The Wrath of Khan vs The Undiscovered Country

[STEPhon IT]

For me, it's TWOK by a country mile. TUC doesn't even crack my top 4 TOS films. It's easily, in my opinion, the most over-rated film in the entire franchise.

While TWOK was fresh, edgy, genuinely dramatic and had a totally unique look and feel at the time it was released, to me TUC feels tired, rushed and almost like it's trying too hard. It has some nice moments, but the story is flawed and the "mystery plot" was sophomoric even for Junior-in-HS me back in 1991. I thought Meyer's script and dialogue were painfully self-indulgent ("Hey, I like literature and Shakespeare, so I'm going to make the Klingons...ummmm....fans of Shakespeare and have them randomly quote lines from plays"). Even the title is self-indulgent ("Hey, I wanted to subtitle Star Trek II The Undiscovered Country, but they overrode me, so now I'm going to shoehorn it in as this movie's title...because I like the sound of that title even though it's obscure and really makes no sense."). Everything in TUC feels "winky at the audience" to me, which takes away any feeling of realism or tension...which are feelings that pervade TWOK. I also really don't like the soundtrack. Chang to me is the lest gripping TOS movie villain as well. He's just....boring, despite a nice performance by Christopher Plummer. And even "teenage me" knew, seeing the movie for the very first time, that Valeris was basically just a discount-rack Saavik.

It's not that I don't like it (I actually do, despite my paragraph above), but it just doesn't check a lot of my personal boxes. I know there's a lot of sentimentality tied up with this film across fandom, and I don't know why that never affected me. I'm a huge TOS fan (the other series come as close to TOS as TUC comes to TWOK for me hahaha), so you'd think I'd have a soft spot, but the end with the signatures and final log just sort of fall flat for me. So while I do enjoy it, to me it's very average, undercooked, and could have/should have been so much more.

Meanwhile, TWOK revives an iconic bad guy, has a rousing nautical soundtrack, has genuine (non-winky) tension and drama throughout, plays with an interesting sci-fi concept, has the iconic death of Spock, and ultimately sets the tone for the franchise for years to come.

James Horner's score was a goosebumps of elevating that experience of watching The Wrath of Khan; it was sprinkles and chocolate covered casing on the ice cream. What an incredible score, along with Kirk's story, Singh's rage and obsession, creating pretty interesting new characters, and taking me back to an epic Star Trek adventure, although it had its flaws, by far a breath taking experience. I get caught into the movie and it just doesn't allow me to drift on my phone or laptop, the movie is so engaging and it is engaging to my friends who are not Star Trek fans. The movie works on all cylinders and even when I knew Spock's outcome was coming I still get caught up in the drama. To compare such a very good movie to TUC is a joke, a "super-fans'" compliment within their internal logic.

TUC is okay and gets a pass but misses so many opportunities to make it an epic moment which I thought both the Federation and the Klingons well deserved. Thank Goodness George Lucas did such a marvelous send off for these iconic heroes because what's around it falls very short and empty.

I was surprised to find out Cartwright was involved.

Impossible. Cartwright never held back on his bigotry in his first scenes, maybe not for you, but I saw him as THE number 1 suspect in that conspiracy. Valeris was a given when she was seen by the door of Kirk's quarters when he made his racist Captain's log, and another scene where we saw her observing some ugly picture, talking very fearful subtext, and drinking wine with Spock inside his pad.

 

[DonIago]

^That "ugly picture" is "Adam and Eve expelled from Paradise" by Marc Chagall.

https://www.wikiart.org/en/marc-chagall/adam-and-eve-expelled-from-paradise-1961-6

 

[STEPhon IT]

Ooooooh, well then, it's kind of "ugly"???

 

[Damian]

Impossible. Cartwright never held back on his bigotry in his first scenes, maybe not for you, but I saw him as THE number 1 suspect in that conspiracy.

In retrospect, yes, I see it all now.

But at the time I was caught off guard. I'm old enough (ugh) to have seen the movie when it came out, and up to that point in Star Trek, Starfleet didn't really have 'bad' guys that would commit a conspiracy like that (at least without some alien influence). Starfleet were the good guys. Misguided sometimes, but they wouldn't be involved in a conspiracy. There was no Section 31 yet, no Admiral Leytons yet. So I just wasn't used to see someone in the Starfleet leadership commit treason basically. That's one of the reasons Gene Roddenberry had considered TUC at least partly apocryphal. Now I don't agree with him on that point, but I can see where he was coming from. Starfleet brass did not commit treason before that.

And Cartwright was a non-controversial figure in TVH before that.

If TUC came out today, absolutely, I would peg Cartwright much like you did. But when the film came out it was just sort of a new concept.

Valeris was a lower level officer, and if nothing else, her conversation with Spock in his quarters was a gimme. And I didn't like her so I was actually kind of glad she was a bad guy.

Some novels that have come out later have used the idea that Section 31 was behind the plot and Cartwright was part of 31, along with Valeris. Which in retrospect makes sense. It would be exactly the kind of plot they would be involved with.

James Horner's score was a goosebumps of elevating that experience of watching The Wrath of Khan; it was sprinkles and chocolate covered casing on the ice cream. What an incredible score, along with Kirk's story

Yeah, Horner did a great score for TWOK, and for TSFS as well. I still favor Goldsmith. Goldsmith captured the essence of what Star Trek is overall perfectly. But Horner is a close second, and in both TWOK and TSFS he captured the right mood for the scenes. Eidelman was fine for TUC but he had big shoes to fill. I sometimes wonder what Horner or Goldsmith would have done with TUC. Meyer had asked both to score TUC but both turned him down.

 

[STEPhon IT]

In retrospect, yes, I see it all now.

But at the time I was caught off guard. I'm old enough (ugh) to have seen the movie when it came out, and up to that point in Star Trek, Starfleet didn't really have 'bad' guys that would commit a conspiracy like that (at least without some alien influence). Starfleet were the good guys. Misguided sometimes, but they wouldn't be involved in a conspiracy. There was no Section 31 yet, no Admiral Leytons yet. So I just wasn't used to see someone in the Starfleet leadership commit treason basically. That's one of the reasons Gene Roddenberry had considered TUC at least partly apocryphal. Now I don't agree with him on that point, but I can see where he was coming from. Starfleet brass did not commit treason before that.

And Cartwright was a non-controversial figure in TVH before that.

If TUC came out today, absolutely, I would peg Cartwright much like you did. But when the film came out it was just sort of a new concept.

Retconning Meyer's forced inclusions wouldn't help I don't think, and this Section 31 thing is sooooooo 1990's; this is as ridiculous and old as the Illuminati and the freemasons. Star Trek is so much better than that, it's too bad current fans, and showrunners, can't see anything fresher than that boring idea. Cartwright may have gotten a pass but it seemed as if... everyone on the Federation side were on the same plane on these prejudices, I didn't like that parroting structure from all of the characters. Spock may have been for peace but he was an observer, figuring things out, but I felt some of the crew and officials should've had positive favors of a Klingon alliance and maybe some of them were deeply involved in the conspiracy. This kind of plotting was not well thought out. I do understand your reasons.

 

[fireproof78]

I'll never understand the push back against Section 31. I've read of so many different types of organizations in Star Trek literature that if not 31 then something else. Some times it felt forced, but with Cartwright I appreciated that small detail in the literature.

 

[STEPhon IT]

Then use those organizations, but this retcon in which Section 31 was the end all, end all of organization since the foundation of the Star Fleet and maybe since the 1st book of the bible is old hat. There are ideas out there to explore, that's what Star Trek was about but now it's a whole deep dive of a derivative concept. It's weak, ridiculously weak.

 

[fireproof78]

The organizations base concept is the exact same as Section 31: protect from external threats by any means necessary.

I like a deep dive in to a derivative concept rather than making up more organizations.

 

[Damian]

Then use those organizations, but this retcon in which Section 31 was the end all, end all of organization since the foundation of the Star Fleet and maybe since the 1st book of the bible is old hat. There are ideas out there to explore, that's what Star Trek was about but now it's a whole deep dive of a derivative concept. It's weak, ridiculously weak.

I do agree Section 31 is becoming a bit overused. In the beginning on DS9 and Enterprise it was intriguing and mysterious. In STID it was fine and I really liked Admiral Marcus as a villain (and they stayed pretty consistent with 31 as seen on DS9 and Enterprise). Then it popped up again on Discovery and now it was starting to get overused, and I'm not a fan of 31 operating in the open as much as they were. It flies against their usual MO IMO.

The novel was Cast No Shadow BTW. It came out a little over 10 years ago I think, so even before STID, when 31 wasn't yet overdone

 

[STEPhon IT]

The organizations base concept is the exact same as Section 31: protect from external threats by any means necessary.

I like a deep dive in to a derivative concept rather than making up more organizations.

Its BORING. There has to be other creative stories to tell but I guess I am wrong Star Trek just need to continue to go where it has gone before since the 90. No worries I'll just ignore it because it is old and weak guttering up Star Trek IMO.

 

[STEPhon IT]

I do agree Section 31 is becoming a bit overused. In the beginning on DS9 and Enterprise it was intriguing and mysterious. In STID it was fine and I really liked Admiral Marcus as a villain (and they stayed pretty consistent with 31 as seen on DS9 and Enterprise). Then it popped up again on Discovery and now it was starting to get overused, and I'm not a fan of 31 operating in the open as much as they were. It flies against their usual MO IMO.

The novel was Cast No Shadow BTW. It came out a little over 10 years ago I think, so even before STID, when 31 wasn't yet overdone

Yeah, this crap is here to stay with the folks with limited imaginations and making Star Trek something its not. Glad TOS exist and just gloss over the crap which was Section 31. Lets give it 5 more years and Section 31 is the reason exploration happened. How optimistic is that? Yawn.

 

[fireproof78]

Its BORING. There has to be other creative stories to tell but I guess I am wrong Star Trek just need to continue to go where it has gone before since the 90. No worries I'll just ignore it because it is old and weak guttering up Star Trek IMO.

Of course there are other creative stories to tell. I just don't mind S31 either. Star Trek is a flexible storytelling platform and I welcome Section 31 and Strange New Worlds among others. Just like TWOK and TUC stand side by side just fine for me.

Mileage will vary

 

[Damian]

Yeah, this crap is here to stay with the folks with limited imaginations and making Star Trek something its not. Glad TOS exist and just gloss over the crap which was Section 31. Lets give it 5 more years and Section 31 is the reason exploration happened. How optimistic is that? Yawn.

Of course there are other creative stories to tell. I just don't mind S31 either. Star Trek is a flexible storytelling platform and I welcome Section 31 and Strange New Worlds among others. Just like TWOK and TUC stand side by side just fine for me.

Mileage will vary

I'm fine with Section 31 as originally presented in DS9 and Enterprise (and as used in STID). A secret cabal operating outside the system whom most of the Federation and Starfleet are unaware of. Having them crop up to time to time causing ethical dilemmas for our heroes would be fine. Like in DS9 when they created the Founder virus. Most in Starfleet were appalled at attempted genocide--but things got a bit murkier when Dr. Bashir created a cure and he and Odo wanted to give it to the Founders, while the Dominion War was still raging. What do you do? Those are just the kind of stories tailor made for 31.

But, much like how the movies have gone to TWOK well a bit too many times, the shows now are going to the 31 well a bit too much. I don't care for how Discovery is using 31. They are practically an official arm of Starfleet now, have their own bases and their own ships. The whole idea of 31 originally was that they operated in the shadows, out of sight. They didn't want to be seen. Frequently they infiltrated Starfleet, sometimes the official Starfleet Intelligence itself. And now they want to create an entire show around Section 31 (though I wonder where that stands, it seems other shows have gone into production but I haven't heard anything new on that particular front in a while).

It's become ho-hum now.

Before Discovery came out, in the novels after the Romulan War, Section 31 went dormant for a while (explaining why we never 'heard' of them during the 23rd century in the prime universe---in universe). Then finally, by 2387 Section 31 and their agents were exposed and their AI system defeated, ending Section 31. It caused the end of many Starfleet Admirals careers when their roles in various plots were exposed. It also almost ended Captain Picard's career because he was an unwitting pawn in one of their schemes from another ethical conundrum caused by 31. Former Federation President Zife was involved in illegal weapons placements on a planet along the Klingon border in violation of a treaty (they were designed against the Dominion) and if exposed it could have caused war with the Klingons at a time when Starfleet was still trying to recover from the Dominion War. So it was covered up and several admirals, along with Picard, 'encouraged' Zife to step down. It was basically a coup--though 31 wanted the usual process to replace Zife to proceed, they didn't want Starfleet to take over much like Leyton attempted. They just wanted Zife out (and in keeping with 31's desire to stay in the shadows). But the worse thing was that Zife and his 2 co-conspirators were murdered by 31 in secret. Captain Picard was not aware of that, or 31's involvement in the plot, which was the only thing that saved his career. But while we condemn 31's actions, like in DS9 with the Founder virus, the result was a peaceful transition of power to an untainted President, the actions of Zife on Tezwa were covered up so peace was maintained at a time it was desperately needed. Those are the kind of ethical dilemmas that make for great drama that I thought Discovery ruined.

 

[fireproof78]

I just don't see ruination. I get it isn't for everyone but I had no issue with Discovery because i felt it was Section 31's Icarus moment. But, like many evil type things it was only defeated for a time. Thats storytelling i find intriguing.

 

[Damian]

I just don't see ruination. I get it isn't for everyone but I had no issue with Discovery because i felt it was Section 31's Icarus moment. But, like many evil type things it was only defeated for a time. Thats storytelling i find intriguing.

I am glad Discovery moved to the 32nd century. IMO that's where they should have placed it in the first place with all the changes they made, esp. with set design and some story elements that just don't seem to fit 10 years pre-original series.

Moving it to the 32nd century frees them to a large extent to do what they want since they want to keep things in the same 'universe.'

 

[fireproof78]

I am glad Discovery moved to the 32nd century. IMO that's where they should have placed it in the first place with all the changes they made, esp. with set design and some story elements that just don't seem to fit 10 years pre-original series.

Moving it to the 32nd century frees them to a large extent to do what they want since they want to keep things in the same 'universe.'

32nd century is terrible. That's closer to "ruining " if i were to ever use that term.

 

[Damian]

32nd century is terrible. That's closer to "ruining " if i were to ever use that term.

Well, I haven't seen season 3 yet since I don't stream Paramount+. I have to wait for the Blu-Ray.

I have read the novel Wonderlands, which is a lead in to season 3 of sorts so I'm familiar with some of the background, the Burn and where Burnham ended up.

 

[STEPhon IT]

I am glad Discovery moved to the 32nd century. IMO that's where they should have placed it in the first place with all the changes they made, esp. with set design and some story elements that just don't seem to fit 10 years pre-original series.

Moving it to the 32nd century frees them to a large extent to do what they want since they want to keep things in the same 'universe.'

Agreed. I honestly hope their presence remain there or with some imagination bring it to what "The Cage" looked like. Something even better properly place it in the JJ Universe, it still remains a large canvas to explore and I would be in open arms for that, but TOS??? NEVER!

 

[johnjm22]

I enjoy both, but TWOK is clearly the better movie.

Meyer's literary influence is welcome, but taken too far in TUC.

I like the portrayal of Klingons in TUC as intellectual warriors, as opposed to meathead idiots like they were in Berman Trek.

 

[fireproof78]

Well, I haven't seen season 3 yet since I don't stream Paramount+. I have to wait for the Blu-Ray.

I have read the novel Wonderlands, which is a lead in to season 3 of sorts so I'm familiar with some of the background, the Burn and where Burnham ended up.

It has nothing to do with the story told and everything to do with the rationale behind it of going in to the far, far future as though that will stop the complaints. In my opinion, such a big gap was completely unnecessary. I don't disagree that Discovery would have done better set in a different period than ten years prior to TOS (more or less). I think that it created a huge amount of unnecessary consternation over set design and uniforms and that the furor over such leads to general dissatisfaction and perceptions of apathy on the part of the production team towards continuity.

It's funny to me, to tie back to on topic, that a similar opinions were stated around Meyer and Bennett, and their uniforms and visual designs. It was a departure from TOS or even TMP in terms of visual language and presentation of Starfleet, creating a very distinct identity within the Star Trek sandbox. Yet, TWOK with its uniforms still gets accolades. It has become a part of the background tapestry, rather than regarded as a distinct departure from what had been going on with Star Trek prior to the film.