Some points about Star Trek VI:The Undiscovered Country

[CorporalCaptain]

So we get a film at the end where we see the credits of the actors twice??? It doesn't make any sense; if these characters, not actors, we loved and followed for some time, the sign off is appropriate for the film for the characters because it was they who were retiring from service. The sign off was not part of the closing credit, it was part of the film--before the closing credits, and I wish there was an alternate version where the cast signed it as the characters.

You ever stand in line for an autograph? I did when I was a kid, and I really enjoyed getting that close to Leonard Nimoy. I still have the autograph. Getting it was a little moment, but still special.

As @JonnyQuest037 said, it's like the cast taking a bow; their names are also on the program, you know. But it's also like getting an autograph from everyone, because that's pretty much literally what is was. That made it a special moment. I wouldn't want it the other way.

I frankly don't care what the characters' handwriting looks like.

 

[Steven P Bastien]

A few years ago I was at a convention. One session had Walter Koenig speaking. He made a couple of comments related to the fact that he considered TUC the best TOS movie, by a mile.

I think that is a significant opinion, as he was an actor in the series, as well as the movies and was even a script writer on occasion. This means that if we think Star Trek, in general, has any merits, then TUC must be a reasonably good movie.

I'll say that TUC is not my favorite, although I do like it a lot, but it does not give the "feel good" factor I get from the series in general. I mention that so you don't think I'm referencing WK's opinion to support my own.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

It doesn't make any sense; if these characters, not actors, we loved and followed for some time, the sign off is appropriate for the film for the characters because it was they who were retiring from service.

I think the original cast doing their final film together on the 25th anniversary of the series is a lot more significant than a bunch of fictional characters retiring, sorry. TUC was a significant film for the Trek franchise and the actors deserved that signoff.

The sign off was not part of the closing credit, it was part of the film--before the closing credits, and I wish there was an alternate version where the cast signed it as the characters.

...So if the names are in cursive, they don't count as credits somehow?

And you see double credits in movies all the time. Haven't you ever seen a film that says something like "A Robert Wise Film" at the beginning of the opening credits and then "Directed by Robert Wise" as the last credit right before the movie starts?

I frankly don't care what the characters' handwriting looks like.

Yeah, exactly.

One session had Walter Koenig speaking. He made a couple of comments related to the fact that he considered TUC the best TOS movie, by a mile.

That's interesting, especially considering that he submitted a story proposal for STVI.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

The cast is often credited twice, too, in end credits.

 

[STEPhon IT]

A few years ago I was at a convention. One session had Walter Koenig speaking. He made a couple of comments related to the fact that he considered TUC the best TOS movie, by a mile.

I think that is a significant opinion, as he was an actor in the series, as well as the movies and was even a script writer on occasion. This means that if we think Star Trek, in general, has any merits, then TUC must be a reasonably good movie.

I can see why he saw it that way; TUC was the only film in the series I thought treated them (Koenig, Nichols, Takei, and Doohan) as an ensemble which I'd never thought they were. They were supporting casts from TOS while the ensemble was Shatner, Nimoy, and Kelley. Everyone in the movie had a moment and it was fitting for the end of this franchise as we knew it.

 

[STEPhon IT]

I think the original cast doing their final film together on the 25th anniversary of the series is a lot more significant than a bunch of fictional characters retiring, sorry. TUC was a significant film for the Trek franchise and the actors deserved that signoff.

...So if the names are in cursive, they don't count as credits somehow?

And you see double credits in movies all the time. Haven't you ever seen a film that says something like "A Robert Wise Film" at the beginning of the opening credits and then "Directed by Robert Wise" as the last credit right before the movie starts?

Of course, but it was the first film I'd seen which had double closing credits. The characters were signing off of a their duties from the Starship Enterprise, not their careers as actors--so I got nothing out of that. Also, it wouldn't be the last time we'd seen, at least, some of the cast in another installment. I'm not sure if they deserved a signoff, but the one thing they did deserve was to get paid... and some valued screen time which they received.

 

[STEPhon IT]

The cast is often credited twice, too, in end credits.

Only if they're not credited in the beginning of the film.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Only if they're not credited in the beginning of the film.

Nopers. See, oh, Close Encounters of the Third Kind. Richard Dreyfuss is credited once at the beginning and twice at the end.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

Also, it wouldn't be the last time we'd seen, at least, some of the cast in another installment.

Oh, come on. They had no way of knowing in 1991 that some of them would be playing those parts again. It's not like they were issued handbooks saying when they'd do a guest spot on TNG or something.

If you're criticizing them for not having foreknowledge of the future, you're really reaching.

 

[johnnybear]

TUC was the closest movie in terms to the television series I'd say! Apart from the turtle head make-up on the Klingons they were much like the Kor, Koloth and Kang variety rather than the "This is a good day to die" and other mad bravado they shouted during other movies and of course TNG!
JB

 

[STEPhon IT]

Absolutely. The Klingons were finally back, and were as threatening as they were in TOS. The Klingon court room was clever... just like the Klingons of old, and that cloaking device which can fire while invisible is as interesting and dangerous like the legendary "Mind Sifter". Something Discovery's, ST: Enterprise's (Augment Virus??? Feh!), and TNG's Klingons combined couldn't have the IQ to invent it. It was a thrill to see the real Klingons, 1 last time at the cornerstone of Universal peace.

 

[johnnybear]

These Klingons had style my friend!
JB

 

[Marsden]

I liked how General Chang had the bumps but not really, he could have fit right in with Kor and Kang from the series. The other's had more of the ridges but Chang was the main adversary.

I liked how the Romulan looked, too. No weird brow ridges. I wonder if he had something to do with the ship that could fire cloaked.

It would be funny to find out something like the ship has a 5% chance of blowing up every time it fired while cloaked is why it didn't catch on.

 

[STEPhon IT]

I liked how the Romulan looked, too. No weird brow ridges. I wonder if he had something to do with the ship that could fire cloaked.

Nah. The Klingons were smart in TOS and ruthless; I wouldn't doubt they created it. It was a tool to frame the Enterprise, and I'm sure Cartwright and the conspirators had full knowledge on the progress of this prototype, but this scheme of a plan and intellect was all Klingon.

 

[F. King Daniel]

It never made any sense to me that the Klingons never used that technology again. In fact, nobody did until Shinzon came along 100 years later.

Even if the Enterprise crew defeated it, they're the best and brightest. The rest of the galaxy wouldn't stand much of a chance.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Meh. If we imagine that there are multiple generations of cloaking technology, power supplies, and indeed all forms of technology, then a ship able to fire while cloaked by one version of a cloak does not imply that a ship can fire cloaked by the next version. All it means is that the power supply problem is solved for the existing configuration of systems. Later generations of cloak, or indeed later versions of torpedoes that can be energized to defeat more powerful defenses, could easily require more powerful power systems that render the problem of firing while cloaked intractable during that period. IIRC there was even a TNG episode where they said that it was an assumption that the enemy couldn't fire while cloaked, implying that these limitations were always only dependent upon what the state of the art was. Of course, when the power supplies get better, that means that shipboard detection systems likely get better, which means cloaks have to get better, which means in short order firing while cloaked takes too much power. Rinse, repeat.

 

[Steven P Bastien]

The classic arms race scenario gives a lot of leeway for the writers.

 

[Kor]

Chang's BoP, the prototype, was the only one that existed. I think some non-canon background materials put this as his secret pet project. Once he and his cronies were destroyed, knowledge of the technical details was lost.

Kor

 

[David cgc]

Chang's BoP, the prototype, was the only one that existed. I think some non-canon background materials put this as his secret pet project. Once he and his cronies were destroyed, knowledge of the technical details was lost.

Even if the technology wasn't lost, Starfleet had already figured out a countermeasure, so it'd be back to the drawing board.

 

[Pauln6]

The purpose of a cloak is stealth I.e. To avoid long distance scanning. It could never be effective in close combat (Impulse turns are detectable, hydrogen thrust is detectable, and plasma exhausts are detectable) unless you are warping in, firing, and warping out again and even there, the warp field/trail itself is detectable on scanners.