• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Lt. Saavik or Lt. Valeris

Status
Not open for further replies.
It wasn't right for the Character of Saavik.
They didn't ever establish that she was half human or half romulan....
There in lies the problem. They would have to added a lot more to TUC in order to make that development work out for THAT plot.

I don't believe in treating the audience as though they've all seen the last movie let alone the last movie with that character. Thus I don't believe it would have had significant character development or shock by having Savvik as the betrayer...It wouldn't have worked.

Saavik was FAR too logical in the last movie...and it made sense. She did a better job than Kirstie Alley. IF they had kept all those deleted scenes with Kirstie Alley's background and her flirting with David...you could pull of this betrayal with Saavik but Robin Curitis' stellar job of strength and stoic impartial-ism she shows in TSFS, you couldn't buy her as the betrayer.
 
Robin Curitis' stellar job of strength and stoic impartial-ism she shows in TSFS, you couldn't buy her as the betrayer.

Nick Meyer had no intention of offering Ms Curtis the opportunity. I understand she was quite shattered to hear that he wasn't interested to know if she was even available.
 
Last edited:
Robin Curitis' stellar job of strength and stoic impartial-ism she shows in TSFS, you couldn't buy her as the betrayer.

Nick Meyer had no intention of offering Ms Curtis the opportunity. I inderstand she was quite shattered to hear that he wasn't interested to know if she was even available.


wow, that's harsh. Whatever issues with the TSFS version of Saavik there are are more a reflection of the way the character was written, not Curtis' performance, which I thought was fine.
 
I think I'm in the minority. I liked Robin Curtis's portrayal of the character way more than Alley's. I remember watching TWOK in the theater as a kid and thinking, "What is wrong with this woman?" All the emotional outbursts, the crying at Spock's funeral...from a Vulcan? (this was before I learned about the whole Vulcan/Romulan thing, but still, it wasn't in the movie).

Now as for TUC, I would have much preferred Saavik over Valeris, simply because Valeris was obviously in on the conspiracy. Why else would the character have been in the movie? I remember thinking this from the moment I saw her. However, if it had been Saavik, then everyone would have thought it was just a nice sendoff for the character. I certainly wouldn't have assumed that she was the bad guy.
 
Robin Curitis' stellar job of strength and stoic impartial-ism she shows in TSFS, you couldn't buy her as the betrayer.

Nick Meyer had no intention of offering Ms Curtis the opportunity. I understand she was quite shattered to hear that he wasn't interested to know if she was even available.


That's not what I heard.
While I didn't hear if it was Robin in particular she was the last person to play the role and I heard he wanted to use Saavik for the role. So even if that means making a new Saavik ala Catrell.
 
That's not what I heard.
While I didn't hear if it was Robin in particular she was the last person to play the role and I heard he wanted to use Saavik for the role. So even if that means making a new Saavik ala Catrell.

What? I'm really not sure what you're trying to say.

Nick Meyer wanted to use Saavik for ST VI. Paramount approached Alley and she said no. Meyer was not interested in approaching Curtis ("Starlog", including an interview with Curtis). So Meyer went back to his original favourite from the casting of ST II: ie. Cattrall. She was interested but did not wish to be the third actress to play the character, so Meyer and Cattrall came up with Valeris, which coincidentally meshed well with Gene Roddenberry's memo that he wasn't keen on the script turning the fan-loved character of Saavik into a traitor. Meyer created Saavik and it amused him that Roddenberry originally objected to the character during the making of ST II.
 
Last edited:
They should have over ruled Roddenberry, and cast someone else if Katrall REALLY didn't want to play Saavik. The role was written as Saavik and should have stayed that way. There are a literally 1000 actresses who would have been thrilled to play Saavik and done a great job.
 
^ Well, overruling Roddenberry, who had virtually no involvement in the films by that point, would be one thing. But overruling your director and trying to force him to cast an actress he didn't want in a major role would be quite a different matter.
 
They should have over ruled Roddenberry

Meyer did. He says as much on his commentary on the DVD. Meyer had to let Roddenberry read every draft script, but Paramount didn't have to listen to any of Roddenberry's concerns. And then GR had the right to withhold his "Creative Consultant" credit, as a signal to fans that the film did not have his blessing.

and cast someone else if Katrall REALLY didn't want to play Saavik.

Meyer himself prefers not to direct sequels. He'd be the first person to understand an actress not wanting to be expected to emulate a role created by two previous actresses.

The role was written as Saavik and should have stayed that way. There are a literally 1000 actresses who would have been thrilled to play Saavik and done a great job.

And the point is, Meyer wanted to work with Cattrall. Had wanted to since ST II. Creators and performers are usually allowed to reach consensus.
 
Would have been nice if Cattrall had gotten the job in 82. We would have had a consistent Saavik all the way through.
 
Would have been nice if Cattrall had gotten the job in 82. We would have had a consistent Saavik all the way through.

I found Valeris quite unlikable in ST VI, right from the beginning. For me, Kim Cattrall always bring a rather abrasive quality to her roles, whether it be Valeris, Miss Honeywell in "Porky's", the "Mannequin", or Samantha in "Sex and the City".

And I've met several casual viewers of the Trek franchise who never even noticed the switch in actresses between II and III, until it was pointed out. We've had three Tora Zeyals, two Zefram Cochranes, two Daimon Boks and two Senator Cretaks, among other switcheroos. Is it really that important that only one actor ever be allowed to interpret a certain role?
 
Would have been nice if Cattrall had gotten the job in 82. We would have had a consistent Saavik all the way through.

I found Valeris quite unlikable in ST VI, right from the beginning. For me, Kim Cattrall always bring a rather abrasive quality to her roles, whether it be Valeris, Miss Honeywell in "Porky's", the "Mannequin", or Samantha in "Sex and the City".

And I've met several casual viewers of the Trek franchise who never even noticed the switch in actresses between II and III, until it was pointed out. We've had three Tora Zeyals, two Zefram Cochranes, two Daimon Boks and two Senator Cretaks, among other switcheroos. Is it really that important that only one actor ever be allowed to interpret a certain role?

Nope. This kind of thing happens on TV shows all the time. However, it would be nice if the same actor palyed the role throughout.

And I agree with you on Catrall. Of the three actors who played the role (yes, I know Valeris wasn't Saavik in character, but in spirit...), Catrall was my least favorite.

I also forgot to mention that Saavik had way more of a motive than Valeris, seeing as how she was right there when the Klingons killed David Marcus in cold blood.
 
The Sex and the City thing is a problem. Admittedly every time l see Valaris I expect her to lean over and smugly say "and that's when I sucked his c*ck".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top