Weird sickbay scene in ST VI

[STEPhon IT]

It's not that far away from what you said, actually.

Because the rewrite isn't a simple patch, and I never said it was. Only that when you decide to remove a character from a script, that often means making substantive changes to more than just the name over lines of dialog.

They thought they could just re-assign all Saavik's lines to a brand-new character without doing anything else, and still have the same resonance. They were wrong.

Unfortunately, the Great Nicholas Meyer wrote his script with an upstart Kirstie Alley in mind instead of the rising star she became; it could've worked if Nimoy was willing to share or sacrifice his screen time like he did with TWOK*. There just wasn't enough room for 3 Big Stars in this struggling budgeted movie and the plot should've been more about Kirk living and learning about Klingons either on a Klingon dominant Penal colony or a community. I was struggling to understand how Meyer thought anyone would be fooled by what he delivered. All of the suspects were openly obvious and all of them were involved, that is definitely not how mysteries work, deception and cunning along with making a character less suspicious makes the genre work.

*Nimoy at the time was over with Star Trek and wanted out. He played along but he was less involved in that movie and as sad as I am admitting this, I thought the movie shined because of this because it allowed Shatner to be a star and not worry about screen time politics and other bullsh*t which would return in IV.

 

[suarezguy]

They thought they could just re-assign all Saavik's lines to a brand-new character without doing anything else, and still have the same resonance. They were wrong.

There's at least still some resonance. And bringing back a character who last had a big role 3 movies ago would have still felt pretty weird and probably also still suspicious so not a lot of difference.

I do think it's actually kind of better that Kirk's animosity and the traitor's animosity isn't rooted from the exact same incident, Valeris and her animosity more of an every-officer (or cold logic) take against Klingons.

 

[McCoy's Disco Collar]

There's at least still some resonance. And bringing back a character who last had a big role 3 movies ago would have still felt pretty weird and probably also still suspicious so not a lot of difference.

There really isn't any resonance, though. That's what makes the script so lazy - it tells, it doesn't show.

You really think people would have instantly identified Saavik as the traitor just because she had taken one movie off? I must respectfully disagree.

 

[DonIago]

^You keep asserting your belief that there's no resonance, but I haven't seen other posters agreeing with you.

I'd also argue that Saavik's role in TVH is so minimal that one could easily forget she was in the movie at all.

I don't know about 'instantly identified', but when things went south in TUC, once you eliminate Our Heroes (because they're not going to trample on any of the Big Seven in that manner), who's left on the Enterprise to suspect?

"Goblet of Fire" (the movie) had the same problem. So many characters were trimmed out that the suspects became obvious.

 

[McCoy's Disco Collar]

It's not an uncommon problem.

I do think that had Saavik been the traitor, it would have come as a great surprise to many. For the very reason that Roddenberry campaigned against it.

 

[DonIago]

But if not Saavik, then who?

Disappointment? Sure. Sadness? Sure.

But surprise? Once you assume Our Heroes aren't the suspects, who's left?

I suppose the best of both worlds (cough) option would have been to have both Saavik and Valeris in the film and keep it a mystery as to which one of them was responsible.

Or really, any more than one reasonable suspect.

 

[McCoy's Disco Collar]

There's a whole lot they could have done to improve that terrible script.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

Once they decided not to use Saavik, they should have dropped the "Spock feels betrayed" bit.

I certainly wouldn't want to be the one to tell the second lead and executive producer of my film that I cut the meaty scenes I wrote for him because we couldn't get a particular actor for the part of Saavik.

I do think that had Saavik been the traitor, it would have come as a great surprise to many. For the very reason that Roddenberry campaigned against it.

Although I've come around to the idea that Saavik being the traitor would've been a great twist, I certainly agree with Meyer about Roddenberry's protests: Nicholas Meyer created Saavik, not Roddenberry. GR didn't deserve a vote on whether or not a character he had nothing to do with would turn traitor or not.

 

[McCoy's Disco Collar]

I certainly wouldn't want to be the one to tell the second lead and executive producer of my film that I cut the meaty scenes I wrote for him because we couldn't get a particular actor for the part of Saavik.

Fair enough, but Nimoy was an uncommonly-generous actor, not known for putting his own bits above the story.

Although I've come around to the idea that Saavik being the traitor would've been a great twist, I certainly agree with Meyer about Roddenberry's protests: Nicholas Meyer created Saavik, not Roddenberry. GR didn't deserve a vote on whether or not a character he had nothing to do with would turn traitor or not.

True enough. Not only did Roddenberry not create her, he hadn't any input into any of the films she appeared in. Saavik was easily the biggest character created during Gene's lifetime that he had nothing to do with.

 

[STEPhon IT]

I certainly wouldn't want to be the one to tell the second lead and executive producer of my film that I cut the meaty scenes I wrote for him because we couldn't get a particular actor for the part of Saavik.

Although I've come around to the idea that Saavik being the traitor would've been a great twist, I certainly agree with Meyer about Roddenberry's protests: Nicholas Meyer created Saavik, not Roddenberry. GR didn't deserve a vote on whether or not a character he had nothing to do with would turn traitor or not.

Wait a minute, in another thread it was established Meyer didn't create Saavik, the inclusion of a protégé was from 1 of the 5 scripts he put together. Remember Meyer's own sentiments about "Priming the pump"?

But if not Saavik, then who?

Disappointment? Sure. Sadness? Sure.

But surprise? Once you assume Our Heroes aren't the suspects, who's left?

I suppose the best of both worlds (cough) option would have been to have both Saavik and Valeris in the film and keep it a mystery as to which one of them was responsible.

Or really, any more than one reasonable suspect.

You don't require a "Who done it?" for the movie, rather establish the character as the traitor ala "Columbo" and see whether our heroes figure it out. As our heroes get closer to exposing her, she desperately tries to evade; another thing which could've been interesting to show Saavik is doing everything to have the Enterprise report back to Earth, in her mind could escape, but the plot thickens as she's getting closer to exposure being trapped in deep space aboard the ship. I think if a star like Kirstie Alley returned, she needed equal screen time for this subplot to work.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

Wait a minute, in another thread it was established Meyer didn't create Saavik, the inclusion of a protégé was from 1 of the 5 scripts he put together. Remember Meyer's own sentiments about "Priming the pump"?

I was talking about the character of Saavik as she appeared the film. I don't think a male Vulcan character named "Savik" being included in one of the unmade STII story treatments really counts as "creating" the character we saw in the finished film.

And I was also referencing a quote from Meyer in the Cinefantastique issue covering STVI where he said (paraphrasing from memory), "I created the character of Saavik, not Roddenberry. If he doesn't like what I intend to do with her, maybe he should give back the money he's earned off my films. Maybe then I'll care what he has to say." (I'm sure I'm off by a word or two there, but that was the gist of what Meyer said.)

 

[STEPhon IT]

One the ugliest things he's said regarding Roddenberry; at the time a man who was in his last days of life. Not his best moment. It was very cruel and there's no excuse for it.

 

[Takeru]

One the ugliest things he's said regarding Roddenberry; at the time a man who was in his last days of life. Not his best moment. It was very cruel and there's no excuse for it.

If Roddenberry could publicly campaign against Meyer's plans Meyer could tell him to shut up and go away. Roddenberry started this and involved himself in things that were none of his business spoiling a potential plot point in the process to try using the fan outrage against then studio and director. Meyer's response was appropriate.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

If Roddenberry could publicly campaign against Meyer's plans Meyer could tell him to shut up and go away. Roddenberry started this and involved himself in things that were none of his business spoiling a potential plot point in the process to try using the fan outrage against then studio and director. Meyer's response was appropriate.

I agree. Roddenberry also leaked word of Spock dying to the press to try to utilize fan outrage against it, protested against them destroying the Enterprise in STIII, said he considered most of Star Treks V and VI to be "apocryphal", objected to Harve Bennett's proposed Starfleet Academy movie, and even criticized Kirk zapping the Ceti Alpha eel in TWOK as not in keeping with the ideals of Trek.

Roddenberry was constantly complaining about what the movies were doing wrong, but AFAIK, he never pitched any alternatives outside of the same damn JFK story over and over again. I personally think that what Roddenberry was really upset about was that he wasn't in charge of Star Trek anymore. And that's why the early days of TNG were such a clusterfuck, as Roddenberry and Leonard Maizlish tried to seize back control, alienating several of Roddenberry's old friends (Bob Justman, D.C. Fontana, David Gerrold) in the process.

I don't know how widely GR's health issues were known, but I can totally believe that by 1990, most everyone at Paramount was sick of Roddenberry's shit.

 

[DonIago]

I'll just say that while it may have been a bit of a disrespectful thing to say if Meyer knew that GR was in poor health at the time, calling it "ugly" or "cruel" seems like a bit of a reach to me.

 

[STEPhon IT]

In Meyer's book he felt so, and I agree with his self reflection.

 

[Maurice]

I agree. Roddenberry also leaked word of Spock dying to the press to try to utilize fan outrage against it, protested against them destroying the Enterprise in STIII, said he considered most of Star Treks V and VI to be "apocryphal", objected to Harve Bennett's proposed Starfleet Academy movie, and even criticized Kirk zapping the Ceti Alpha eel in TWOK as not in keeping with the ideals of Trek.

Roddenberry was constantly complaining about what the movies were doing wrong, but AFAIK, he never pitched any alternatives outside of the same damn JFK story over and over again. I personally think that what Roddenberry was really upset about was that he wasn't in charge of Star Trek anymore. And that's why the early days of TNG were such a clusterfuck, as Roddenberry and Leonard Maizlish tried to seize back control, alienating several of Roddenberry's old friends (Bob Justman, D.C. Fontana, David Gerrold) in the process.

I don't know how widely GR's health issues were known, but I can totally believe that by 1990, most everyone at Paramount was sick of Roddenberry's shit.

I've read some of Roddenberry's TWOK memos to Bennett and Meyer and he is actually quite generous in them and when he objects to something he almost invariably explains his rationale and offers alternatives.

His leaking stuff is another matter.

As discussed elsewhere, he did not pitch "the same damned JFK story over and over again." As far as we can tell he pitched two stories in which time travel changed history (once by Scotty, the other by Klingons) and in going back in time to fix things Kirk had to convince world leaders to help them even at great personal cost...notably JFK. The first outline—Star Trek II—was written by Jon Povill and Roddenberry in 1976 and the other we have is the spring 1980 outline titled Star Trek III (likely to differentiate it from the previous pitches and the aborted series that became TMP, which was also called Star Trek II ; Phase II was only used for a hot second).

 

[JonnyQuest037]

Then there's no truth to the account of Roddenberry hauling out the time travel pitch yet again when he was giving his feedback on the STIV screenplay?

 

[Maurice]

Then there's no truth to the account of Roddenberry hauling out the time travel pitch yet again when he was giving his feedback on the STIV screenplay?

We've never seen any evidence of to support it. Sure he could have suggested it or elements from it. Just who said he dragged it out again? Bennett?