Could Star Trek V been saved?
- Thread starter tim0122
- Start date
A Director's Cut, to let Shatner really explore this to the way he had wanted, especially with modern CGI to do the rock monsters or at least the existing material more justice... problem is, how many people would buy the release? I'm still floored that TMP got the huge 4K box set, with every version of it made (theatrical, director's cut, and my favorite: The expanded TV edition-but-also-in-widescreen properly remastered).
The comedy is as frequent as it is increasingly over the top, which hurts the movie already. It was impossible to replicate the "fish out of water" trope, so not much is left. Yes, it's a new ship, but some of the problems shown were just the butt of bad jokes. Even the logbook, ugh... never mind the number of decks, where the bridge is no longer deck 1 but is deck 78 or 99 or 86 or missed it by that much, chief? Brownie points for the late-80s aesthetic of white with green, blue and purple neon adornments - that aspect still looks snazzy. No worries, even some of the more popular flicks screw up on deck count,
The effects could have been the greatest ever and it wouldn't make too much a difference to this story. Even TMP in 1979 only got so far because of a big spectacle of the sort that Trek never had before. After all, look at "Batman & Robin" - the camerawork and effects are beyond first rate. It's gorgeous to look at, as much as you can stand the idiotic script. The plot is one big steamin' cowpie that lost focus, though the idea of incompatible baddies teaming up had potential and it's obvious that they would fight each other if they defeated Batman... (Had the third Schumacher installment gone through, apparently it would have been a more serious outing again. And noting some of his serious-toned flicks, 90s Batman fans might have had a resurgence, but oh well. As it stands, B&R can be watchable if you accept it for what it is trying to be: A lot of fluffy fun. If that's your cup of tea or mood du jour, then it's not as bad as all that.)
It does capture the feel of the 60s show, which was jarring in 1989 because everyone was used to the format of TWOK, TSFS, and especially TVH.
The direction and camerawork, especially when the movie takes itself seriously, is pretty darn good.
The campfire singalong does get to be a bit much, but it otherwise does capture the spirit of the big three.
It tries something new with a rogue Klingon, one who wants Kirk's head stuffed on a wall. This is kept to the side just enough thanks to the main plotline of some impressive attempted universe expanding of the failed Nimbus III colony. What's sad is that the deleted scenes, while giving some depth to this important piece, still aren't enough. But there's real potential in this.
As with some TOS episodes, galaxy hopping occurs as the ship gets to the center of the galaxy fast enough. Then back enough fast as well. And just as with the TOS episodes, it stretches the episode's credibility. We're so close to the edge and, if we're going to use continuity, notice the barrier being at the edge of the galaxy and going through it causes a ton of damage and/or konks out navigation systems. So nobody would notice a planet or space station at just the right area housing Sybok's God Thing.
Was Sybok the best new character to enter the lore? No, but Laurence Luckinbill bestows a verisimilitude that actually works.
The attempted mind control scene - is Sybok looking to bring up memories, or is he looking up and tweaking memories? Either which way, the big three's bond (as exemplified in the campfire scene earlier on) is stronger. Apparently, in an early idea, Spock and McCoy would turn to Sybok. But Nimoy and Kelley did not want their characters to turn to Sybok since they did not like the idea of their betraying Kirk, so that was changed.
The ending is also great, as it's the opposite of the start where Nimbus is shown to be a failure due to the three sides not getting along; everyone in the room at the end of STV is genuinely acting happy and conversing. The movie missed a potentially great idea tying in these elements together stronger.
But I've rewatched this more times than three of Picard's four flicks. So it's a matter of personal taste, if nothing else.
That, and the movie needed more Vixis and Chekov. I'm amazed the NES game that came out in 1991 didn't feature a minigame of both of them wrestling. But NES wrestling games were a dime per dozen, so to make it unique, have them wrestle in pudding and/or lettuce.
The comedy is as frequent as it is increasingly over the top, which hurts the movie already. It was impossible to replicate the "fish out of water" trope, so not much is left. Yes, it's a new ship, but some of the problems shown were just the butt of bad jokes. Even the logbook, ugh... never mind the number of decks, where the bridge is no longer deck 1 but is deck 78 or 99 or 86 or missed it by that much, chief? Brownie points for the late-80s aesthetic of white with green, blue and purple neon adornments - that aspect still looks snazzy. No worries, even some of the more popular flicks screw up on deck count,
The effects could have been the greatest ever and it wouldn't make too much a difference to this story. Even TMP in 1979 only got so far because of a big spectacle of the sort that Trek never had before. After all, look at "Batman & Robin" - the camerawork and effects are beyond first rate. It's gorgeous to look at, as much as you can stand the idiotic script. The plot is one big steamin' cowpie that lost focus, though the idea of incompatible baddies teaming up had potential and it's obvious that they would fight each other if they defeated Batman... (Had the third Schumacher installment gone through, apparently it would have been a more serious outing again. And noting some of his serious-toned flicks, 90s Batman fans might have had a resurgence, but oh well. As it stands, B&R can be watchable if you accept it for what it is trying to be: A lot of fluffy fun. If that's your cup of tea or mood du jour, then it's not as bad as all that.)
It does capture the feel of the 60s show, which was jarring in 1989 because everyone was used to the format of TWOK, TSFS, and especially TVH.
The direction and camerawork, especially when the movie takes itself seriously, is pretty darn good.
The campfire singalong does get to be a bit much, but it otherwise does capture the spirit of the big three.
It tries something new with a rogue Klingon, one who wants Kirk's head stuffed on a wall. This is kept to the side just enough thanks to the main plotline of some impressive attempted universe expanding of the failed Nimbus III colony. What's sad is that the deleted scenes, while giving some depth to this important piece, still aren't enough. But there's real potential in this.
As with some TOS episodes, galaxy hopping occurs as the ship gets to the center of the galaxy fast enough. Then back enough fast as well. And just as with the TOS episodes, it stretches the episode's credibility. We're so close to the edge and, if we're going to use continuity, notice the barrier being at the edge of the galaxy and going through it causes a ton of damage and/or konks out navigation systems. So nobody would notice a planet or space station at just the right area housing Sybok's God Thing.
Was Sybok the best new character to enter the lore? No, but Laurence Luckinbill bestows a verisimilitude that actually works.
The attempted mind control scene - is Sybok looking to bring up memories, or is he looking up and tweaking memories? Either which way, the big three's bond (as exemplified in the campfire scene earlier on) is stronger. Apparently, in an early idea, Spock and McCoy would turn to Sybok. But Nimoy and Kelley did not want their characters to turn to Sybok since they did not like the idea of their betraying Kirk, so that was changed.
The ending is also great, as it's the opposite of the start where Nimbus is shown to be a failure due to the three sides not getting along; everyone in the room at the end of STV is genuinely acting happy and conversing. The movie missed a potentially great idea tying in these elements together stronger.
But I've rewatched this more times than three of Picard's four flicks. So it's a matter of personal taste, if nothing else.
That, and the movie needed more Vixis and Chekov. I'm amazed the NES game that came out in 1991 didn't feature a minigame of both of them wrestling. But NES wrestling games were a dime per dozen, so to make it unique, have them wrestle in pudding and/or lettuce.
A Gen Z member I know, who started with the Kelvin movies, then binge-watched TNG, Voyager, and the first ten movies, summed up her reaction to Nemesis as "No one should watch that movie ever again."
Honestly, part of the problem with Sybok is there's zero point to him being Spock's brother. They do almost nothing with the idea. It's so tact on.
The reason they made him Spock's brother, as explained by Harve Bennett and William Shatner, was to explain why Spock wouldn't shoot Sybok when he had a chance. That's really the only reason their being brothers makes any difference at all in the film.
Having recently rewatched "Final Frontier," I enjoy its bonkers nature.
In particular, I love those three delegates on Nimbus III, begrudgingly running the city from the back room of a strip club. I like that each one of them is the polar opposite of their planet's stereotype. The Klingon is a super chill and jolly fat guy, the Romulan is a progressive optimist, and the human is a grouch with a cigarette. These nonconformities may even be the reason their governments sent them to that desolate outpost.
The trio would male great recurring characters for a series set in the "lost era." I imagine their storyline would feel like "Casablanca" meets "Clerks."
In particular, I love those three delegates on Nimbus III, begrudgingly running the city from the back room of a strip club. I like that each one of them is the polar opposite of their planet's stereotype. The Klingon is a super chill and jolly fat guy, the Romulan is a progressive optimist, and the human is a grouch with a cigarette. These nonconformities may even be the reason their governments sent them to that desolate outpost.
The trio would male great recurring characters for a series set in the "lost era." I imagine their storyline would feel like "Casablanca" meets "Clerks."
Yes. It isn’t a horrible film as is, but it could have been much better. Shatner’s initial concept was a valid one, but the final execution cut too many corners, and not all of that is Shatner’s fault. The VFX alone were subpar even for the era particularly compared to what had been seen in the previous films.
But the story needed a decent rewrite and some of the more questionable ideas should have been thrown out.
I like a lot of the comedy, but there was top much of it, which hurt the drama.
I personally think Shatner's original concept, at least as far as the ending, was far worse than what we got. The idea that people take advantage of other people's religious faith for their own personal gains, particularly in that era of televangelists, is a valid one and could make for a decent story.
However -- and I say this as a very religious person myself who definitely believes God is real -- we didn't need a Star Trek story where the crew actually runs into God or the devil for real. The story that Shatner wanted to tell could have easily been told without that, and in fact running into a false imposter pretending to be God makes more sense to convey the point he wanted to convey. But he is absolutely insistent to this day that changing it to an alien imposter is what killed the film. I just don't agree.
They already did an actual real god in Who Mourns for Adonais? and How Sharper Than a Serpent's Tooth, plus the real devil in Magicks of Megas-Tu, so I reckon a complete imposter was a nice change.
Was Who Mourns really the case of a real god, though? From what I remember, it seemed they were more suggesting that he and his race were so much more advanced that they merely seemed like gods to ancient Greece. Maybe I'm remembering wrong, but even if I am, he very easily could just be another all powerful alien being like the 10,000 others we saw in TOS.
Oh yeah, he's definitely all that too.
Discovery and TNG season 7.
I don't either. This is a case of Shatner not seeing the forest for the trees. It's the same logic that Rick Berman had when he assumed that Nemesis failed because 'the fans didn't want to see a movie about Romulans.'
...but we didn't see a movie about Romulans.
Similar threads
