Klingon Ambassador Scene in ST IV

[Amos]

In the opening scene in TVH we see the Klingon ambassador claiming Kirk to be a renegade and terrorist and demanding justice for the Klingon people. He finally storms out of the Federation council after Sarek and the UFP president tell him to go pound sand.

My problem with the scene is that it doesn’t make much sense in the context of the story or the movie experience as a whole. It doesn’t really get the casual viewer “caught up” with events from the prior movie nor does it give any sense of the trouble Kirk and crew might be in. Further, it adds a layer of potentially confusing galactic politics that really goes nowhere until STVI, at least.

Maybe the writers were planting the seeds for the next film or two but my guess is probably not, so I’m not really sure.

It may have made more sense to have a scene with Starfleet brass and perhaps several UFP council members pressuring Sarek to have Vulcan turn over Kirk and Sarek refusing saying while he understands the ramifications of Genesis, Kirk and his crew sacrificed everything to save his son and he’ll forever be in their debt.

Anyway, that’s my feelings. Maybe I’m wrong or missing something. Thoughts or comments welcome.

 

[Timo]

I feel it does nicely establish the concept of Genesis being controversial. Were it a mere scientific curiosity or tactical issue, response to it would be straightforward. But since it's Political, we get the tiptoeing that is important to how the plot unfolds:

- There is a blockade that makes little practical sense; yet something like this is a plausible byproduct of Politics. Without this plot complication, our heroes would not face the most dramatic of their obstacles.
- Starfleet sends a science team but no warships for protection, looking foolish as events unfold; again, Politics is a great way to justify the absence of heavy guns, and gives the heroes a lot more to do.
- The science team proceeds with caution atypical of Hollywood researchers or the Trek precedent; again, it makes Political sense for the Fleet to assign a man who's his own politruk. Sure, the movie goes out of its way to make every non-hero artificially foolish, but without the excuse of the opening scene, this would make the movie look even worse.

The previous movie made no use of Klingons (save for that one proverb). Somehow tying them to the plot of this one from the get-go is vital. And doing it in this two-tier fashion, with top-level political blustering that leads nowhere, and then with covert and selfish action by a vile Klassic Klingon Kharacter, is a brilliant way to have and eat this particular cake. Kruge perishing leaves the next movie free to choose between massive Klingon retaliation and an indifferent shrug, and it doing the latter is much more plausible now that we have seen how little it matters whether a Klingon Ambassador huffs and puffs in San Francisco.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Vger23]

That guy was just a blowhard idiot.

 

[Indysolo]

That guy was just a blowhard idiot.

Don't you mean a "pompous ass?"

 

[fireproof78]

In the opening scene in TVH we see the Klingon ambassador claiming Kirk to be a renegade and terrorist and demanding justice for the Klingon people. He finally storms out of the Federation council after Sarek and the UFP president tell him to go pound sand.

My problem with the scene is that it doesn’t make much sense in the context of the story or the movie experience as a whole. It doesn’t really get the casual viewer “caught up” with events from the prior movie nor does it give any sense of the trouble Kirk and crew might be in. Further, it adds a layer of potentially confusing galactic politics that really goes nowhere until STVI, at least.

Maybe the writers were planting the seeds for the next film or two but my guess is probably not, so I’m not really sure.

It may have made more sense to have a scene with Starfleet brass and perhaps several UFP council members pressuring Sarek to have Vulcan turn over Kirk and Sarek refusing saying while he understands the ramifications of Genesis, Kirk and his crew sacrificed everything to save his son and he’ll forever be in their debt.

Anyway, that’s my feelings. Maybe I’m wrong or missing something. Thoughts or comments welcome.

Part of the story is the fact that Kirk and company are in exile. They have remained on Vulcan for several months because of the political push back and fear of punishment from the Council. I always took the seen as establishing that this wasn't just a small event that only had limited consequences, but a huge one that even Kirk was reluctant to go face.

 

[Maurice]

It's fine. It sets up that Kirk and Co. and in deep political doo doo and that there may be consequences if they are not seriously punished.

Film narratives are all about conflict and stakes. This accomplishes both with some economy.

 

[Timo]

It's continuity - the previous movie, Klingons were a big deal, but this time the writers don't want them around, so they have to be excused somehow. A big noisy exit is great for that.

But does continuity matter? Well, this movie is a sequel. That is, it chooses to be, where the previous one had no choice but to be one. A transition that is also a recap helps out the audience, not only in getting up to speed, but in comprehending that they are dealing with a sequel and should accept that they walked into the wrong theater if they didn't catch the previous one...

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Mojochi]

But does continuity matter?

It kind of did in this case, with these particular movies, because they're not only tandem stories, but also had big stakes, not readily washed over.

 

[Yistaan]

I don't really get what the Klingon Ambassador's legal reasoning is. Kirk took a ship unauthorized to Genesis. But the Klingons weren't authorized to be there either. Just because they imagined that it was a weapon to be used against them doesn't mean anything. By that logic, they could just show up at, say, Noonien Soong's laboratory because his androids are so powerful they could be used against Klingons.

Even if they write off the destruction of the Grissom as an accident due to a rogue Klingon officer, Kruge still had David Marcus killed then sent the rest of his crew to invade the Enterprise. Why should anyone complain that they subsequently got blown up?

 

[fireproof78]

I don't really get what the Klingon Ambassador's legal reasoning is. Kirk took a ship unauthorized to Genesis. But the Klingons weren't authorized to be there either. Just because they imagined that it was a weapon to be used against them doesn't mean anything. By that logic, they could just show up at, say, Noonien Soong's laboratory because his androids are so powerful they could be used against Klingons.

Even if they write off the destruction of the Grissom as an accident due to a rogue Klingon officer, Kruge still had David Marcus killed then sent the rest of his crew to invade the Enterprise. Why should anyone complain that they subsequently got blown up?

Why not? Kirk surrendered under a false flag and wiped out an entire contingent, save for one, thus dishonoring him as well. So, why would he not go to bat for his comrades in arms who died a coward's death?

 

[Timo]

I wonder what the current rules of war are as regards scuttling. Kruge didn't place a special condition on the surrender that would have forbidden scuttling. If a boarding party takes control of a sinking ship, it presumably isn't the original crew's obligation to guarantee their safety, especially as again the terms of surrender didn't include a ban on abandoning ship. Kruge just happened to be slow to evacuate his team (presumably because his own transporters still were down for the count, meaning he had to rely on Kirk's assets there).

Also, it's technically not a booby trap if the ship helpfully tells the boarders that a scuttling will take place in 47 seconds and counting. And not Kirk's fault if the PA system is down on the corridors leading from the transporter room to the bridge. Or if the boarding party doesn't speak much English.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Bad Robot]

It's the obligatory "previously on Star Trek" sequence.

Bennett/Nimoy struggled with these sequences in both their movies, and Nimoy in particular has taken flack from ST fans insisting that these scenes speak to his inexperience as a movie director ("So where were the cameras apparently shooting all this footage, Nimoy?").

I've even heard a couple of podcasts (don't recall if they were Trekmovie or Critical Drinker) questioning whether these recaps were even necessary. I don't see that there was any getting around them, and most of these scenes I've always thought were handled cleverly enough.

With more money perhaps the engine room "mind meld" sequence in II could have been re-shot from a single camera angle for III... however I don't think even that was ever going to happen.

 

[Kor]

I don't really get what the Klingon Ambassador's legal reasoning is. ...

"Klingon justice is a unique point of view."

Kor

 

[NCC-73515]

Without this scene, the end would've been very confusing for non-fans

 

[Coops]

I thought it was a nice reminder for those maybe new to the series that Kirk was a bit of a 'loose cannon' who played by his own rules, hinting at past events and setting up for the, ahem, future ones.

 

[dupersuper]

I thought it was a nice reminder for those maybe new to the series that Kirk was a bit of a 'loose cannon' who played by his own rules,

Not nearly as much as he's been made out to be...

 

[fireproof78]

In the films far more than the show, though even then he had disobeyed orders, to quote Kirk.

 

[publiusr]

It pointed the way towards The Undiscovered Country. I was expecting a Klingon War

 

[Timo]

Well, everybody should have been, on basis of the previous movie - had this scene not defused the whole thing by showing that the Klingons are mere windbags and their "There shall be no peace!" was simply how things had always been.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Dukhat]

Don't you mean a "pompous ass?"

It’s funny. For years I never knew exactly what that guy in the background was yelling, as the Ambassador and the rest of the Klingons completely ignore the outburst. It’s almost like that line was added in post-production.