Heh. Well, TVH has even less pew pew than TMP and it was (is?) the most popular film.
Should TMP be ignored?
- Thread starter WarpFactorZ
- Start date
That doesn't mean it's good. I dislike that movie immensely, but I don't try to force my views on others.
TVH was quite popular and quite successful.
Jebus, people, get a grip. This is an academic discussion, no one is imposing anything on anyone. The question "Should it be ignored?" is really "CAN it be ignored, and the remaining films not be affected?", and "Does ignoring TMP solve continuity issues?" There's no harm in such a thought experiment, and most often you end up learning something new in the process. I've rather enjoyed it. Nothing about pew-pew. I've been a ST fan for the better part of 40 years.
Why are we on this board? TO SHARE OUR OPINIONS WITH OTHERS. That's the point of a DISCUSSION forum. No one said anything about "imposing our will", or stifling discussion.... except you guys.
If you care to notice, this has turned into quite a lively debate. Quite frankly, coming in to the thread on the 8th page and effectively saying "Shut up!" is pretty much the dictionary definition of imposing your will on others, because it attempts to make your point the last one and doesn't offer the chance for counter opinions.
I could write a long post about why I don't like it, how silly the characters act, and such...but I won't.
You know that the original title was just Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan, right?
It was inconsistent. It was "II" in the trailer, the "II" was NOT used in the prints, "II" was used on posters, but not on the novel.
In other words, it was changed on the things it was easiest to change the title on.
So I guess Star Trek III, IV, V, and VI don't exist?
Well, the trailer came out months before, so your theory just died on the table.
Wow. You're bringing so much to think about to this thread. Is your podcast is as enlightening?
What was it someone said, about imposing their will on everyone?
Last edited:
Why yes I have read this thread but have failed to be convinced by your and other people's arguments to the contrary.
Since coming to Star Trek forums in the last decade I have thought much more about Star Trek than I should and have always considered that TMP and TWOK didn't fit quite right. If others are OK with Kirk's personal journey through these films then I'm happy for you all.
And I still watch TMP every time its on TV.
It hasn't aged very well for me.
The problem is made up though. Yes, if you assume Kirk got permanent command of Enterprise in TMP things don't add up, but why would you?
Phoenix219, you've received a warning for linking to an illegal way to watch Star Trek 5. Guys, piracy is illegal. Thank you for your attention.
Because that was clearly the intent of the end of TMP. It was foreshadowed by McCoy earlier in the film. It was how the writer ended the film and more explicitly the book.
It isn't any sillier to say that Kirk took a demotion to take command of the Enterprise back than it is to say that he's going to stay CO of the ship for an impromptu shake down cruise or "Hey, let's just run her out to Vulcan to drop off an officer".
As soon as the Vejur emergency was over the Enterprise should have docked (since she's conveniently back in Earth orbit) and her officers and crew debriefed after the greatest threat to the planet Earth in over 100 years. And maybe they can finish the refit.
But that's not how the movie ends.
Which would be telling in itself, if we assume Starfleet works rationally. Kirk knows this is his very last chance to command the ship. He knows the chance would be gone the moment he beams down for debriefing. But he also knows that if he goes AWOL on the pretense of a silly ferry run to Vulcan, he gets to retain command for a precious four days (isn't it good the ship was so badly damaged that she can't go any faster?) and still they won't keelhaul him because he just saved Earth...
Timo Saloniemi
Timo Saloniemi
It was no 'clearly' the intent. When I saw the two films as a kid I knew nothing about the books or background info. I just assumed that Kirk went back at his desk job shortly after TMP as that's where we find him in the next film and that's (roughly) how things operate in the real world.
Now people are free to interpret unclear things how they want and are free to imagine what happens between films, but it seems ludicrous to me on insist on silly interpretation of events and based on that interpretation complain that there is a continuity clitch.
Similar threads
