Star Trek Wrath of Khan backlash?
- Thread starter Spocklight
- Start date
Excellent point. That's another example of "living with consequences" that is far more immediate.
I also considered touching upon the fact that for a while, Kirk is facing the fact that his actions may have indeed caused the death of Carol and David, and it's not until they realize in the transporter room that some people escaped that he probably has hope that they are still alive.
A bigto Vger23's post above. Well said.
I'm a little shocked that anyone could find The Undiscovered Country a better movie than Wrath of Khan.
Thanks...!
And I may have come off hard on TUC. It was really jut trying to prove a relative point that, while TUC is an enjoyable Star Trek flick, it doesn't even come close by relative comparison to what's going on in TWOK.
I agree. It just took me by surprise by how many people seem to prefer it over Khan
I still prefer TUC over TWOK. They both have they depth, just in different ways. I think TWOK is the superior assembled film (poor grammar, possibly), with a lot of little nuance and details that worked on many different levels.
However, I can certainly recognize TWOK as a good film, but I do not enjoy it.
However, I can certainly recognize TWOK as a good film, but I do not enjoy it.
While TVH and TUC are certainly more hamfisted and obvious I find it to be more compelling. Many of the memorable episodes were quite ham fisted like "the man trap" , "platos step children" , and "arena" (to an extent). But we clearly have different tastes.I think you missed a lot about Star Trek II, quite frankly, if this is all you got out of it. The film delves PLENTY deep into the dilemma over Genesis. Here is a device and a technology with the capability of transforming entire dead worlds into planets teeming with life and opportunity. The possibilities for improving the galaxy are endless. In the beginning, you see the scientists in charge of the project and how careful they are about the need to sustain life and not disrupt evolution on any potential life-generating planet (there can't be so much as a microbe). Later, you see the conflicting ideology between the civilians and their perception of the dangers of being in bed with the "military" (hey...is Starfleet a military? We should engage in a thoughtful discussion on this one) on the project. Later, we see the triad engaged in a very lively debate about the "moral implications" of developing such a device, given that it could be used to destroy the populations and eco systems of entire planets in "favor of its new matrix." And ultimately, the very first deployment of the devise is as a weapon "in the wrong hands."
If that's not a Star Trek moral and ethical dilemma...I'm not sure what exactly you're looking for.
To say the only other element that isn't action/revenge driven in the film is Khan's henchman questioning authority makes me wonder if you've actually seen the movie in the last 20 years, quite frankly.
There is a massive character arc for Kirk filled with heavy themes that we never saw again portrayed as well in Trek...probably an even better arc than what was presented in TMP. Kirk is dealing with mid-life ennui and depression. He's surrounded by younger and optimistic cadets (just like in today's workforce where there are tons of people of the Baby Boomer generation starting to learn how to deal with the massive influx of Millennials) and this makes the situation even more pronounced. It takes his two best friends to open his eyes to how his "best destiny" is commanding a starship...and it takes the unfortunate crisis to initiate the change.
Moreover, Kirk is confronted with his own past and his life choices. The re-appearance of Carol and David has shaken Kirk to the core. We learn that he now even further questions his life and the decisions he's made / path he's followed. This, combined with the resurfacing of Khan, causes Kirk to examine his past decisions and choices in a way that really defines the character.
Finally, there is the Spock sacrifice. This brings Spock's arc established in TMP and brings it to its full conclusion. Enough has been written about this where I don't feel the need to pontificate. Suffice it to say, this provides the audience with the insight into the fact that Spock's soul truly has become the most "human." It also brings Kirk's arc to a climax, as he admits that he's never faced death like this, and has spent his life laughing at danger because he's been more lucky than good. It's the most humanizing element for both Kirk and Spock in the entire franchise.
I also totally disagree with what you said about TUC. No shit it's an "allegory for the end of the Cold War," but it's done so obviously and without any finesse that it's not NEARLY as effective as the deeper themes explored in TWOK. What you see as a "grand" illustration of two cultures learning to work together (to do what, BTW, prove they can collaborate on an assassination attempt), I see as a pretty mundane outing. Compare Kirk's closing statements/revelations in TWOK ("I've cheated death" and "young...I feel young") with his closing statements in TUC ("people can be very frightened of change" and "once again we've saved civilization as we know it") and I clearly see that TWOK is a senior thesis paper while TUC is a Sophomore frat party. Sophomore frat parties can be fun (and TUC was fun), but they're not to be mistaken for anything deeper. The stuff in TUC is hand-waving and surface material. Kirk's prejudice arc is not nearly as emotional or "adultly portrayed" as the arc he goes through in TWOK. "Hey, now I know how prejudiced I really was." Ok??
TUC was a light and obvious allegory, basically in the same category as "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield" while TWOK was a taught thriller with very subtle in interconnected themes and character explorations, similar to the classic "Balance of Terror."
TUC also has an equally sophomoric villain compared to Khan. Khan is truly a menace from Kirk's past. He has fought to keep his people alive in a nightmarish hell for 15 years. He is a man of tremendous (engineered!) ego. This combination, plus the growing resentment for Kirk (not for leaving him there, but for never caring to follow-up) has driven him mad. He throws his entire life away, and the lives of the people he fought so hard to protect, just to attempt to kill Kirk. Chang, on the other hand, just doesn't like peace. He's a cold warrior (or something) who twirls his moustache, apparently doubles as a legal prosecutor, and pretentiously quotes Shakespeare. No depth. He just "doesn't like change" and he's going to further an inane plot to continuously assassinate whatever leaders in his government continue to push the peace process forward because he'd rather die than live in peace with the Federation. Which makes.....NO sense given that the Klingons have pently of other challenges and enemies to motivate them throughout the galaxy.
I guess the difference is in the preference for the way these themes are presented. If you want them interwoven masterfully into a tense and action filled story, then TWOK is for you. If you want them obvious and laid-out for you (like a TNG Picard speech or Ready Room scene filled with lame exposition), then TVH and TUC hit the mark perfectly. I for one prefer Star Trek when the message is subtle but powerful, not overt and ham-fisted.
But hey man, to each their own.
As to wether star fleet is a military, I would argue that it is. The starship enterprise travels throughout the galaxy spreading the federation, the federation is an empire that uses diplomacy to spread instead of force. The missions are similar to that of the real life captain cook, who largely treated other cultures with respect but was still out to spread the British empire. While star fleet is reluctant to use force, unlike modern imperialism and military tactics, it still seems to function like a military.
But space ships really are, in fact, 'submarines in space'. Both vehicles are primarily concerned with massive atmospheric pressure differences between what's inside and what's outside the hull. It should resemble submarines in space. That's EXACTLY what it should be like. Get too far away from that and you lose the sense of being in space.
The real reason the films went downhill is that they spent the next 2 movies getting back on track after Nimoy changed his mind about leaving. Plus putting Shatner in charge of the fifth. That was a major blunder.
Then of course there was the alienation of Harlan Ellison by Roddenberry. Ellison turned down offers to write those 2 catch up movies. They could have been fantastic.
And the question still in my mind as a consequence is why Vulcans are not essentially immortal now. All they need do is clone themselves and transfer their minds to younger bodies.
Of course similar logic applies to everyone in the federation. Transporter technology should equal immortality. Just record your pattern when you're in your prime (or whatever your preferred age might be).
There are not massive pressure differences on a space ship. There's 1ATM difference (assuming that air is pressurised to that level on board), that's pretty much insignificant - less than the difference in pressure of a sealed can of coke and normal sea level pressure.
You didn't really have to explain what spaceships are. I was aware of that.
The question is how you portray it. Do you use futuristic imagery? Do you pull a 2001? Or a Star Wars? Or a super-futuristic looking clean scifi design like TMP?
Or do you make it dark, ugly and claustrophobic like Nick Meyes likes it.
TMP didn't make me forget I'm in space. In fact it showed me a future science fiction world.
In fairness though, I don't think that the Trek movies as a whole presented things as "submarines in space." Sure, there was that feel during the Mutara Nebula battle in the TWOK climax, but the sets where not dark and dreary...in fact they were just jazzed-up/colored up versions of the TMP sets. Nothing in TSFS, TVH or TFF says "subs in space" to me. It's really only TUC that goes back there...and Meyer said that he got a lot of inspiration from "Hunt for Red October" because of the themes of the movie.
Yeah, I'm exaggerating for effect a little. But I always find it striking how different the style of TMP but also TOS is. Those shows were stylish and futuristic. The colors and crazy lighting in TOS were used to market color TVs. TMP has this sleek, clean SciFi design look.
And then TWOK just looks messy and dirty to me in comparison.
I'll take the TOS look any day, to be honest. And I really like the TNG / VOY aesthetic as well. But, I didn't think TWOK had the ship looking dirty or blah. I think it got that way after they got blasted a few times, which is reasonable.
That said, it was definitely so in TUC...so no argument there.
Of all the things I don't like about the films, including TMP, it was the change in uniforms, because I love the colors of TOS.
Wrath of Khan is a fun, quotable action flick in general, but it's not a good Star Trek film. It reboots the series into something very militaristic. Roddenberry had a problem with this in his notes. Federation sciences seems to now be separate from Star Fleet and the Marcuses are very weary of "the military". That's just odd.
Then you have serious characterization problems with Kirk and Spock. Kirk has faced plenty of death and never "cheated it". He was on a failed colony. His brother was killed. He held Bones back when his girlfriend was hit by a truck. He mourned every redshirt. Spock is not his first experience with death. It's also very weird to see him so disinterested in his ship and crew that he needs a biological family invented for him to get his crap together.
Spock's death is really problematic for both him and Kirk. Kirk has never been shy about running down to engineering to ride Scotty about an emergency. TWOK Kirk sits on the bridge impotently calling down and waiting for an answer. He becomes a total idiot. So much so that Spock is the one that has to go down and do the dirty work. No one in engineering has made any attempt to save the ship when he gets there. There are no dead kids littered about the magic radiation tube. No one puts on a helmet and gives it a try. 300 people are going to die and only Spock cares. It really makes no sense.
So, it's not my favorite film of the series. It gets most of its emotion hooks from distorting the characters. I don't recognize anyone in this film. But, again, it's a good ride in general.
Then you have serious characterization problems with Kirk and Spock. Kirk has faced plenty of death and never "cheated it". He was on a failed colony. His brother was killed. He held Bones back when his girlfriend was hit by a truck. He mourned every redshirt. Spock is not his first experience with death. It's also very weird to see him so disinterested in his ship and crew that he needs a biological family invented for him to get his crap together.
Spock's death is really problematic for both him and Kirk. Kirk has never been shy about running down to engineering to ride Scotty about an emergency. TWOK Kirk sits on the bridge impotently calling down and waiting for an answer. He becomes a total idiot. So much so that Spock is the one that has to go down and do the dirty work. No one in engineering has made any attempt to save the ship when he gets there. There are no dead kids littered about the magic radiation tube. No one puts on a helmet and gives it a try. 300 people are going to die and only Spock cares. It really makes no sense.
So, it's not my favorite film of the series. It gets most of its emotion hooks from distorting the characters. I don't recognize anyone in this film. But, again, it's a good ride in general.
They did the exploration thing with TMP, TVH, TFF. They did the brinkmanship thing with TWOK. They did the diplomacy thing with TUC. Exploration, brinkmanship and diplomacy episodes each represent some of the most celebrated aspects featured in TOS.
The atheistic is more militaristic in the TOS movies, that's certainly true. Especially with the uniforms but also with the "colder" look of the bridge and the fixtures and fittings. These are also somewhat different characters - especially Kirk. Movie Kirk is quite different from TOS Kirk.
But the plots/stories I think represent TOS Trek fairly well I think.
The atheistic is more militaristic in the TOS movies, that's certainly true. Especially with the uniforms but also with the "colder" look of the bridge and the fixtures and fittings. These are also somewhat different characters - especially Kirk. Movie Kirk is quite different from TOS Kirk.
But the plots/stories I think represent TOS Trek fairly well I think.
How is TWOK different in tone from Balance of Terror or Errand of Mercy?
Also, Starfleet visited "Federation scientists" who were not Starfleet often enough. And the only one "weary" was David (who was a bit of a crank and also very young). Carol was fine.
Roddenberry's TMP novel had a TON of military in it.
TWOK is incredibly different from both those episodes. BoT and EoM are stories where the Enterprise is thrust into a military situation. In BoT the Romulan commander hates his job as the aggressor. Kirk and the Romulan have respect for one another at the end. The war mongers of the episode are punished, or remorseful. EoM is a pacifistic tirade where violence is constantly threatened but we never actually see any. And when you think the big battle is about the happen the Organians step in and shame you for wanting to see it so badly. Kirk is embarrassed about his militaristic attitudes.
TWOK starts with a military exercise. It sets the tone for the whole film. Those uniforms look like there should be swords and pistols on their belts. There's a couple of prolonged battle show pieces. Khan is irredeemable and we all applaud his destruction.
David is not just a crank, he actually thinks Kirk ordered the murder of everyone on the station. When he complains about "pawns of the military" Carol says starfleet has "kept the peace for a hundred years". That's damning with faint praise. It seems like a lot of the people on the station are equally cranky.
It also had a whole giant footnote about Kirk denying he was having sex with Spock. That novel is all over the place.
Someday, I really must try to read this.
The Kobayashi Maru is not inherently a military exercise. The candidate can go about their business and adhere to treaty stipulations. Or call the Klingons and talk. Or call the real military. Also the Enterprise does not fire until fired upon. (Actually, do they fire at all?)
In the Ultimate Computer the Federation (Starfleet) buys a computer to run its ships. First exercise? Military. Second? Planetary exploration. Second? Also military.
Do the Organians TALK the Klingons and the Federation out of their conflict? Or do the Organians resort to violence?
We don't applaud Khan's death. We're too busy freaking out about Spock. And Khan is just as dead as the Romulan crew. Khan didn't hate his role as the aggressor in Space Seed either. Neither did Kor (although Kirk did).
See? Crank?
As was The Great Bird.
Someday, I really must try to read this.
You totally should. It's not even that long. It's my favorite Star Trek book.
You're trying to argue every individual aspect of the film in a vacuum as opposed to relating to each other. Any of these alone is innocuous. All of them together is a theme. TWOK is purposefully way more militant, pound for pound, than what came before or after in TNG.
Buys? Where did you get that?
They use the violence of others against them. They render violence an impossibility. There's an enormous difference between that and attacking them to make them stop.
I don't know what movie you were watching, but I saw a long scene where the Enterprise rises over the stern of the Reliant to swelling music and we see closeups of Kirks mouth shouting "fire" while the Reliant is gleefully blown to bits. Speaking of which, I'm pretty sure they could have blown the Reliant the rest of the way up to stop Genesis. It's not like it was TNT in a container. If you drop it it doesn't go off. It was a specifically programmed sequence of reactions.
Similar threads
