He doesn't deliver the line in that tone, though. Rather, he's jubilant. Contrast this with the way he says "They don't arrest people for having feelings.", which is 100% classic McCoy snark directed at Spock.
Something that bugs me about TUC
- Thread starter Discofan
- Start date
He doesn't deliver the line in that tone, though. Rather, he's jubilant. Contrast this with the way he says "They don't arrest people for having feelings.", which is 100% classic McCoy snark directed at Spock.
I've already explained that in detail. I'd advise you to actually read my previous posts before trashing them, that would be a nice change.
He's not talking to Spock. Bones is allowed to mention feeling to people other than Spock. They aren't exclusive. Or was Spock's "If I were human" line a moment later directed back at McCoy?
That's unlikely. Spock usually makes his comebacks to McCoy plain and unambiguous. I think it relates to Spock answering Kirk earlier in the movie that the idea that everybody's human, is insulting.
It wasn't even a response to one of your fantasy land posts for a start so pipe down.
So you're asking questions that you can't handle the responses to. Looks like you should heed your own advice.
No, just your responses, as they have little bearing as to what's presented on screen, and worse still, are backed up by an incredibly weak argument based on things that are not even shown.
As opposed to your ignoring parts of the dialogues that contradict your "theories".
Yes, in fact, he looks at him precisely when he says the word "feelings".
There's no 'theory' here. The baddies got caught, the enterprise crew didn't get prosecuted for disobeying orders and breaching klingon space.
There is NOTHING in this film that suggests that the people responsible for what is a pretty massive crime just get 'let off' - any talk of valeris being released despite her confession is just making up things that simply aren't on screen.
That's what happened in this film. End of.
What part of it is on screen? What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
Who non-fans are you referring to??? How many non-fans actually cares about Star Trek VI???
Because throughout the entire film, she is established as a likeable character with whom the crew bonds. They are taken aback by the revelation that she's in on things, and are equally horrified when she is tortured by the mind meld. The news she's been let off the hook is welcoming to them, in light of the fact that her confession brought down the conspiracy. It's a plea deal.
I don't want to get political, so let me just put this out there. There is a current (unnamed) investigation into a similar conspiracy between "the Federation" and "the Klingons", in which some individuals who have committed crimes are being exonerated because their cooperation is leading to the big fish about to be fried...
Last edited:
What part of what is on screen? I've just clearly described what happens on screen. You see valeris in custody. What more do you need to see? An extended court martial scene? Oh no, in your version of the film she gets let off doesn't she despite murdering federation officers amongst a string of other charges.
You're being deliberately obtuse now, or just trolling, either way I'm done with this thread.
And I forgot to bring you a gift!
The ones that go see Star Trek films, but would never be caught dead at a Star Trek convention. They like a good yarn, but don't invest in the material the way everyone here does. Hollywood loves them. They're considered 'butts in seats' by the accountants, and can make or break a film in ways you and I have no chance of ever achieving.
I know we analyze the blood out of everything but that's just who we are.
Good God, this "debate" is still raging. Unbelievable.
But since Nichols was not comfortable saying those lines or felt that they were out of character for Uhura (or both), in the finished film her largest beef with the Klingons is their table manners.
You think we were supposed to like Valeris by the end of the film? After she commits cold blooded murder, frames the heroes of the movie, and outright refuses to help them prevent the murder of the UFP President? What does it take for a character to become unsympathetic in your eyes?
. Yeah, okay, when Valeris is Spock's protege and she makes suggestions like the "sabotage" thing, yes, the crew bonds with her & likes Valeris. And the audience is supposed to like her enough that they'll be surprised and/or disappointed when she turns out to be one of the conspirators. But Valeris being a party to mass murder on the Klingon ship, framing Kirk & McCoy for that crime, directly murdering two crewman on the Enterprise, and being an accomplice to the attempted murderer of the UFP President... Those are pretty much dealbreakers, you know?
And I don't know if the Enterprise crew is exactly horrified at Valeris' torture during the mind meld. I think they're stressed & nervous because they don't know if Spock will get the information they need about the names of the conspirators and the location of the conference, and startled/horrified because they've never seen Spock so quietly furious and intense before. But nobody on the bridge says a single word against what Spock is doing. They all seem to silently agree that it's a necessary evil. And when Spock breaks the meld, nobody, not even McCoy, expresses any concern if Valeris is all right. I'd say by then the characters (and the audience) are supposed to be in "She's a bad guy -- fuck her" mode.
And I honestly don't get the logic of why, if the audience is supposed to get that: A) Valeris has been set free offscreen, and B) We're supposed to feel good about that, what the possible advantage of being ambiguous about that is. This was (IIRC) a $30-35 million dollar picture, a big Christmas release, and, as far as anyone knew or intended at the time, the last film they were going to be making with these characters. What the hell is the possible advantage of playing coy with that fact that one of the bad guys gets away with it? And why in the world would you end your last motion picture with the original cast on a strange note of ambiguity in the last five minutes like that? They were wrapping everything up for Kirk and his crew, giving them a happy ending, and ended the movie with them literally sailing off into the sunset. That is not the time you suddenly introduce loose ends into the picture.
I disagree with you there, but I can see this interpretation. I always took this line to mean that Uhura felt like Lt. Valeris in that she did not consider the Klingons trustworthy. Now granted, this would have been clearer in the finished film if Nichols had not outright refused to say the line "Guess who's coming to dinner?" which was instead given to Chekov. Nicholas Meyer felt that some of the stronger prejudicial lines would have more bite coming from the African-American actors (Such as "Klingons would become the alien trash of the galaxy" coming out of the mouth of To Kill a Mockingbird's Brock Peters).
But since Nichols was not comfortable saying those lines or felt that they were out of character for Uhura (or both), in the finished film her largest beef with the Klingons is their table manners.
Or else you've been misunderstanding the line for 27 years.
You think we were supposed to like Valeris by the end of the film? After she commits cold blooded murder, frames the heroes of the movie, and outright refuses to help them prevent the murder of the UFP President? What does it take for a character to become unsympathetic in your eyes?So if this stuff was all quietly swept under the rug, why does Picard tell Spock that "history is aware of the role you played [in peace with the Klingons], Ambassador" in the "Unification" two-parter on TNG?
Yes. This is always how I've taken those lines. Uhura, Chekov, and Scotty, all have have mini arcs in the film that reflect Kirk's larger arc. He goes from "Let them die" to "You've given me back my son's [hope]." By the end of the film, Kirk and his crew are no longer frightened of change.
And God knows that people are never, ever jubilant when they're making jokes!
Again,
. Yeah, okay, when Valeris is Spock's protege and she makes suggestions like the "sabotage" thing, yes, the crew bonds with her & likes Valeris. And the audience is supposed to like her enough that they'll be surprised and/or disappointed when she turns out to be one of the conspirators. But Valeris being a party to mass murder on the Klingon ship, framing Kirk & McCoy for that crime, directly murdering two crewman on the Enterprise, and being an accomplice to the attempted murderer of the UFP President... Those are pretty much dealbreakers, you know?And I don't know if the Enterprise crew is exactly horrified at Valeris' torture during the mind meld. I think they're stressed & nervous because they don't know if Spock will get the information they need about the names of the conspirators and the location of the conference, and startled/horrified because they've never seen Spock so quietly furious and intense before. But nobody on the bridge says a single word against what Spock is doing. They all seem to silently agree that it's a necessary evil. And when Spock breaks the meld, nobody, not even McCoy, expresses any concern if Valeris is all right. I'd say by then the characters (and the audience) are supposed to be in "She's a bad guy -- fuck her" mode.
And I honestly don't get the logic of why, if the audience is supposed to get that: A) Valeris has been set free offscreen, and B) We're supposed to feel good about that, what the possible advantage of being ambiguous about that is. This was (IIRC) a $30-35 million dollar picture, a big Christmas release, and, as far as anyone knew or intended at the time, the last film they were going to be making with these characters. What the hell is the possible advantage of playing coy with that fact that one of the bad guys gets away with it? And why in the world would you end your last motion picture with the original cast on a strange note of ambiguity in the last five minutes like that? They were wrapping everything up for Kirk and his crew, giving them a happy ending, and ended the movie with them literally sailing off into the sunset. That is not the time you suddenly introduce loose ends into the picture.
