Saavik I vs. Saavik II?

[CoveTom]

Being a fan doesn't make you better at something. It makes you more knowledgeable about the source material with can also work against you if you come into it with preconceived notions. And considering she cried at Spock's funeral, being a fan did nothing in that scene.

Disagree. The crying was a poignant moment that was striking because of how unusual it was. It added to the scene and to the character.

Additionally, remember that Alley was not playing a Vulcan. She was playing a half-Vulcan/half-Romulan who was supposed to have hints of emotion showing through.

 

[Grant]

Still amazed that some folks don't know that they filmed the scene where Spock mentions that she is half Romulan. It's been available to see online for 25 years.

 

[TJames03]

It’s weird to see deep fake things on YouTube showing Curtis in II and Alley in III.

 

[Ssosmcin]

Disagree. The crying was a poignant moment that was striking because of how unusual it was. It added to the scene and to the character.

Mileage varies.

Additionally, remember that Alley was not playing a Vulcan. She was playing a half-Vulcan/half-Romulan who was supposed to have hints of emotion showing through.

Point taken but that doesn't negate that being a fan has nothing to do with it. It was in the script and she made that choice, so fair enough. Meyer, though, chose to cut the scene mentioning her ancestry and created the incongruity. He never even put it back into the various extended cuts. Other than the Scotty/Preston relationship, he wasted time on nonsense additions. He made her a Vulcan in the end.

Still amazed that some folks don't know that they filmed the scene where Spock mentions that she is half Romulan. It's been available to see online for 25 years.

Oh please, I'm aware of it. It's not in the final cut, so it doesn't count. But regardless, watch it as a regular viewer who doesn't hang on Star Trek news or had read Starlog (like, say, everyone else in my life in 1982) and you have a Vulcan crying.

But all of this is beside the point I was making. You don't need to be familiar with Vulcans to play one.

 

[Elder Knight]

I think Kirstie Alley and Robin Curtis both did good jobs in their respective films. The problem is that they were not playing the same character, no matter what name was attached to it. Nick Meyer and Leonard Nimoy had two entirely different ideas for the character. But by TSFS, the character had already been established. Nimoy should have either stuck with what was established or introduced a new character.

Frankly, there was no reason the character in TSFS needed to be Saavik. They could have changed the character to a different Vulcan as easily as they did in TUC. When Alley was confirmed to not be reprising the role, and Nimoy decided he wanted a different interpretation anyway, they should have just gone with a different character.

My long-ago suggestion is linked. I didn't get much agreement for my brilliant resolution.
https://www.trekbbs.com/threads/an-origin-for-saavik.138764/post-4841185

 

[Riley]

I don't feel Curtis was misdirected in Star Trek III -- I think she gave the performance Nimoy wanted -- though I agree that Nimoy wanted to retcon the character. Possibly he felt the character Alley and Meyer created together was misconceived. I think Nimoy had his own ideas about what that character should be, ideas that would be easier to achieve with a new actress than with Alley, and when there was an issue over money it became easy for Nimoy to walk away and begin afresh. Had things worked out with Alley, though, I can't imagine that her performance in Star Trek III would have been greatly different than Curtis'; Nimoy wanted what he wanted, and Alley would have been on the receiving end of the "Again, but colder" direction that Curtis received.

You touch on one of the things that has begun to bother me more and more in my old Trek fan age. I was born in '76 and grew up with TOS reruns and the TOS films. As I learn more about Meyer and how he approached Star Trek, I find myself disliking elements of TWOK and TUC that didn't bother me when I was younger. One of the issues I have is that Meyer came with a "I don't need to know Star Trek because I know better," and it shows in a lot of ways. I think Alley's performance is perfect, but I wonder if Nimoy should have been consulted a bit more in Saavik's development.

As I sat here typing that last paragraph, I began to wonder if the reason Harve Bennett wrote out Saavik in Star Trek IV is because Nick Meyer, who wrote the 20th-century portion of the film, wasn't interested in writing Curtis' Saavik, possibly because he felt Nimoy's retcon of the character was equally misconceived. When Meyer had an opportunity to use Saavik in Star Trek VI, he was only interested in working with Alley, not Curtis, and when that fell through, he went in a different direction. This does suggest that Alley is the "canonical" Saavik--the writer and director who created her has a clear preference--but again, both actresses are Saavik to me.

I think Meyer preferred the version of Saavik that was less Trek and more flawed, which he enjoys writing/directing more than what we'd consider a traditional full Vulcan. This is the same guy that has Uhura using old books to clumsily speak Klingon because that's somehow "more interesting" than Uhura using the computer or having a stronger knowledge of Klingon.

 

[CoveTom]

You touch on one of the things that has begun to bother me more and more in my old Trek fan age. I was born in '76 and grew up with TOS reruns and the TOS films. As I learn more about Meyer and how he approached Star Trek, I find myself disliking elements of TWOK and TUC that didn't bother me when I was younger. One of the issues I have is that Meyer came with a "I don't need to know Star Trek because I know better," and it shows in a lot of ways. I think Alley's performance is perfect, but I wonder if Nimoy should have been consulted a bit more in Saavik's development.

There were definitely some issues with the way Meyer approached Trek, which is why I've always said I think he worked best when he was paired with Harve Bennett who had a healthy respect for the original series. That being said, Nimoy also tended to be quite full of himself and think that he knew how to do Trek better than Roddenberry or Meyer or whoever else, and his instincts were not always great either.

I think the way Meyer directed Alley in TWOK worked very well and part of what made her character so appealing is that she wasn't just a carbon copy of Spock. She was a unique Vulcan. I much preferred that portrayal to Curtis' portrayal in TSFS. Not that Curtis did anything wrong. She's a fine actress and she did what her director wanted. But in this case, I prefer Meyer's instincts to Nimoy's.

 

[Allyn Gibson]

Nimoy also tended to be quite full of himself and think that he knew how to do Trek better than Roddenberry or Meyer

Also Bennett. Nimoy "knowing better" ruptured their friendship and led to the falling out during the making of Star Trek IV. The two men rebuilt their friendship after -- Nimoy was Bennett's AA sponsor -- and I will forever treasure the memory of Bennett breaking down when he spoke of his relationship with Nimoy at a convention twenty years ago. It was moving, but you also never want to see a frail, elderly man crying on a stage.

 

[Riley]

There were definitely some issues with the way Meyer approached Trek, which is why I've always said I think he worked best when he was paired with Harve Bennett who had a healthy respect for the original series. That being said, Nimoy also tended to be quite full of himself and think that he knew how to do Trek better than Roddenberry or Meyer or whoever else, and his instincts were not always great either.

I think the way Meyer directed Alley in TWOK worked very well and part of what made her character so appealing is that she wasn't just a carbon copy of Spock. She was a unique Vulcan. I much preferred that portrayal to Curtis' portrayal in TSFS. Not that Curtis did anything wrong. She's a fine actress and she did what her director wanted. But in this case, I prefer Meyer's instincts to Nimoy's.

I prefer the Alley version, too, and don't dislike everything Meyer brought to Trek. I just don't care for his flippant disregard for Trek. He seems to think it wasn't really great until he "improved it," which I couldn't disagree with more. My favorite TOS films remain TMP, TSFS, and yes, even TFF.

 

[Ssosmcin]

There were definitely some issues with the way Meyer approached Trek, which is why I've always said I think he worked best when he was paired with Harve Bennett who had a healthy respect for the original series. That being said, Nimoy also tended to be quite full of himself and think that he knew how to do Trek better than Roddenberry or Meyer or whoever else, and his instincts were not always great either.

TWOK works much better for me than TUC because in TOWK, Meyer is writing in a rush and then had Bennett in actual charge of the production. Bennett respected the series and what came before, altho not to the point of slavishness. TWOK is the result of a certain mixture of minds, talents and points of view that makes it different from but close to the spirit of the TV series. It's an excellent compromise that works.

TUC is mostly Meyer and Nimoy - and Nimoy seemed to only care how Vulcans were handled. He let Meyer run with the rest. Meyer disregarded Roddenberry entirely (to the point where he now regrets how badly he treated the dying old man) and TUC was really his version of Star Trek. It's not a bad movie, but I don't feel it works nearly as well. There's a different feel between a Harve Benett Production and a Nicholas Meyer Film.

I think the way Meyer directed Alley in TWOK worked very well and part of what made her character so appealing is that she wasn't just a carbon copy of Spock. She was a unique Vulcan. I much preferred that portrayal to Curtis' portrayal in TSFS. Not that Curtis did anything wrong. She's a fine actress and she did what her director wanted. But in this case, I prefer Meyer's instincts to Nimoy's.

As for Saavik, if they just kept her original Half Romulan background intact, then Nimoy would have been forced to allow Curtis to be less cold. I don't think she ever would have been as popular as Alley, and the comparison may have actually been worse because Curtis would have been coming close to aping another actors performance. In the end, Nimoy may have done her a service in allowing her to create a different persona totally divorced from Alley's work.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

TUC is mostly Meyer and Nimoy - and Nimoy seemed to only care how Vulcans were handled. He let Meyer run with the rest. Meyer disregarded Roddenberry entirely (to the point where he now regrets how badly he treated the dying old man) and TUC was really his version of Star Trek.

To be fair to Meyer, I also wouldn't be too fond of Gene Roddenberry telling me he didn't like my handling of a character I created nine years before.

 

[Ssosmcin]

To be fair to Meyer, I also wouldn't be too fond of Gene Roddenberry telling me he didn't like my handling of a character I created nine years before.

Meyer wasn't wrong in rejecting the argument, it was the way he spoke to him that rubs me the wrong way. This wasn't 1966 feisty Gene or even wacky 1978 "making his first movie" Gene. This was one foot in the grave Gene. There's a way of blowing off a sick old man on his last legs who was, actually, doing his job as creative consultant. YMMV.

 

[CoveTom]

To be fair to Meyer, I also wouldn't be too fond of Gene Roddenberry telling me he didn't like my handling of a character I created nine years before.

I can understand that point of view, but I think it is wrong on Meyer's part in two respects.

First, I personally think Roddenberry was correct in his objection. I think Saavik had, in fact, become a beloved character and had shown herself to be an honorable one. To have her turn traitor in TUC would have infuriated the fans and I think rightly so.

Second, and more importantly, was Meyer's attitude about the whole thing. He very publicly said something to the effect of "when Gene Roddenberry gives back all the money he's made on my films, maybe I'll care what he has to say." Meyer acted as though he was the reason for Star Trek's success and that Roddenberry was just some interloper. But without Roddenberry, there would be no Star Trek. Meyer owes a great deal of his career to Roddenberry. There was no excuse for his attitude.

Now, in fairness to Meyer, he now acknowledges that he behaved badly and says that he regrets it. And I appreciate that he has been willing to not only acknowledge that, but to do so publicly. I think that does show some class on his part.

 

[Allyn Gibson]

First, I personally think Roddenberry was correct in his objection. I think Saavik had, in fact, become a beloved character and had shown herself to be an honorable one. To have her turn traitor in TUC would have infuriated the fans and I think rightly so.

Meyer's reasoning makes sense, though. It's because the audience already has a connection to Saavik that she would not be an obvious suspect, and thus truly shocking when revealed.

Roger Ebert's "Law of Economy of Characters" applies here. A production can only afford so many characters. It's why in CBS's mystery procedurals, the perpetrator is almost always the biggest name guest star that week. (It's why I suspect Sigourney Weaver will be the villain in The Mandalorian & Grogu; she's the biggest name guest star in the movie.)

Kim Cattrall. Love her. She was hot as hell in The Return of the Musketeer. But her Valeris stood out as a likely villain because she was a complete unknown to the audience. Alley's Saavik would not.

 

[XCV330]

I appreciate both performances, but I like Curtis's better. I didn't aways feel that way, but in hindsight, TSFS is a major worldbuilding movie and having a Vulcan act Vulcan goes well towards that.

 

[Rowdy Roddy McDowall]

Roger Ebert's "Law of Economy of Characters" applies here. A production can only afford so many characters.

He used it selectively...at least in quantitive terms rather than monetary. He championed Robert Altman's NASHVILLE, though it contained about two dozen key roles. Yet the first X-MEN movie roster distressed him because he thought ten mutants in one movie was overkill. Had he watched AVENGERS ENDGAME, he'd properly forgive X-MEN entirely. Ebert, as Saavik might say, was so human.

I think larger ensembles are fine, providing everyone gets at least one critical moment in the process. While major stars serve their purpose, it's arguably more difficult for many leads to carry a film with only a handful of actors. Not that it can't be done with SLEUTH or GIVE 'EM HELL, HARRY, among others.

 

[Maurice]

Meyer wasn't wrong in rejecting the argument, it was the way he spoke to him that rubs me the wrong way. This wasn't 1966 feisty Gene or even wacky 1978 "making his first movie" Gene. This was one foot in the grave Gene. There's a way of blowing off a sick old man on his last legs who was, actually, doing his job as creative consultant. YMMV.

And, having read some of Roddenberry's feedback memos on the movie scripts, he was always polite and somewhat deferential, and he often made good points.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

Meyer's reasoning makes sense, though. It's because the audience already has a connection to Saavik that she would not be an obvious suspect, and thus truly shocking when revealed.

Roger Ebert's "Law of Economy of Characters" applies here. A production can only afford so many characters. It's why in CBS's mystery procedurals, the perpetrator is almost always the biggest name guest star that week. (It's why I suspect Sigourney Weaver will be the villain in The Mandalorian & Grogu; she's the biggest name guest star in the movie.)

Kim Cattrall. Love her. She was hot as hell in The Return of the Musketeer. But her Valeris stood out as a likely villain because she was a complete unknown to the audience. Alley's Saavik would not.

Exactly. If it had been Alley returning as Saavik after nine years, that would've been a twist that no one in the audience would have seen coming. And it would've been so shocking that fans would still be debating it to this day.

 

[Ssosmcin]

Kim Cattrall. Love her. She was hot as hell in The Return of the Musketeer. But her Valeris stood out as a likely villain because she was a complete unknown to the audience. Alley's Saavik would not.

Cinefantastique blew the reveal long before the movie came out by naming Saavik as the villain before the character change. It wasn't hard to put 2 and 2 together. If I recall that correctly anyways

 

[suarezguy]

Exactly. If it had been Alley returning as Saavik after nine years, that would've been a twist that no one in the audience would have seen coming. And it would've been so shocking that fans would still be debating it to this day.

If it had been Saavik in that role I think that would have been way too big and dark a twist for what was, despite quite a bit of drama, overall feel-good finale, and it would have needed a lot more justification/time to be dealt with then just Well you don't like/trust them either and They killed your son!, and that also would have felt too small universe that both reluctant-but-reforming Kirk and the actual murderous traitor's main motivations directly stemmed from the exact same incident (that we saw, had been big part a few films ago).