No love for Star Trek V?
- Thread starter Valenti
- Start date
While I never really liked the idea that McCoy had euthanized his father (mainly because there'd never been any hint of this or the pain that resulted from it before - same as Spock suddenly having a brother we've never heard of), Kelley's performance during that scene was brilliant. It was a great demonstration of just how good an actor he was.
One thing that I will give The Final Frontier is that you can tell Shatner truly believed in the story he was trying to tell, and I actually think that's something that lifts it above Insurrection and Nemesis. On Insurrection for instance you can tell that Frakes was basically handed a script based on Michael Piller's personal politics and told to just get it up on the screen with minimum fuss, whereas Baird never viewed Nemesis as anything more than a quick paycheck.
They wouldn't even have gotten the "C" unit; they were busy with Back to the Future II and III. In fact, I seem to remember hearing that unit, which had handled Treks II-IV was essentially block-booked for three consecutive years (between the two BTTF sequels and Who Framed Roger Rabbit) - so, the man actually to blame for TFF's downfall was none other than Robert Zemeckis!
Star Trek V is Star Trek to its core... there are many things to criticize the movie about but the people who do so with statements like "Shatner didn't get it" or whatnot are I think selling The Shat short... the story that Shatner crafted calls upon his memories of making Star Trek going way back to the 1960s, it has through-lines of the original television series that in some ways none of the other movies matched... what's clear is that Shatner was paying attention to those old scripts and what he creates here is in one line a love letter to them... the Starship Enterprise on TV encountered larger than life God creatures all the time, Star Trek V could in a thumbnail be described as "The Way To Eden meets Who Mourns For Adonis", but perhaps that's simplifying it too much. Nevertheless, not once when rewatching it have I ever been struck by any sense of un-Trekness.
The movie has a warmth and good heartedness that again harkens back to the innocence of pre-movie original series, everything from the campfire scenes through examining the relationships between the trio feels like someone helmed this who *understood* that those things are as fundamental to the original series as you can get, and in part it lives in the sheer delight of that legacy better than any of the other original Trek movies...
Heck, this is the first movie since maybe TMP to actually remember that the Captain's Yeoman is a thing
Shatner also brings a wry irony to proceedings though. Paradise City was established in the exact time frame of TOS and has become corrupted and abandoned by successive governments over time, with this Shatner is looking back at the wide-eyed optimism of the 1960s through the pesimistic eyes of the 1980s, and that's a very powerful (and often overlooked) perspective...
I may sound like I'm defending the movie, and in a lot of ways I am
Star Trek V is flawed. But every time I watch it I come away with new perspectives about it, about it's humour, about it's heart and it's philosophy. Yes it is flawed. But in concept, in the interesting insight it gives into the lead actor's take on a universe he'd been basically living inside for so long, it has hidden depths.
The movie has a warmth and good heartedness that again harkens back to the innocence of pre-movie original series, everything from the campfire scenes through examining the relationships between the trio feels like someone helmed this who *understood* that those things are as fundamental to the original series as you can get, and in part it lives in the sheer delight of that legacy better than any of the other original Trek movies...
Heck, this is the first movie since maybe TMP to actually remember that the Captain's Yeoman is a thing
Shatner also brings a wry irony to proceedings though. Paradise City was established in the exact time frame of TOS and has become corrupted and abandoned by successive governments over time, with this Shatner is looking back at the wide-eyed optimism of the 1960s through the pesimistic eyes of the 1980s, and that's a very powerful (and often overlooked) perspective...
I may sound like I'm defending the movie, and in a lot of ways I am
Star Trek V is flawed. But every time I watch it I come away with new perspectives about it, about it's humour, about it's heart and it's philosophy. Yes it is flawed. But in concept, in the interesting insight it gives into the lead actor's take on a universe he'd been basically living inside for so long, it has hidden depths.The main complaints against TFF seem to be that it's humor was too broad and/or forced (slapstick humor in SF/F tends to be derided though I usually like it including in the film) and it's too full of Kirk/Shatner-worship, with pretty much everyone and everything else made to look pretty bad (as part of that, how underwhelming and even unexplored the betrayals/mind control of the rest of the crew was). The other big complaint was that in addition to underwhelming/inconsistent story and tone it visually looked cheap.
And the plot was the overly done Roddenberry-ish Coming To Terms With God-issues thing.
My least favorite of the TOS movies by a wide margin, but still I think it's good.
One strange thing is how easily Kirk, McCoy and Spock resist the urge to join Sybok, but everyone else is totally bamboozled like freakish cult members.
One strange thing is how easily Kirk, McCoy and Spock resist the urge to join Sybok, but everyone else is totally bamboozled like freakish cult members.
My favorite of the movies. The ending wasn't great, but not horrible either.
Vulcan princess? Nah....Sybok was the product of an affair between Sarek and Sybo, from 'Wolf in the Fold'. She was older than she looked.
Vulcan princess? Nah....Sybok was the product of an affair between Sarek and Sybo, from 'Wolf in the Fold'. She was older than she looked.
Star Trek V is not the worst Trek film, simply because it was not the last to feature the original cast. It was certainly the weakest of the TOS films, but I would take it over Nemesis any day of the week and twice on Sunday, merely because things improved for the TOS cast and they got the ending they deserved in the next film, whereas Nemesis killed the TNG films altogether, without giving the cast a chance to properly say goodbye.
I can certainly see the criticisms (I've even agreed with some of them ) but over the years and with plenty of reviewing I've really come to appreciate the movie's positive points. 
Another one is that most of the TOS movies are pushing this universe forward and doing quite big things -- even TVH -- but The Final Frontier (perhaps aptly, given that subtitle) is the only one that revels in the wonder of the Enterprise boldly going into the unknown and exploring the crazy shit that's out there. In this way again it encapsulates certain things about TOS the television show that the other TOS movies don't really do.
) but over the years and with plenty of reviewing I've really come to appreciate the movie's positive points. Another one is that most of the TOS movies are pushing this universe forward and doing quite big things -- even TVH -- but The Final Frontier (perhaps aptly, given that subtitle) is the only one that revels in the wonder of the Enterprise boldly going into the unknown and exploring the crazy shit that's out there. In this way again it encapsulates certain things about TOS the television show that the other TOS movies don't really do. 
Star Trek V: The Final Frontier kicks ass and takes names. Anyone who says otherwise will feel differently after they share their pain with Sybok and he takes it away. He's ready for it. Gem from "The Empath" coached him.
Had Bill Shatner gotten his way with the script he wanted to film, the entire crew -- that includes Spock & Bones -- would've betrayed Kirk to follow Sybok ... willingly. Effectively making TFF all about Kirk's heroic exploits as a Man Who Walks Alone. This is how The Shat saw STAR TREK; it's what he takes from it. I have to say, I'm kind of surprised by that. I mean, it's one thing to dig the fact of being the star, it's quite another to sort of be so dismissive of your costars, like that. I mean ... that's pure ego, right there! The idea of Kirk taking on He Who Has No Name was also an idea Bill was deeply infatuated with -- and not meaning it as a joke, either! He has some very strange ideas about STAR TREK, or at least, he did in those days. But TOS movies were on the way out, by then, that's for sure. TNG was the new kid on the block. And it's really like, well who cares? This is the the last, or next to the last TOS movie, anyway, who cares what it's about, anymore? We're about ready to move on, here.
So, between that and the unexpected success of The Voyage Home, Shatner was granted the chance to make his STAR TREK movie and a shot to kickstart his would-be career as a big event movie director, from now on. You know, it's funny how the 2nd bananas talked so much shit about Shatner as having this rampaging ego and his propensity for stealing and changing scenes to flatter himself. Part of that sounds like sour grapes, because The Shat never had to pander to the Trekkies to keep his career going. On the other hand, the only other member of TOS who had an outside career as film maker and big screen actor was Leonard Nimoy and guess what? Nobody ever talked shit about him. So, I'm not so sure that jealousy is what it was all about. But TFF was definitely not the STAR TREK film that had the most committed performances from TOS actors. That it was just successful enough to merit one final outing is, perhaps, a small achievement for Bill, considering everything that went wrong with the production. And I know that he was extremely proud of what he'd done. Extremely proud ...
So, between that and the unexpected success of The Voyage Home, Shatner was granted the chance to make his STAR TREK movie and a shot to kickstart his would-be career as a big event movie director, from now on. You know, it's funny how the 2nd bananas talked so much shit about Shatner as having this rampaging ego and his propensity for stealing and changing scenes to flatter himself. Part of that sounds like sour grapes, because The Shat never had to pander to the Trekkies to keep his career going. On the other hand, the only other member of TOS who had an outside career as film maker and big screen actor was Leonard Nimoy and guess what? Nobody ever talked shit about him. So, I'm not so sure that jealousy is what it was all about. But TFF was definitely not the STAR TREK film that had the most committed performances from TOS actors. That it was just successful enough to merit one final outing is, perhaps, a small achievement for Bill, considering everything that went wrong with the production. And I know that he was extremely proud of what he'd done. Extremely proud ...
I always say there’s a good movie in there somewhere trying to get out.
I watched it yesterday actually (part of a Starz TOS marathon). I still find things to enjoy about it. It is definitely hampered by poor f/x and some dumb moments (Sybok being Spock’s brother added nothing to the story, “I know this ship like the back of my hand” THUNK).
I like it better than TMP, though that’s not saying a whole lot...
I watched it yesterday actually (part of a Starz TOS marathon). I still find things to enjoy about it. It is definitely hampered by poor f/x and some dumb moments (Sybok being Spock’s brother added nothing to the story, “I know this ship like the back of my hand” THUNK).
I like it better than TMP, though that’s not saying a whole lot...
Personally, i don't see anything wrong with this. Previously I commented that the strange thing was seeing Kirk, Spock and Bones all resist Sybok, even though no one else did.
I think a better compromise would have Bones joining Sybok. Kirk, of course would be able to resist him, and then Spock might also because of his bond with Kirk, his Vulcan discipline and his intellect.
On the Shat ego thing, it's interesting to hear the interview that Shatner did with Koenig on his talk show. It's also interesting to hear interviews of Eddie Paskey who played Leslie and other characters on the show. I think these cases are often a situation where the truth is somewhere in the middle and people often misinterpret others motivations, and sometimes people do not take the care to think of or check on other's feelings.
Source?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek_V:_The_Final_Frontier
DEVELOPMENT:
"Roddenberry, Nimoy and Kelley all disagreed that Spock and McCoy would betray Kirk, which Loughery explained was done to give a conflict in which "one man stands alone" from the rest."
DEVELOPMENT:
"Roddenberry, Nimoy and Kelley all disagreed that Spock and McCoy would betray Kirk, which Loughery explained was done to give a conflict in which "one man stands alone" from the rest."
Considering what we got with 'Return of the Archons' and Landru....it might have been interesting to see Kirk stand alone.
Sybok usually goes just so far in helping people with their pain.
But this time the....fervor....makes him (perhaps unintentionally) stronger and he even converts Spock.
There is something about Kirk that makes him able to resist....
Sybok usually goes just so far in helping people with their pain.
But this time the....fervor....makes him (perhaps unintentionally) stronger and he even converts Spock.
There is something about Kirk that makes him able to resist....
Yes, I saw the Keonig interview, also. Because TOS' movies were so long ago, the Shat and everyone can talk with complete frankness about those days, now. But Walter does make the point that A) the 2nd bananas did NOT come forward with their concerns/complaints about Shatner and that B) this was also the result of the fact that, regardless, Bill was in a position to exclude any of the 2nd bananas from being in the next movie (when, unlike Shatner, the Trek movies was pretty much all they had going. Take that away and they're on food stamps). But I also agree that there was a lot of misunderstanding, in those days, mainly because there was a kind of a "wall" between them and Shatner. Talking to Shatner about what they saw, or felt, he was doing -- directly -- wasn't going to be possible. They just didn't have that sort of rapport with him and Shatner probably wasn't that interested in knowing them, then, anyway.
Similar threads
- Poll
