Just watched Star Trek V - pros and cons

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

I just finished watching it for the third time. I love this movie. I couldn't care less about the special effects. I don't find the humor particularly forced, there was often banter in TOS and they just upped the banter a bit. Here's what I liked about it:

1. Sybok. Excellent acting, nuanced character. Able to perpetuate his flawed ideals by his telepathic powers. I'd be interested to know if the people who experienced that he had taken away their pain felt it had a lasting positive effect in their life because of it it or if the positives faded like some drug high revelation.

2. Nimbus III. Awesome. The Planet of Galactic Peace. What a shithole. What a testament to wanky ideals dreamed up far from realities. It seems the only thing offered to these people to make their life one of multicultural peace is the removal of all weapons. Hahahahaha. Nice to see that all is not the Hilton in the Federation.

3. Opening scenes, very striking. Sybok and stringy bald guy in the desert. How's this for a great quote:

Sybok.. "Besides I can't believe you'd kill me for a field of empty holes."

Stringy Bald Guy.. "It's all I have."

4. Musical score. I bought the soundtrack for this after seeing it the second time. It's great stuff. I love the Klingon Calvary theme music which was used in several other films.

5. Most importantly this movie has some great character moments between Kirk, Spock and McCoy. Their characters really shine as does their acting. DeForest Kelly seems to be really enjoying himself and relishing his role. It's classic Trek friendship bonding stuff, touching, cheesy, for some I guess subtexty.. and most of all believable. These three are very much three old friends, comfortable in their banter and bickering and always having each others backs.

6. FAN DANCE!!!! Surprising, weird, bizarre, tacky, nice song, short enough to make your eyes pop but not drop.

7. "What does God need with a starship?" I know some people don't like this quote. I like it. Kirk delivers it PERFECTLY. It's classic Kirk too, and classic Trek that God turns out to be a megalomaniac alien of great power.

8 Sybok's end. Very sad when Sybok realizes his error.. we know he's a lunatic (probably gone insane pursuing his wild Vulcan emotions) but we still feel for him because ultimately he was used by this fake god alien. Though it isn't spelled out I think he was contacted telepathically, his very powers made him vulnerable. His sacrifice redeems him.

There was nothing I didn't like about it. It's right up there with VI for me. It's a grand romp with great Kirk, Spock, McCoy scenes!

 

[RandyS]

This much is true. Other than the TOS bridge, this one is my favorite - it is the closest thing to an enhanced and updated version of the TOS set that we're ever likely to get.

I was REALLY disappointed when they didn't reuse it for The Undiscovered Country.

They did. It is the very same bridge set, just in different colors. And maybe they changed the postion of the doors, I'm not sure exactly.

They did change the position of the doors, as well as repainting the whole damn thing and re-upholstering the chairs, adding buttons to the consoles.....

No, it was NOT the same set at all.

 

[CorporalClegg]

^
No it isn't. I guess it wasn't "military" enough for poor Nicky.

What a shame.

I actually think that, had Shat been allowed to make his film, it would've instead been received as one of (if not the) best of the films. It had so much potential. And really the one of all of 'em that was in the spirit of TOS.

 

[jwb]

Some of this has already been said, but here's my two cents.

Pros:

- music was great
- Shatner did a great job directing it
- Bennett made sure the story moved quickly and was a fun rollercoaster ride to distract the audience from the story problems
- Sets and locations were gorgeous

Cons
- Sybok the laughing Vulcan being Spock's brother (seems both illogical and contrived and is too much to swallow)
- Followed II, III, IV, which not only were incredible films but took our heroes from the tv show thing, heroes having space adventures on the Enterprise, to a new place, renegades having nonspace adventure in our time on earth. Trying to follow all that up with them being heroes having a space adventure on the Enterprise is bound to be anticlimactic. That said, IV set that all up.

-jwb-
jwbraun.com

 

[Broccoli]

The bridge in TUC was the same set as the bridge in TFF, just redressed and some walls shuffled around. Link:

By Star Trek V: The Final Frontier, most of the movie Enterprise sets had been recycled to become the Enterprise-D of Star Trek: The Next Generation. The bridge had been irrevocably modified as various Starfleet bridges seen throughout the series, including the Enterprise-D battle bridge, and also became several science labs and alien interiors. A new bridge was constructed under supervision of production designer Herman Zimmerman, who wanted to show a transition to the TNG era by introducing carpet and warmer tones to the bridge.

<snip>

The new bridge was reused in Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country for both the Enterprise and the Excelsior, with some modifications. Director Nick Meyer wanted to give the vessels a much more militaristic feel, and incorporated metal flooring and some tactile control surfaces.

 

[NathanielM]

We posted a question to Shatner and asked him what the hell was he thinking.

PRO: Decent story idea, originally thought up by Roddenberry before Motion picture that was used and was rejected by the film company.

Just needed a few frills and more action and better directing and it should been fine. Instead it reminded me of a bad rerun of TJ Hooker...

CON Decent Plot -- Again Roddenberry's idea...

CON BAD dialoge,

CON BAD acting, (Except maybe scotty's blooper they left in) "I know this ship like the back of my hand... WHAM!"

CON Shatner Directed and wrote it.

PRO He did not direct another one... they got harve bennett to do VI...

Overall it was a bad attempt at Trek...

It could have been better written. although I thought the part using Yosemite was well done. Can't beat scenery like that!


Nathaniel

Please hold me =(

Seriously though this movie was horrible. The sad thing is they created a fantastic anti-hero/hero in Sybok. I thought he was played to perfection from the moment we saw him in the desert up until he faced himself and sacrificed himself to save the Enterprise crew and his followers. By the end I honestly couldn't even see him as a villain, just a misguided man who in a different circumstance could have been a galactic hero who could have changed many lives. Imagine if Sybok had had the chance to work with Spock to help the Romulans years later.

Terrible, terrible movie otherwise with bad acting from the two Klingon "villains" (if you can call them that they acted and were presented like bit-players) and sub-par special effects.

Yes... hold me.

 

[CorporalClegg]

We posted a question to Shatner and asked him what the hell was he thinking.

PRO: Decent story idea, originally thought up by Roddenberry before Motion picture that was used and was rejected by the film company.

Just needed a few frills and more action and better directing and it should been fine. Instead it reminded me of a bad rerun of TJ Hooker...

CON Decent Plot -- Again Roddenberry's idea...

CON BAD dialoge,

CON BAD acting, (Except maybe scotty's blooper they left in) "I know this ship like the back of my hand... WHAM!"

CON Shatner Directed and wrote it.

PRO He did not direct another one... they got harve bennett to do VI...

Overall it was a bad attempt at Trek...

It could have been better written. although I thought the part using Yosemite was well done. Can't beat scenery like that!


Nathaniel

Just so you know, you might want to research some of your information.

 

[Trek_princess]

It would take too long to list all the cons, so here's the top few things that bother me about Star Trek V:
1. Embarrasingly-bad and unrealistic Kirk/Spock/McCoy camping adventure (I mean, come on - grown men don't sit around a campfire and sing "Row Your Boat" - and why would Kirk go rock climbing without a safety rope?)
2. Uhura's silly feather dance
3. Evil-brother Sybok

PROS: the scene where Spock witnesses his perception of his own birth was wonderfully done.

 

[A beaker full of death]

It would take too long to list all the cons, so here's the top few things that bother me about Star Trek V:
1. Embarrasingly-bad and unrealistic Kirk/Spock/McCoy camping adventure (I mean, come on - grown men don't sit around a campfire and sing "Row Your Boat" - and why would Kirk go rock climbing without a safety rope?)
2. Uhura's silly feather dance
3. Evil-brother Sybok

1. Yes they do. I'm a grown man and I do. As for the no-safety harness - because he's Captain Kirk and has giant balls. The dialogue makes clear that free-climbing El Capitan is not an unusual occurrence in the 23rd Century

2. Nothing silly about it. Singing, being sexy, and using her sexuality as a weapon is entirely in keeping with the character.

3. He wasn't evil.

 

[CorporalClegg]

And to be fair, Kirk wouldn't have been the first person to free-clime El Capitan--or a dozen other high-skill rock faces around the world for that matter.

 

[Kirk-On-Stilts]

The best Trek movie, and no, I aint joking. Those who dislike it are sheep following the 'cool' crowd. It's 'cool' to hate this movie. I am happily uncool. I reckon more people LOVE this movie than statistics show. Cowardice is what it is.

 

[Subcommander R.]

"What does God... need with a space ship?"

Need I say more?

And to you Kirk, I will grant the concept is good. I read the novelization and watched the film again, in hopes I'd appreciate it after enjoying the novel. I didn't.

 

[ConRefit79]

I really enjoy this film, despite its production flaws.
Pro: Like many have said, this felt more like the TOS.
Pro: The 3 main characters were great.
Pro: I like how the antagonist was misguided, not stock evil character.
Pro: The Bridge set is my favorite of the TOS movies. But, I do think carpet was inappropriate for a bridge during this time period.
Pro: Real location shots.
Pro: A bunch of aliens.
Pro: Observation lounge.

Con: Rushed, pure and simple. This explains why the script was not ironed out further to permit appropriate humor and the sub par visual FX. And the studio shoulders all the blame for rushing it.

Con: Not enough focus on the other characters to explain why they were following Sybok. The novel does a much better job explainig their actions.

Con: No engineering shots.

Con: Too TNG. The hallways were way too big for Enterprise-A. I already mentioned the carpet.

Con: No explanation of where E-A came from and why it was having so many problems. I've heard some say that the Probe from the previous film could be the cause, because Roddenberry once said she was originally the YorkTown.

Con: Klingons pursuing were comical.

Con: No explanation of how they reached the center of the galaxy so quickly. Then again, at the time, I had no idea of the distances involved. Nor how fast warp speed is supposed to be. And, I doubt average viewers would know either. We know how they got through the barrier, because Sybok says it is all an illusion.

Con: Studio refused to pay for updates and improvements in the Directors cut.

 

[Amaris]

I really enjoy this film, despite its production flaws.
Pro: Like many have said, this felt more like the TOS.
Pro: The 3 main characters were great.
Pro: I like how the antagonist was misguided, not stock evil character.
Pro: The Bridge set is my favorite of the TOS movies. But, I do think carpet was inappropriate for a bridge during this time period.
Pro: Real location shots.
Pro: A bunch of aliens.
Pro: Observation lounge.

Con: Rushed, pure and simple. This explains why the script was not ironed out further to permit appropriate humor and the sub par visual FX. And the studio shoulders all the blame for rushing it.

Con: Not enough focus on the other characters to explain why they were following Sybok. The novel does a much better job explainig their actions.

Con: No engineering shots.

Con: Too TNG. The hallways were way too big for Enterprise-A. I already mentioned the carpet.

Con: No explanation of where E-A came from and why it was having so many problems. I've heard some say that the Probe from the previous film could be the cause, because Roddenberry once said she was originally the YorkTown.

Con: Klingons pursuing were comical.

Con: No explanation of how they reached the center of the galaxy so quickly. Then again, at the time, I had no idea of the distances involved. Nor how fast warp speed is supposed to be. And, I doubt average viewers would know either. We know how they got through the barrier, because Sybok says it is all an illusion.

Con: Studio refused to pay for updates and improvements in the Directors cut.

Completely agree on all counts.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

A completely enjoyable film. I've never understood the despising of it. It's right up there with VI for me as great TOS films. Sybok is a very interesting character, the first (?) of Vulcans we see who reject Surak's teachings and take a very different path. Why does everyone hate him? I don't get it. He had a lot more depth than Soran.

 

[ConRefit79]

A completely enjoyable film. I've never understood the despising of it. It's right up there with VI for me as great TOS films. Sybok is a very interesting character, the first (?) of Vulcans we see who reject Surak's teachings and take a very different path. Why does everyone hate him? I don't get it. He had a lot more depth than Soran.

I don't know why Roddenberry hated him. One would assume Sarek was bonded as a child. So what happened to that mate? Did she decide to become a priestess? Was she killed? Was she like T'Pring and wanted someone else?

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

A completely enjoyable film. I've never understood the despising of it. It's right up there with VI for me as great TOS films. Sybok is a very interesting character, the first (?) of Vulcans we see who reject Surak's teachings and take a very different path. Why does everyone hate him? I don't get it. He had a lot more depth than Soran.

I don't know why Roddenberry hated him. One would assume Sarek was bonded as a child. So what happened to that mate? Did she decide to become a priestess? Was she killed? Was she like T'Pring and wanted someone else?

Maybe Sarek left her for Amanda. Though that level of scandal doesn't fit his highly esteemed positing in Vulcan society.

 

[Jonesy]

Biggest con: they pushed too hard to throw humor in, which turned out to be contrived, rather than evolving genuinly from the plot.

Well, another way to put it is that the writing was simply written badly. ("Pushed too hard" to me is a statement that seems to place blame soeley on the studio) There's nothing wrong with adding (or being told to add) humor into a movie. IMO the humor is not the only thing that was written badly, though.

 

[Jonesy]

The best Trek movie, and no, I aint joking. Those who dislike it are sheep following the 'cool' crowd. It's 'cool' to hate this movie. I am happily uncool. I reckon more people LOVE this movie than statistics show. Cowardice is what it is.

No, I dislike it strictly on my own terms, regardless of what the general consensus is on it or any of the other films. I'm sorry, it's ridiculous to simply pigeonhole critics as people who are following a crowd. Do you really believe that?

I think what separates me from a lot of Trek fans is that I have detached myself from the "Trek" part far enough to simply look upon it critically as a movie. I find people are way too forgiving of it based on their emotional attachment of the franchise and characters.

 

[SeerSGB]

Pros: The story works for TOS, the cast come off as having fun, some silly but fun humor-- again, very TOS, one of my favorite bridge sets.

Cons: Budget cuts really hurt the movie, SFX were SHITE, Shatner can't direct his way out of a paperbag with a TomTom, a sherpa, and a road map, "God" was a good concept, but felt like a wasted chance to revisit TOS-- Gary Mitchell anyone?

Final grade: C/B-