for that mission was in all likelihood thrown together at the last moment, with key personnel left ashore either because of the extreme hurry or because Kirk insisted on his own men and women. Chekov sitting at the weapons console might be the one element of duty assignment that did go as planned - him rushing belowdecks to see Ilia naked in the shower would be pure improvisation, though.
Timo Saloniemi
Chekov was NOT the XO of the Reliant. Mr. Beach was. Am I the only one who noticed this?
I think there is much truth to this considering all that reevaluation especially TUC, TMP and TFF are getting on these boards.
People walk into TUC with high expectation because they either remember enjoying it or have heard that it is one of the better trek movies and are thus more likely to be disappointed when the movie doesn't meet those high expectations.
Likewise people walk ino TMP and TFF remembring or having heard that they are "too boring to watch" or a horrible, shrieking mess and are thus more likely to be positively suprised when the movies are not quite as bad as they remember, have heard.
In addition' well it's the internet some critic goes against the common opinion in a witty matter and people adopt the revised opinion. Basic modern journalism.
I think you'll find that Kirk's yeoman had that entered in his diary 12 seconds after Ilia came on board.
If by "XO" you mean "first officer," I disagree:
"Starship log, stardate 8130.4. Log entry by First Officer Pavel Chekov.…"
Similar threads
