Generations had a bigger budget than ST6, so why...

[Doug Otte]

He actually did have the smallest role out of the TOS cast in that movie, and indeed he's missing from a majority of the movie's main storyline or even its important set piece scenes, like the dinner with the Klingons.

My comments were comparing Sulu's role in VI vs. all the earlier films. Yes, in VI they gave each of the supporting cast a more substantial role, and I would argue that Sulu's (captaining his own starship, being the first in Starfleet to experience the explosion of Praxas, rushing to save the Enterprise) role in VI was more instrumental than the other subsidiary characters. If he was still on the Enterprise, could the writers have given him as much to do?

 

[Doug Otte]

Plus the Sulu as a Captain thing is just unsustainable if they were ever going to do future movies. You can't keep bringing Sulu and the Excelsior into every single story, because by the definition the story has to revolve around the crew of the Enterprise. The Captain Sulu thing only works as part of the very last story of the TOS crew.

True, but we all knew there weren't going to be any more movies.

I think the main reasons Takei likes the Captain Sulu thing so much are because it appeals to his ego ("Captain Kirk & the others are retiring, but Hikaru Sulu is still going strong!") and because he didn't have to work with Shatner very much.

Very true, and I bet Takei was already thinking ahead to a possible Sulu series.

 

[The Wormhole]

My comments were comparing Sulu's role in VI vs. all the earlier films. Yes, in VI they gave each of the supporting cast a more substantial role, and I would argue that Sulu's (captaining his own starship, being the first in Starfleet to experience the explosion of Praxas, rushing to save the Enterprise) role in VI was more instrumental than the other subsidiary characters.

But he only has six scenes in the whole movie, one of which is watching the trial with the rest of the Excelsior bridge crew, another is the climax which includes most of the movie's cast, and there was the scene where he said good-by over the viewscreen. In other words, half his screen time was spent with the rest of the TOS cast anyway.

 

[Allyn Gibson]

But he only has six scenes in the whole movie, one of which is watching the trial with the rest of the Excelsior bridge crew, another is the climax which includes most of the movie's cast, and there was the scene where he said good-by over the viewscreen. In other words, half his screen time was spent with the rest of the TOS cast anyway.

Yet, only one of those required filming with the TOS cast. Takei probably had only one day on set with Shatner.

 

[Doug Otte]

But he only has six scenes in the whole movie, one of which is watching the trial with the rest of the Excelsior bridge crew, another is the climax which includes most of the movie's cast, and there was the scene where he said good-by over the viewscreen. In other words, half his screen time was spent with the rest of the TOS cast anyway.

While your comments are true, I feel like we're talking past each other. I'll try once more, then I'll back off. I never mentioned screen time or number of scenes, etc. I specifically mentioned Sulu's role being more "pivotal" and "instrumental" to the plot than he was in any previous films, and than he probably would have been at the helm of the Enterprise.

 

[DonIago]

If anything, Sulu being on the E-A might have created more problems than it solved, as, assuming the plot is otherwise largely unchanged, you then need to bump Valeris into another prominent position.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

Very true, and I bet Takei was already thinking ahead to a possible Sulu series.

Pipe dream.

 

[The Wormhole]

If anything, Sulu being on the E-A might have created more problems than it solved, as, assuming the plot is otherwise largely unchanged, you then need to bump Valeris into another prominent position.

Valeris becomes the chief of security. Which might have worked better for the narrative.

 

[DonIago]

Valeris becomes the chief of security. Which might have worked better for the narrative.

It might have worked better for the narrative, but in terms of filming, the E-A set never really had a well established Chief of Security position, and I think randomly introducing a new Chief of Security would have been even more eyebrow-raising than introducing a new helmsman into a Whodunit-style movie, which at least made some sense when Sulu wasn't onboard.

Though it would have been amazing if Valeris had been innocent and it had been one of Our Heroes who turned out to be a co-conspirator.

 

[The Wormhole]

Though it would have been amazing if Valeris had been innocent and it had been one of Our Heroes who turned out to be a co-conspirator.

Well, that would never have happened. They were originally going to have Saavik be the traitor, but Roddenberry forbid it saying "you can't do that to a beloved fan favorite." If he felt that way about Saavik, it goes without saying how he'd have felt if it were one of the TOS Gang.

 

[DonIago]

Well, that would never have happened. They were originally going to have Saavik be the traitor, but Roddenberry forbid it saying "you can't do that to a beloved fan favorite." If he felt that way about Saavik, it goes without saying how he'd have felt if it were one of the TOS Gang.

Oh, I know it never would have happened, and I'm not even sure how I would have felt about Saavik being the traitor, but I respect audacity to a point.

The problem with this movie as well as Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire is that they're both whodunit films to some degree, but when you introduce a minimum of new characters there's really no mystery involved as to who committed the bad deeds.

 

[Allyn Gibson]

Well, that would never have happened. They were originally going to have Saavik be the traitor, but Roddenberry forbid it saying "you can't do that to a beloved fan favorite." If he felt that way about Saavik, it goes without saying how he'd have felt if it were one of the TOS Gang.

It's more accurate to say Roddenberry objected. He couldn't forbid using Saavik in the way Meyer intended, as he had no veto power on the film, and Meyer's retort was, roughly, "I created her and I'll care what you say when you give back the money I made you." Kirstie Alley wasn't interested in returning to Star Trek at this point.

The problem with this movie as well as Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire is that they're both whodunit films to some degree, but when you introduce a minimum of new characters there's really no mystery involved as to who committed the bad deeds.

Roger Ebert termed this "The Law of Economy of Characters." It's why you can often ID the murderer in a television procedural pretty quickly, and it's often the guest star you can know. It's because there's limited amount of time to get characters on the screen and a limited budget, both which limit the story's ability to offer red herrings.

 

[The Wormhole]

Kirstie Alley wasn't interested in returning to Star Trek at this point.

Did Meyer not want to work with Robin Curtis, or was she unavailable when TUC was being filmed, or just not interested in playing Saavik again? At the very least, she certainly had no issues withdoing Star Trek again, given a couple years later she guest starred on TNG.

It's why you can often ID the murderer in a television procedural pretty quickly, and it's often the guest star you can know.

Or, in the event it's not a guest star you recognize, it's someone who was present near the start of the episode, is absent for most of it before showing up again within the last ten minutes.

 

[Praetor]

I seem to recall that Meyer wanted Kim Cattrall in place of Alley, who was supposedly his first choice for Saavik.

Cattrall didn't want to be the third actress to play Saavik, and so Valeris was created.

 

[Allyn Gibson]

Did Meyer not want to work with Robin Curtis....

I don't know, but I have heard this is the reason, that Meyer was "Alley or nothing," and when she passed he went in another direction.

 

[DonIago]

Honestly...Robin Curtis seemed like a lovely person when I saw an interview with her during Virtual TrekCon earlier this year (she even answered a question I submitted!), but whether it was her acting ability, Nimoy's direction (I have a fair amount of suspicion that this played a significant part these days), or a combination of both, as Saavik she just falls flat for me. I won't even say it's entirely her fault; she was picking up a role played by another actor first, and whether or not they were intentionally playing up the half-Romulan idea, Alley's Saavik is just a lot more interesting to watch for me. So I can't exactly blame Meyer for not wanting to revisit Curtis.

...but I do wonder what Curtis could have done with the role if directed differently.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

Well, that would never have happened. They were originally going to have Saavik be the traitor, but Roddenberry forbid it saying "you can't do that to a beloved fan favorite." If he felt that way about Saavik, it goes without saying how he'd have felt if it were one of the TOS Gang.

Yeah, Roddenberry had nothing to do with Saavik not being the traitor. The creatives on the ST movies were under no obligation to listen to him at that point, but they still kept him in the loop because of courtesy and because they knew his word still carried a lot of weight with fandom.

Although I enjoy Cattrall's performance in the film, the revelation of who the traitor was would've been a LOT more surprising if it'd been a known character like Saavik. I think the Saavik/Valeris switch was part of the reason they brought Brock Peters back as Admiral Cartwright, IIRC. Meyer wanted someone the audience knew and liked to be one of the conspirators, but he probably knew he couldn't get away with it being one of the seven regulars.

Did Meyer not want to work with Robin Curtis, or was she unavailable when TUC was being filmed, or just not interested in playing Saavik again?

Kirstie Alley was either uninterested in returning or out of their price range (I forget which), Meyer was uninterested in using Robin Curtis and Kim Cattrall didn't want to be the third actress to play Saavik. So they made her a new character.

Honestly...Robin Curtis seemed like a lovely person when I saw an interview with her during Virtual TrekCon earlier this year (she even answered a question I submitted!), but whether it was her acting ability, Nimoy's direction (I have a fair amount of suspicion that this played a significant part these days), or a combination of both, as Saavik she just falls flat for me.

Honestly, I'd put a lot of that at Nimoy's feet. Let's be real, Kirstie Alley's Saavik was intended at least partially as a replacement for Spock (an attractive young actress, new blood in the franchise, and playing a Vulcan who's conflicted about her dual heritage). If Nimoy was coming back to Trek on an ongoing basis, it's no wonder he wouldn't want this new character around for much longer, taking up screen time and storylines that arguably could've been Spock's. So I think it's very possible that Nimoy intentionally directed Curtis to be rather wooden as Saavik, which killed off a lot of interest in the character.

 

[DonIago]

^I'd prefer to think he just had a vision of Saavik that didn't work as well for myself and others as Alley's version than that he made a point of undercutting her by giving her direction he knew to be poor. That seems beneath him.

 

[Farscape One]

i definitely think it's more because of his directing vision of Vulcan than Nimoy having any ulterior motives abput a potential replacing of Spock stories. I don't picture Nimoy being that petty.

 

[ZapBrannigan]

Kirstie Alley was either uninterested in returning or out of their price range (I forget which), Meyer was uninterested in using Robin Curtis and Kim Cattrall didn't want to be the third actress to play Saavik. So they made her a new character.

Honestly, I'd put a lot of that at Nimoy's feet. Let's be real, Kirstie Alley's Saavik was intended at least partially as a replacement for Spock (an attractive young actress, new blood in the franchise, and playing a Vulcan who's conflicted about her dual heritage). If Nimoy was coming back to Trek on an ongoing basis, it's no wonder he wouldn't want this new character around for much longer, taking up screen time and storylines that arguably could've been Spock's. So I think it's very possible that Nimoy intentionally directed Curtis to be rather wooden as Saavik, which killed off a lot of interest in the character.

I definitely heard the story that Kirstie Alley wanted to be in Star Trek III, but she or her agent asked for too much money and blew the negotiation. There was a Starlog interview where she said (approximately) "She's not Saavik, I'm Saavik!" in the headline. Alley didn't reject the role, she missed out on it— that's what I understood it to be.

It never occurred to me that Nimoy wanted Robin Curtis to fall flat in ST3, but it makes sense. He did give her specific instructions to be unemotional and have 5000(?) years of Vulcan wisdom behind her eyes, to reflect some baloney about Vulcan katras being passed on cumulatively forever. And that ran dead against not only the ST2 Saavik personality, but Spock himself. Spock was never serene and infinitely wise, he was a guy seeing life for the first time and dealing it, like the rest of us.

So making Curtis's Saavik seem above it all, unengaging and dull, not only hurt the character, it contradicted what had come before. An "unexplainable" mistake like that can often be explained if there is a hidden motive. Nimoy may have thought Spock came across as the "second most interesting Vulcan" in Star Trek II, that he was upstaged by Alley's fresh, vivid, realistic character, and he didn't want that to happen again. So yeah, I can see the possible motive.

BTW, Robin Curtis has always been linked in my mind with Robyn Douglass (Galactica 1980). I think of one, I think of the other. It never fails. They're like the Susan Anton and Morgan Fairchild of science fiction.