First, I'd like to say that I love Star Trek III: The Search for Spock, and have never really been able to understand a lot of the criticism that gets directed at it. However, there is one tiny element of it that has always bugged me a little. You may find this a tad silly of me, but what irks me is that though the film happens immediately after the events of The Wrath of Khan and deals with a lot of the consequences of that movie, Khan himself, a hugely pivotal figure in the last film, doesn't get name-checked once. You'd think that after everything that happened because of him, he'd at least get a mention in dialogue. What I also find incredible is that the film-makers managed to drop in a reference to Carol Marcus, a relatively minor character in the previous movie! I realise all this is rather trivial and doesn't really amount to much, but it's something I can't help noticing.
Something that's always annoyed me a bit about Star Trek III
- Thread starter EJA
- Start date
Well, since the Genesis Planet and its instability play a big part in this film, it makes sense that Carol would at least get a mention.
So should Khan, considering he was the one who stole and detonated the Genesis Device, thereby creating the Genesis Planet, and was responsible for Spock having to give his life.
Never knew that but you're right!!
I hadn't thought about this topic but I agree Khan should be mentioned. His actions set the course of events that followed in TSFS into motion.
Badly damaged Enterprise that would be decommissioned, creation of the Genesis planet, Spock's death, McCoy's mental state, the Klingons' interest in the planet, Grissom's presence, etc...
I was always bugged by the re-dubbing of the Genesis proposal by Kirk instead of Carol.
Khan is actually referred to by name quite a number of times in Vonda McIntyre's novelisation of TSFS, which I'd say is an improvement. It even revisits the Genesis cave on Regula 1 seen in TWOK, which the subsequent film never followed up on. And Kirk does learn Kruge's name in the book too. As much as I like the film, the novelisation is in some ways superior.
That was just a $$$ saving ploy by the suits. By using Shat, they didn't have to pay Bibi Besch for using her recording from TWOK.
They should have replaced it with David, then. It made no sense to have Kirk giving the science team's proposal.
Yes it did, in context. Don't forget the added introduction (paraphrasing); "To fully understand the events of which I report, it is necessary to review the data regarding the Genesis project, as developed by Doctors Carol and David Marcus..." Carol's version was the science team's original proposal to the Federation, and Kirk's was the beginning of his subsequent report to Starfleet on the events of TWOK.
There would have been no story reason for David to re-record Carol's narration because it wouldn't have made a difference in the fictional context, but if the producers of TSFS didn't want to shell out for the use of Bibi Besch's image then it made the most sense to have Kirk record a version as part of his log.
Makes it easier for him to blame "Klingons" plural and a specific individual since his "name is not important".
Indeed, while some argue that Kruge was a weak villain and thus made the movie weaker, I find delight in the idea that the villain of ST3 was of no real consequence. Kirk's true foes were elsewhere, in his past and his future, and the movie was all about transition...
Timo Saloniemi
Timo Saloniemi
I actually quite like Kruge. Sure, he's no Khan, but who can measure up to that? But something else I find amazing is that while nobody thought Khan important enough to reference throughout TSFS, a story that could not have happened without him, during the recap at the beginning of The Voyage Home, Kruge features fairly prominently! I can't help wondering if the late Ricardo Montalban was a bit annoyed that his character wasn't given similar reverence.
Again, this is where Vonda McIntyre's novel makes for better storytelling than the actual movie.
Saavik and David first beam down to the Genesis cave (though I can't remember if they're still on the Enterprise or if they've transferred to the Grissom by this point), and find that in the few days since they were last there, the vegetation has grown wild; the "unfinished" portion of the cave that Kirk & co. first beam down to is now full of vines. Some nice foreshadowing of what is to come when they reach the Genesis Planet itself...
Saavik and David first beam down to the Genesis cave (though I can't remember if they're still on the Enterprise or if they've transferred to the Grissom by this point), and find that in the few days since they were last there, the vegetation has grown wild; the "unfinished" portion of the cave that Kirk & co. first beam down to is now full of vines. Some nice foreshadowing of what is to come when they reach the Genesis Planet itself...
Unfortunately, there wasn't a very deliberate intent to link the movies together... certainly there had to be some of that from II to III. But I agree. Given the clear dependency of III upon II (you see a recap from the scene where Spock dies, after all), I would have liked to see a few more linkages.
Yeah, the Kirk replacement on the Genesis presentation was very noticeable. It annoyed me, too. He isn't a scientist... they should have either used Carol's clip or another scientist. Maybe even David. As for a payment fee... how much could it have been? For how brief it was, I can't imagine it having much of a financial impact.
Me thinks Shatner wanted more attention on himself and suggested it.
Yeah, the Kirk replacement on the Genesis presentation was very noticeable. It annoyed me, too. He isn't a scientist... they should have either used Carol's clip or another scientist. Maybe even David. As for a payment fee... how much could it have been? For how brief it was, I can't imagine it having much of a financial impact.
Me thinks Shatner wanted more attention on himself and suggested it.
I hadn't noticed; I guess it's a little odd, but then again Khan's been dealt with, he's dead. He was probably discussed, offscreen, but these conversations would have had no impact on the plot at all.
What really bugs me about TSFS, even though it's close to my favorite Trek film of them all, is that the Mutara Sector has been publicly quarantined, but Starfleet has not assigned a single warship to enforce this quarantine. Starfleet Command should have had another Constitution or at least a Miranda sweeping adventure tourists like McCoy and scoundrels like his prospective transporter away from the planet. Sure, you'll say this would have prevented Enterprise from reaching Genesis, but Kruge could have blasted the policing starship out of the sky, just as he did the Grissom. This might have made Kruge more threatening as well (although personally I'm somewhat surprised people don't think of him as a successfully-conceived antagonist).
It's just annoying that they laid out this rule and didn't even bother trying to prevent people from violating it. Does the Federation run on the honor system?
What really bugs me about TSFS, even though it's close to my favorite Trek film of them all, is that the Mutara Sector has been publicly quarantined, but Starfleet has not assigned a single warship to enforce this quarantine. Starfleet Command should have had another Constitution or at least a Miranda sweeping adventure tourists like McCoy and scoundrels like his prospective transporter away from the planet. Sure, you'll say this would have prevented Enterprise from reaching Genesis, but Kruge could have blasted the policing starship out of the sky, just as he did the Grissom. This might have made Kruge more threatening as well (although personally I'm somewhat surprised people don't think of him as a successfully-conceived antagonist).
It's just annoying that they laid out this rule and didn't even bother trying to prevent people from violating it. Does the Federation run on the honor system?
Star Trek III is dopey for a lot of reasons -- campy Klingons, irritating or inept Starfleet personnel, plot convolutions (Why are they going to Genesis at all? Yes, I'm aware of the editing issue; that's my point), Nimoy's workmanlike direction. It succeeds because of a few scenes -- Kirk/Sarek, destroying the Enterprise, returning to Vulcan -- and because it follows on the heels of Star Trek II, whose principal action it mimics/deconstructs. But it was a disappointing film, in 1984 and now. Still, it's better than Nemesis.
Similar threads
- Locked
