I don't think STV is that terrible

[SchwEnt]

^^^ What these guys said.

I can't think of another movie that can be so greatly improved by simply editing and cutting. Remove the Klingons, remove the humor, remove the bad effects... it can only improve the movie.

Don't really have to change, re-write... just cut cut cut.
After the bad parts are edited out, what remains isn't such a terrible ST movie. Not great or very good, but not terrible.

Actually, I think if you remove some of those elements, it makes it more of an obvious retread of "Way to Eden."

Right on. And in both cases, it's not really a bad idea and is a common ST story theme-- the group of misfits or malcontents or ostracized folk, seeking fulfillment or paradise or the promised land.

Now portraying that general story via a space-hippy counter-culture movement maybe isn't so great. Religious zealots and cult figures are another way to tell the story as in TFF.

Whatever story means are used, the idea is fine. It's been well used in novels and films before, it's not rotten from the get-go.

 

[sonak]

^^^ What these guys said.

I can't think of another movie that can be so greatly improved by simply editing and cutting. Remove the Klingons, remove the humor, remove the bad effects... it can only improve the movie.

Don't really have to change, re-write... just cut cut cut.
After the bad parts are edited out, what remains isn't such a terrible ST movie. Not great or very good, but not terrible.

Actually, I think if you remove some of those elements, it makes it more of an obvious retread of "Way to Eden."

Right on. And in both cases, it's not really a bad idea and is a common ST story theme-- the group of misfits or malcontents or ostracized folk, seeking fulfillment or paradise or the promised land.

Now portraying that general story via a space-hippy counter-culture movement maybe isn't so great. Religious zealots and cult figures are another way to tell the story as in TFF.

Whatever story means are used, the idea is fine. It's been well used in novels and films before, it's not rotten from the get-go.

Except that it's an example of the "failure is the only option" story. It's like a Voyager episode from early seasons about finding some potential way home. You know the episode ends in failure.

In TFF, you know the quest ends in failure.

 

[Ssosmcin]

Sure, the quest is a failure from the start, but the quest is a McGuffin and the real object of the story (if not the characters) is in what they learned about themselves. The Quest was Sybok's, the lesson was learned by the main characters. I knew flat out when I originally heard the plot back before the film opened that they would never find God. With that out of the way, I was able to appreciate the journey of the characters.

It's a deeply flawed film with a lot of BS that didn't need to be there. The intention was good, but there were too many cooks in the kitchen and, frankly (much as I love him), Shatner is not a good originator of stories. He simply should have been allowed to direct, God knows why they let him write.

 

[22 Stars]

I will have to do some more research, but his contract clause that matches Nimoy's probably included story input, much the same as Nimoy had on III and more-so on IV.

 

[Elder Knight]

I really wanted this film to be good, but I feel that even the scenes that should have been effective are awkwardly presented, with the humor badly forced and the emotions layed on with a bludgeon. They really needed a professional director in there.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

Maybe I've been drunk every time I watched it. I thought it was a blast.

 

[LOKAI of CHERON]

Maybe I've been drunk every time I watched it. I thought it was a blast.

Thank you, thank you. Despite its flaws, at least one other appreciates the tremendous sense of fun this film elicits!

 

[ALF]

As a Star Trek film, I felt it did have some nice moments. Plus, I also thought it was good to see the Kirk, Spock, and McCoy friendship again - something that was sort of missing throughout most of the films. It may not have been Trek's finest film outing, but at the very least, it was a film that really tried to be about something and I enjoy it on that note.

Thoughts?

I'm with you all the way on this one.
All the classic Trek films are a gift.

 

[Anji]

STV was not that bad.

I think it was just a bit of a downer. All this talk of death, mortality and God.

And dear God, if Shatner would've only gotten the floor numbers going in the right direction!!!!

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

STV was not that bad.

I think it was just a bit of a downer. All this talk of death, mortality and God.

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000638/Kirk: Spock, my top priority right now is to regain control of the ship. After that, you can debate Shakari until you're green in the face.



The whole damn movie is a comedy.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Btw, it's Sha'Ka'Ree, after Sean Connery who was the original choice to play Sybok.

"Spock, why does your fully-Vulcan brother speak with a Scottish accent?"

 

[Peach Wookiee]

Maybe I've been drunk every time I watched it. I thought it was a blast.

So you're saying it was a blast and you were blasted?

But seriously, I've enjoyed this film very much, even with its flaws.

 

[CoveTom]

No, you are mistaken, Ralph Winter has taken full responsibility for this CHOICE not to use ILM:

http://trekmovie.com/2010/06/30/producer-ralph-winter-on-star-trek-v-we-almost-killed-the-franchise/

And, unfortunately I almost killed the franchise in terms of the visual effects. We felt like we got taken advantage of by ILM and so we shopped to go to other places. We found a guy in New York, Bran Ferren, who had a pretty good approach to doing the effects, but ultimately they were horrible. And the combination of a story that was not working, it just wasn’t commercial, the effects were terrible – we almost killed the franchise, it almost died.

Others, including Shatner, have said that ILM's top teams were busy on other films and unavailable, which would have left them with the "C" team to do TFF. The truth is probably a combination of what Winter said and what Shatner has said.

Regardless, I don't fault them for deciding not to go with ILM. What I fault them for is deciding, on such an important film as a Star Trek film, to go with an unknown effects house that had never done anything more extensive than TV commercials to that point. I can't believe Paramount signed off on that decision! You don't want ILM, fine. There are plenty of other effects houses. But you don't hand a Star Trek feature film off to an unknown, no matter how impressive a demo reel he can make with his cloud tank.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

I'm an easy sell with effects. When there is great effects like in ST:XI I enjoy them. When there's a huge upgrade in looks like with ENT I get impressed. But if it's all cardboard and foam rocks I just don't care. The whole franchise could be done in TOS era effects and I would still be a huge fan. I realize most people have standards though, LOL.

 

[sonak]

No, you are mistaken, Ralph Winter has taken full responsibility for this CHOICE not to use ILM:

http://trekmovie.com/2010/06/30/producer-ralph-winter-on-star-trek-v-we-almost-killed-the-franchise/

And, unfortunately I almost killed the franchise in terms of the visual effects. We felt like we got taken advantage of by ILM and so we shopped to go to other places. We found a guy in New York, Bran Ferren, who had a pretty good approach to doing the effects, but ultimately they were horrible. And the combination of a story that was not working, it just wasn’t commercial, the effects were terrible – we almost killed the franchise, it almost died.

Others, including Shatner, have said that ILM's top teams were busy on other films and unavailable, which would have left them with the "C" team to do TFF. The truth is probably a combination of what Winter said and what Shatner has said.

Regardless, I don't fault them for deciding not to go with ILM. What I fault them for is deciding, on such an important film as a Star Trek film, to go with an unknown effects house that had never done anything more extensive than TV commercials to that point. I can't believe Paramount signed off on that decision! You don't want ILM, fine. There are plenty of other effects houses. But you don't hand a Star Trek feature film off to an unknown, no matter how impressive a demo reel he can make with his cloud tank.

I think the effects are far down the list on the problems for this movie. Shatner dwells on it whenever he's defending his "vision," but it's not what made the movie fail. Give TFF the effects of the Next Gen films, and it's still TFF.

 

[Maurice]

Regardless, I don't fault them for deciding not to go with ILM. What I fault them for is deciding, on such an important film as a Star Trek film, to go with an unknown effects house that had never done anything more extensive than TV commercials to that point. I can't believe Paramount signed off on that decision! You don't want ILM, fine. There are plenty of other effects houses. But you don't hand a Star Trek feature film off to an unknown, no matter how impressive a demo reel he can make with his cloud tank.

Altered States, Little Shop of Horrors, and The Manhattan Project are hardly "little more than commercials". But Ferran's group didn't have the practical experience of working with spaceship miniatures and motion control, with the result that most of the shots of the Enterprise he did are little more than optical stills that are scaled on the optical printer.

 

[Ian Keldon]

With the "perfect storm" of factors conspiring against it, we're lucky V was as good as it was.

 

[Captain Nebula]

I never liked TFF much when I was younger, but I just got it from the library again and it seems better now that I'm older.

It is the quintessential Star Trek:

To accidentally be forced to go where no one has gone before.
​

​

I thought Laurence Luckinbill was horrible, even for an 'emotional' Vulcan. The campfire scenes were funny. Some of the FX were great - the scene with the Enterprise in front of the moon rocked! Even though the moon had blue atmosphere. But some FX weren't much better than claymation - it was probably stop-motion animation for the Bird of Prey firing on the old space probe. Scotty hitting his head was kinda dumb.

I read an interview with Nick Meyer talking about filming TWOK and how he had to keep doing take after take after take until Shatner got tired and stopped screwing around. Nothing was stopping TheShat while he was directing. And you can tell.

But it could have been worse, I think.

I mean, it could have been about a dying clone of Captain Kirk that took over the whole Romulan Empire. And Spock would have had to die again to save the ship if that happened.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

I mean, it could have been about a dying clone of Captain Kirk that took over the whole Romulan Empire. And Spock would have had to die again to save the ship if that happened.

But clones are Star Wars mainstays! Trek would never be that hackneyed!

 

[Ian Keldon]

I mean, it could have been about a dying clone of Captain Kirk that took over the whole Romulan Empire. And Spock would have had to die again to save the ship if that happened.

But clones are Star Wars mainstays! Trek would never be that hackneyed!

IIRC (and it's been a LONG time since I read it) one of the early Trek novels had a Kirk clone who helped take over the Romulan Empire.

*EDIT* Double checked, and I was right: "Price of the Phoenix" and it's sequel "Fate of the Phoenix".