...but it would have cost more! I'm not paying to go see a movie that costs 0.000000321 cents more dagnabbit.
Is TUC a better movie if it's Saavik who betrays the crew?
- Thread starter steveman
- Start date
...but it would have cost more! I'm not paying to go see a movie that costs 0.000000321 cents more dagnabbit.
But they never explained why the main heroes hated Klingons so much, either. It was sort of taken as a given that Klingons were to be hated; this ought to have sufficed for Saavik, too.
Timo Saloniemi
Only fans would've been sufficiently shocked at Saavik's betrayal. Overall, it wouldn't have registered to broader audiences as any more, or less, heartbreaking as it was Valeris doing it. Truth be told, I thought having a Vulcan Starfleet Officer betray the Federation was pretty stupid. The movies kept trying to do weird stuff with the Vulcans, Meyer, in particular. Saavik was an emotional girl who swore, but we're still supposed to accept her as Vulcan. Sybok laughs loud and hearty. Valeris schemes and betrays. Spock mind rapes ... there's no end to it. Where all this resentment for the Vulcans comes from ... I don't friggin' know. It's just disenheartening when you're a fan of the species and think they're pretty cool the way Mark Lenard & Tim Russ play them ... and Leonard Nimoy, when Spock was it his most Vulcanican.
Tuvok had to be reigned in by Janeway. You can use logic to justify a lot. It's all about context. Or rather, logic is the beginning of wisdom.
The problem with Valeris as opposed to Saavik is that Valeris isn't a half Romulan nursing a grudge with anger management issues.
On the other hand, the problem with Saavik is that she might also be the mother of Spock's child but her return to Starfleet after maternity leave could have been a thing.
Her return could be the cause for Spock's celebration and Kirk letting her pilot the ship to refresh her memory.
One would also have to question why she would be willing to sacrifice Kirk ([to Spock] I knew you would save him because HE saved YOU).
Using Saavik could have layered more complex motivations for betrayal (siding with the Romulans allows them to enter into a conflict with the Klingons that will keep both occupied for decades, allowing our child to grow up in safety - you were too emotional to see that [burn]) and murder (they were motivated by racism and hatred not worthy of the Federation; I was motivated by logic. If they lived, the plan failed) and yet left the possibility for redemption by persuasion as opposed to the mind rape at the end (Can't you see that you've betrayed David's memory? He wanted to create life to relieve hardship and suffering in the name of peace not a war that will lead to the death of billions. We both have to learn to let go of the hate. Your child has a chance to live in a time of peace. Don't throw that away).
Totally, Saavik would have been better. I found Valeris too be too smug and emotional for a Vulcan.
I think it would have felt too much trying to be shock value and clumsily done at that, with Saavik having already been depicted very differently between II and III/IV (and really just a cameo in IV) and then coming back big in VI (and presumably being characterized more like she was in II but relying on what happened to her in III ... 
). There being a Starfleet-crew character among the bad guys makes sense, as does that that character would not just be an extra, so her suddenly having a big role again and so the bad guy traitor being her would probably still be pretty obvious.
I guess her having a big role again could have again helped push the (misleading) idea that it was an end of an era before a new generation comes in but Valeris being a similar character but younger and with a different (in some ways maybe closer) relationship with Spock did that just as well. And agreed that the traitor not being motivated to hate by one personal incident makes her more interesting as more of an everyperson.
). There being a Starfleet-crew character among the bad guys makes sense, as does that that character would not just be an extra, so her suddenly having a big role again and so the bad guy traitor being her would probably still be pretty obvious.I guess her having a big role again could have again helped push the (misleading) idea that it was an end of an era before a new generation comes in but Valeris being a similar character but younger and with a different (in some ways maybe closer) relationship with Spock did that just as well. And agreed that the traitor not being motivated to hate by one personal incident makes her more interesting as more of an everyperson.
Saavik is certainly a plausible co-conspirator in a general sense. I don't think she'd cooperate in framing Kirk or that she'd jeopardise the 'prise in the way that's depicted in the film though. The film would have to be redrafted where Saavik says something like "I did it for you" thinking it's what Kirk would've wanted.
Valeris is a proportionate character. There's a level of trust there depicted in the start of the film so her betrayal is meaningful but she keeps things tight to her chest so it's a plausible surprise there's a whole world of a hidden agenda within. I don't think there needs to be yet another element added on to jostle for space with the other big themes underway in this film. So I'm happy with Valeris.
Valeris is a proportionate character. There's a level of trust there depicted in the start of the film so her betrayal is meaningful but she keeps things tight to her chest so it's a plausible surprise there's a whole world of a hidden agenda within. I don't think there needs to be yet another element added on to jostle for space with the other big themes underway in this film. So I'm happy with Valeris.
Yes, but Tuvok was always on the side of the angels. His problems were never his intentions. Spock, on the other hand, shows bad intent, here, and it's way more deviant than anything Tuvok was ever capable of. Spock knows -- OK? -- KNOWS that Sulu is aware of where the conference is being held and YET ... uses the excuse of wanting that information from Valeris to issue her a needless mind-rape. This is not something that logic can explain. It's not something that his Human half can explain. When Kirk was pressuring Spock about getting that info, Spock could've so easily just turned to him and said, "Sulu knows." But he didn't ... to our chagrin and dismay. As horrific as this story element is in its own right, it's also the last TOS movie we see him in ... and it's never acknowledged, or dealt with. AFTER Spock goes all Harvey Weinstein, only THEN does he tell Kirk what he knew, all along. This is so inexcuseable and nobody even goes over to Valeris to even OFFER consolation -- not even Uhura!!!
STVI wasn't as bad as Lost where they drafted in a torturer rather than carrying out any fact checking but it's still pretty bad. They still need the names of the co-conspirators I suppose.
The finale seems a bit unlikely though. The conspirators would have had to be really blatant to prevent standard security checks locating an assassin so close to the podium.
I agree. I love TUC but Saavik would have made it better because after growing to like her through three movies I wouldn't have seen her betrayal coming.
Not to rationalize Spock's behavior, but the location of the peace conference is not what causes him to do the mind meld. Kirk wants the "names" of the other conspirators, something Sulu knows nothing about. It's only after they realize how high up the conspiracy goes (Cartright) that Kirk asks for the location of the conference, knowing the only way they can stop a disaster is to go there themselves.
I know this thread was bumped, but it's an excellent discussion topic with good arguments on either side. Here's my two cents:
Here's the history, from what I understand: Catrall was originally Meyer's first choice to be Saavik in TWOK. This didn't happen, and Alley was cast instead. By the time of TUC, Catrall was available, and Meyer's intent was that she was going to be Saavik, and she would act like Alley did in TWOK. But someone didn't want the character to be played by three different actresses, so the character's name in the script was changed from Saavik to Valeris, even though she's clearly meant to be the former, just like how Scotty's lines in Generations were clearly meant to be read by Nimoy's Spock.
So the two questions are...1. Would the movie be better if Saavik betrayed the crew, and 2. Would Alley or Curtis have been a better choice if Catrall wasn't in the equation?
1. Absolutely it would be better. By the simple inclusion of a new character that we know nothing about (backstory above excepted), the suspicion immediately falls on them. But to have a character we know, who we kinda trust, and that the audience would have gotten caught up in the fact that they're back after not having seen them since TSFS, would immediately erase much of the suspicion that she is in fact the bad guy.
2. Even though Valeris acts very similar to Alley's Saavik rather than Curtis's, I think having Curtis reprise the role would have been the better choice. Here's why: By the time of TUC, Alley was widely known as the character Rebecca Howe from the sitcom Cheers. She also looked significantly different from when she was on TWOK. IMHO, the audience would have just seen her as Rebecca with pointy ears, and not been able to really take her seriously as Saavik. Plus, we got more of a backstory with Curtis's Saavik as far as both having a rationale about hating Klingons (David dying for her) and being a more sympathetic character (the possibility that she was pregnant with Spock's child) would have made much more of an impact when it turns out she's the betrayer than the more logical and emotionless Saavik of TWOK-Alley and Catrall/Valeris.
Here's the history, from what I understand: Catrall was originally Meyer's first choice to be Saavik in TWOK. This didn't happen, and Alley was cast instead. By the time of TUC, Catrall was available, and Meyer's intent was that she was going to be Saavik, and she would act like Alley did in TWOK. But someone didn't want the character to be played by three different actresses, so the character's name in the script was changed from Saavik to Valeris, even though she's clearly meant to be the former, just like how Scotty's lines in Generations were clearly meant to be read by Nimoy's Spock.
So the two questions are...1. Would the movie be better if Saavik betrayed the crew, and 2. Would Alley or Curtis have been a better choice if Catrall wasn't in the equation?
1. Absolutely it would be better. By the simple inclusion of a new character that we know nothing about (backstory above excepted), the suspicion immediately falls on them. But to have a character we know, who we kinda trust, and that the audience would have gotten caught up in the fact that they're back after not having seen them since TSFS, would immediately erase much of the suspicion that she is in fact the bad guy.
2. Even though Valeris acts very similar to Alley's Saavik rather than Curtis's, I think having Curtis reprise the role would have been the better choice. Here's why: By the time of TUC, Alley was widely known as the character Rebecca Howe from the sitcom Cheers. She also looked significantly different from when she was on TWOK. IMHO, the audience would have just seen her as Rebecca with pointy ears, and not been able to really take her seriously as Saavik. Plus, we got more of a backstory with Curtis's Saavik as far as both having a rationale about hating Klingons (David dying for her) and being a more sympathetic character (the possibility that she was pregnant with Spock's child) would have made much more of an impact when it turns out she's the betrayer than the more logical and emotionless Saavik of TWOK-Alley and Catrall/Valeris.
Also, during the investigation Valeris was cleaning up her tracks and time was at the essence to get the information as fast as they could. The conspirators were arms length to the President and the information Spock got out of her was vital. If there was time, maybe Spock could've talk logic and stuff and feed her nicely and maybe she would talk... in 10 years, but Kirk needed that information at the moment and there was no time to negotiate or talk her into it. I have no clue how Spock or anyone else could've retrieved that information from Valeris any other way.
good points
regarding Catrall/Alley/Curtis think it goes Meyer wanted Catrall for TWOK but was unavailable so got Alley. then for VI Meyer wanted Alley to reprise the role but she was unavailable (R?) so went with original savvik choice Catrall who didn't want to play a 3rd incarnation of the character so a new role was created (and she came up with the unique hair style and think she even chose the name?)
Unfortunately Robin Curtis wasn't considered for VI which is bizarre as it would've made all kinds of sense as although ally would've made VI even more connected to TWOK, Curtis was the current savvik having taken over the role and it was her version that had experienced the wrath of the Klingons and David sacrificing himself for her with the audience more invested in her plus would've avoided audience confusion with 'cheers' alley coming back (and of course it would've come as a greater surprise over valerius..). abit puzzled why Nimoy didnt step in and say to meyer hang on if savviks in this it has to be Robin as she was chosen by him for III. ideally though Alley should've done III, IV and VI (but as we all know now the negotiations for her to be in III got messed up)
Last edited:
Allegedly Meyer didn't like Curtis's performance but she performed exactly as Nimoy wanted her to. It's not as if Curtis could not have brought more emotion to the fore under a different director. For my part, I really dislike Catrall's performance. At least Alley played stifling her emotions well. Catrall's only Vulcanism is her stilted speech pattern. Curtis would have done way better IMO.
If time hadn't passed by then, then it would mean Saavik hadn't changed since II??? So many things had happened since the events of Khan and her rank would be different and she wouldn't carry a similar rank with Valeris. I would think Meyer would have some respect for characters than to simply just retype names. Valeris is not Saavik in appearance nor in characterization. Kim Cattral did a tremendous performance and created an interesting Vulcan, she didn't ape Kirstie Alley and I'm not saying you implied this.
To me, I just don't see Valeris as the Saavik wannabe. Maybe you think a cut and paste approach was obvious, and it may have been, but I and fans who loved the real Saavik would like an appropriate backstory of what she's been doing since. If it was a cut and paste effort, it's another chink in a rushed through script which never had much weight IMO.
Kirstie Alley returning deserved more than a line in the bridge with Kirk and Spock. I would demand Saavik in the conference room with senior brass, by this time I would think she would've earned the rank of Commander. And also, having a moment where it's Kirk, this time, giving the com to Saavik to take the new Enterprise out of space dock. You are right, it was obvious based on those lines.
No. I think some writers or movie makers had expressed "Vulcan Logic" has its own interpretation of ethics. Vulcanians or Vulcans are not one dimensional; it's presented these characters don't all act like Spock. Something I didn't like with Robin Curtis character.
Maternity leave often puts women's careers on hold ;-p
Yeh!!!
Yes you could have substituted Humans in for Alley and Catrall. At least Curtis played it Vulcan. Whats the point in having Vulcans if they act like humans?
I know Alley was prettier than Curtis and had more charisma but she could have easily been Sarah - Spock's human niece/protege if it wasn't for the ears.
Catrall acted nothing like a Vulcan. She wore the horrible head band. Catrall is beautiful - why make her look ugly. Took satisfaction in killing the Klingons - ruthlessly killed her accomplances. Seem to have no regrets until caught in the act. The only good thing about her being in TUC was her being the baddie.
Last edited:
Similar threads
