Star Trek III-Your Opinions

[Shatmandu]

Kirk: "You're either being poorly directed or you're half-Romulan."

 

[Brutal Strudel]

In my opinion, STIII is a mixed bag.

On the one hand, it has a rare poetry and poignancy to it that almost allows it to kiss the greatness of TMP, at times, but as a complete artistic entity, it isn't remotely on the same level, and is actually a great deal weaker than some of the other entries in the ST canon. Yet there is still something special to it. In some ways, I think Leonard Nimoy outdid Nicholas Meyer, especially in his handling of the trip to, and subsequent ritual on Vulcan. Similarly, he enlivens the film with the theft and destruction of the Enterprise, which is a true highlight of the "Genesis Trilogy", and moments that could rightly be described as William Shatner's all-time best acting (the look of commitment on his face before Kirk gives the order to go to warp in the former, and Kirk's entirely credible and gut-wrenching response to his son's death before the latter). The film also tries to give each character his or her moment to shine at spacedock, which puts it above both former movies in this respect. I also really appreciate the dramatically heigtened sense of lighting and colour that Nimoy and DP Charles Correll bring to the picture. It's much more of a looker than TWOK. Finally, there is the pleasure of seeing Mark Lenard back as Sarek, who must be one of the most formidable actors in ST's history (and there have been a few). Then there is the heightened bond between Spock and McCoy (and Kirk and Spock, if it could be heightened more than it had already been, that is). As usual, DeForest Kelley delivers a performance full of grace, timing and wit, practically bringing his character's symbiosis with Spock full circle. How could this man take a line like, "I choose the danger," and make it sound so full of import? Oh, and ... "It's his revenge for all those arguments he lost!" They NEVER dropped the ball with McCoy. On the other...

Everything that's a credit to STIII is its downfall -- and more besides. For example, while the improved lighting brings more life and colour to the movie, it also feels overdone and, at times, totally absurd. Take this shot of Kruge's boarding party being blown to hell as the Enterprise carks it: http://movies.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/tsfshd/tsfshd1263.jpg I must have missed Kirk's order to "Activate Disco Dome". Then there is Mark Lenard, who for all the excellence he brings to the picture is still, ultimately, saddled with exposition, which is made worse, in my estimation, by Nimoy choosing to focus on his wrinkled, sinuous lips during his mind-meld with Kirk, as well as a silly follow-up scene in which Nimoy recycles footage, complete with edits, from TWOK, as Kirk searches for clues to Spock's fate. A further problem is the new sets -- specifically, the set(s) for Genesis, as well as the Klingon and Excelsior interiors -- which look cheap in the extreme. In fact, the Klingon and Excelsior interiors are pretty obnoxious, ignoring the major aesthetic innovations of TMP and regressing ST to the comparitive infantilism of 1960's TV-bound TOS (or worse). Then there's Kruge, an implausible and undercooked antagonist, especially after Khan (who was also badly botched in the previous movie). Then again, I do love Christopher Lloyd. Kruge's speech about "the flag of the Federation [fluttering in the breeze]" is fantastically delivered. I crack up every time I hear that line. Terrific character actor. Lloyd does the best with a skimpy role. However, Nimoy can't avoid indulging himself, from a pointless scene involving Kruge's pet to a needlessly melodramatic scene where Kruge kills his lover. It feels like he was trying to add some meat onto a pretty thin bone.

Also, on a much deeper, almost spiritual level, the destruction of the Enterprise, while suitably violent and melancholic, leaves a bitter, nihilistic aftertaste. In TMP, the refitted Enterprise seemed to be the pinnacle of engineering, and was so new that it hadn't been fully tested, leading to some real and almost-real fatalities, before being properly balanced and brought into line. In other words, a formidable machine that, after a tricky pregnancy, was essentially born again. But in the very next movie, it had suddenly become a training vessel, nothing more, and in TSFS, we're told that Starfleet considers it old and useless, before it's stolen for one last hurrah and unapologetically blown up (and as a quick-fix solution at that). This is a mortal insult to Gene Roddenberry, Robert Wise and all the talented arts and crafts people that worked on the first film; a film that stressed the Enterprise's newness and its place in the pantheon, and strongly implied it would get more than its share of days in the sun. Really, this is a larger point than I can articulate in one post, much less one paragraph, but Harve Bennett and Nick Meyer drove a stake through ST's humanism, and its attedant features, which Nimoy followed through to its natural conclusion, rather than ameliorating or resisting, when he contrived to dispose of the ship's beauty, first in dialogue, then in actually having it destroyed. Had the Constitution-class Enterprise stayed dead, its destruction would at least have had resonance through any remaining sequels, instead of it being copied and pasted with a new filename, as if the old was lost but conveniently backed up (like Spock and his katra). While contrived to feel sadly beautiful, there's something cynical, if not actually vulgar, about III and IV's attitude to ST's leading lady.

After TMP, for me, the films are what they are -- relatively mediocre, half-hearted stabs at immortality. There is virtually none of TMP's grandeur or intelligence in any of the sequels, and certainly none of its care or precision. Equally depressingly, if not worse, is the way all the optimism and confidence in the human mission that TMP masterfully conveyed was so casually jettisoned in TWOK, never to be seen or heard from again, except in faint, pathetic burping noises from time to time (on the big screen, at least). If anything, Shatner's derided TFF comes the closest to TMP's heightened scope, but that's another story. It is an unutterable sin, and a tragedy of almost epic proportions, what happened to ST. And it's something that says so much about our present human condition, mired as it is in capitalism and ignorance. I say all this not to preach so much as to impugn my own opinion of STIII. I do not hate the other films or anything like it (though I do come close with the last three ST movies, but once again, that's another story). I just try to see them for what I think they are. But they still have things to offer and I enjoy watching and discussing them, from time to time. If there is any consistent triumph of all the movies (the TOS ones, at least), then it's the actors and the characters, which are worth returning to and remembering, when all is said and done. They lift the movies up, even if they are unable to redeem their excesses and their inadequacies. It sounds corny, but for all their faults, the TOS movies, and the human souls that inhabit the soulless spaces, will probably always have a piece of my heart.

Wow. Now that's a post. Bravo, good sir!

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

Star Trek III: The Search For Spock, best third-season TOS episode. It has it's moments like any Trek film and certainly some fun capers, like the starship stealing scene. I didn't have a problem with Robin Curtis as Saavik, and would've liked to have seen her continue in the role. That being said, I did have a problem with how she was directed.

 

[QuasarVM]

IMO

Kristie Alley's performance total eclipsed Curtis's appearance. The pon farr scene with Alley would of been "hot dirty sexy" with Curtis it was just awkward. Alley could have easily became a regular part of Kirk's command crew. She would have been a plus during both Voyage Home and Undiscovered Country. Watching Alley as Saavik play opposite Kim Cattrall as Valeris a definite bonus.

The prime fault in the movie was a missing scene with Kirk. Kirk is a decisive charactor, but I felt there should have been at least a short scene with Kirk experiencing regret over the choices he was making. After his meeting with the admiral, when he tells his officers that he was going anyway, I would of had him step alone into the turbo lift, the doors close and Kirk is facing the Star Fleet emblem on the inner surface of the doors. Kirk's face could of shown to mixure of emotions before settling on resolve. This very brief scene was missing.

The "space pirate" that McCoy meets in the disco bar, his make up was over the top. Klingon commander Kruge was a high point. We're introduced to the Bird of Prey which can not only become invisible but also change size on command. Sarek and Kirk played well in their time together.

Over all, much better than the Star Trek bench mark movie of Final Frontier.

"Spock, inform the crew, I'm about to have turbo lift sex."



T'Girl

Excellent post, T'Girl.

Yeah, the first shot of the Bird of Prey on top of the Merchant ship was ridiculous...it looks to be the size of a Klingon cruiser and then later appears to be smaller...never was sure what was up with that.

 

[Joel_Kirk]

^^

A note about the size of the Bird of Prey in relation to the merchant vessel:

If we recall in the fourth film, the fishing ship was very small compared to the BoP. I'm guessing that was the size of the merchant ship that Valkeris was on. (Cramped, small, not necessarily built for very long trips, etc...)

 

[SRFX]

I used to love this movie when I was a child, despite being always upset that Enterprise was destroyed.

Now as an adult, I find ST3 is the best of the weak Star Trek movies. The only films I like less than 3 are the Final Frontier and Nemesis (and ST5 at least gets bonus points for ambition).

And watching the Enterprise blow up is still just as upsetting to me now as it was 20 years ago.

That said, stealing the enterprise is the greatest scene in all of Star Trek ever, so the movie is redeemed by this.

 

[QuasarVM]

Love that pic of Saavik and Kirk.

If I were Kirk, I'd be tempted to jump her bones...

 

[Cryogenic]

In my opinion, STIII is a mixed bag.

On the one hand, it has a rare poetry and poignancy to it that almost allows it to kiss the greatness of TMP, at times, but as a complete artistic entity, it isn't remotely on the same level, and is actually a great deal weaker than some of the other entries in the ST canon. Yet there is still something special to it. In some ways, I think Leonard Nimoy outdid Nicholas Meyer, especially in his handling of the trip to, and subsequent ritual on Vulcan. Similarly, he enlivens the film with the theft and destruction of the Enterprise, which is a true highlight of the "Genesis Trilogy", and moments that could rightly be described as William Shatner's all-time best acting (the look of commitment on his face before Kirk gives the order to go to warp in the former, and Kirk's entirely credible and gut-wrenching response to his son's death before the latter). The film also tries to give each character his or her moment to shine at spacedock, which puts it above both former movies in this respect. I also really appreciate the dramatically heigtened sense of lighting and colour that Nimoy and DP Charles Correll bring to the picture. It's much more of a looker than TWOK. Finally, there is the pleasure of seeing Mark Lenard back as Sarek, who must be one of the most formidable actors in ST's history (and there have been a few). Then there is the heightened bond between Spock and McCoy (and Kirk and Spock, if it could be heightened more than it had already been, that is). As usual, DeForest Kelley delivers a performance full of grace, timing and wit, practically bringing his character's symbiosis with Spock full circle. How could this man take a line like, "I choose the danger," and make it sound so full of import? Oh, and ... "It's his revenge for all those arguments he lost!" They NEVER dropped the ball with McCoy. On the other...

Everything that's a credit to STIII is its downfall -- and more besides. For example, while the improved lighting brings more life and colour to the movie, it also feels overdone and, at times, totally absurd. Take this shot of Kruge's boarding party being blown to hell as the Enterprise carks it: http://movies.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/tsfshd/tsfshd1263.jpg I must have missed Kirk's order to "Activate Disco Dome". Then there is Mark Lenard, who for all the excellence he brings to the picture is still, ultimately, saddled with exposition, which is made worse, in my estimation, by Nimoy choosing to focus on his wrinkled, sinuous lips during his mind-meld with Kirk, as well as a silly follow-up scene in which Nimoy recycles footage, complete with edits, from TWOK, as Kirk searches for clues to Spock's fate. A further problem is the new sets -- specifically, the set(s) for Genesis, as well as the Klingon and Excelsior interiors -- which look cheap in the extreme. In fact, the Klingon and Excelsior interiors are pretty obnoxious, ignoring the major aesthetic innovations of TMP and regressing ST to the comparitive infantilism of 1960's TV-bound TOS (or worse). Then there's Kruge, an implausible and undercooked antagonist, especially after Khan (who was also badly botched in the previous movie). Then again, I do love Christopher Lloyd. Kruge's speech about "the flag of the Federation [fluttering in the breeze]" is fantastically delivered. I crack up every time I hear that line. Terrific character actor. Lloyd does the best with a skimpy role. However, Nimoy can't avoid indulging himself, from a pointless scene involving Kruge's pet to a needlessly melodramatic scene where Kruge kills his lover. It feels like he was trying to add some meat onto a pretty thin bone.

Also, on a much deeper, almost spiritual level, the destruction of the Enterprise, while suitably violent and melancholic, leaves a bitter, nihilistic aftertaste. In TMP, the refitted Enterprise seemed to be the pinnacle of engineering, and was so new that it hadn't been fully tested, leading to some real and almost-real fatalities, before being properly balanced and brought into line. In other words, a formidable machine that, after a tricky pregnancy, was essentially born again. But in the very next movie, it had suddenly become a training vessel, nothing more, and in TSFS, we're told that Starfleet considers it old and useless, before it's stolen for one last hurrah and unapologetically blown up (and as a quick-fix solution at that). This is a mortal insult to Gene Roddenberry, Robert Wise and all the talented arts and crafts people that worked on the first film; a film that stressed the Enterprise's newness and its place in the pantheon, and strongly implied it would get more than its share of days in the sun. Really, this is a larger point than I can articulate in one post, much less one paragraph, but Harve Bennett and Nick Meyer drove a stake through ST's humanism, and its attedant features, which Nimoy followed through to its natural conclusion, rather than ameliorating or resisting, when he contrived to dispose of the ship's beauty, first in dialogue, then in actually having it destroyed. Had the Constitution-class Enterprise stayed dead, its destruction would at least have had resonance through any remaining sequels, instead of it being copied and pasted with a new filename, as if the old was lost but conveniently backed up (like Spock and his katra). While contrived to feel sadly beautiful, there's something cynical, if not actually vulgar, about III and IV's attitude to ST's leading lady.

After TMP, for me, the films are what they are -- relatively mediocre, half-hearted stabs at immortality. There is virtually none of TMP's grandeur or intelligence in any of the sequels, and certainly none of its care or precision. Equally depressingly, if not worse, is the way all the optimism and confidence in the human mission that TMP masterfully conveyed was so casually jettisoned in TWOK, never to be seen or heard from again, except in faint, pathetic burping noises from time to time (on the big screen, at least). If anything, Shatner's derided TFF comes the closest to TMP's heightened scope, but that's another story. It is an unutterable sin, and a tragedy of almost epic proportions, what happened to ST. And it's something that says so much about our present human condition, mired as it is in capitalism and ignorance. I say all this not to preach so much as to impugn my own opinion of STIII. I do not hate the other films or anything like it (though I do come close with the last three ST movies, but once again, that's another story). I just try to see them for what I think they are. But they still have things to offer and I enjoy watching and discussing them, from time to time. If there is any consistent triumph of all the movies (the TOS ones, at least), then it's the actors and the characters, which are worth returning to and remembering, when all is said and done. They lift the movies up, even if they are unable to redeem their excesses and their inadequacies. It sounds corny, but for all their faults, the TOS movies, and the human souls that inhabit the soulless spaces, will probably always have a piece of my heart.

Wow. Now that's a post. Bravo, good sir!

You have good taste, sir!

Muchas gracias, amigo.

 

[Shieldsdown]

Excellent critique of the movie by Cryogenic, I agree with the vast majority of his observations about this movie, and about where Star trek went in general. I always felt this movie was underrated, so many good Star Trek moments, let down by some poor pacing.

Regards.

 

[A beaker full of death]

Sidenote: This was the 'moment in time' when TJ Hooker was on the air; and Leonard Nimoy and Willam Shatner were actually in an episode together in a Shatner-directed the episode.

Nimoy directed it.
As for TSFS, it's unevenly paced and looks cheap. The scenes on the planet drag terribly.

 

[Myasishchev]

The Search for Spock = the best film of the franchise.

As for why, I strongly agree with everything Cryogenic said that was good about it, and vehemently disagree with everything he said that was bad.

 

[QuasarVM]

Sidenote: This was the 'moment in time' when TJ Hooker was on the air; and Leonard Nimoy and Willam Shatner were actually in an episode together in a Shatner-directed the episode.

Nimoy directed it.
As for TSFS, it's unevenly paced and looks cheap. The scenes on the planet drag terribly.

Aside from ILM's work -- it really does look cheap. And even their warp effect looks cheap. Cheap. Cheap. Cheap.

 

[Ssosmcin]

The Search for Spock = the best film of the franchise.

Seconded. I absolutely, 100% LOVE this film. Is has been and always shall be my favorite Trek movie. It's packed with so much emotional punch with great acting by the principals, high stakes, lots of consequences and my favorite Kirk victory in all Trek:

"I. Have HAD. Enough of. YOU!"

I still get chills when the Genesis death music comes up as the planet starts its final death throes with Kirk and Spock waiting to be transported. The Fal To Pan scene is so freaking sweet, really a nice cap to all of the adventure.

Only one thing bugged me was the Pon Farr scene. Since Spock made it pretty freaking clear way back in Amok Time that the first time he went through it was in that episode. I mean, no kidding, Amok Time never established this every seven years thing, that was a Could Minders goof which everyone took and ran with (even Roddenberry). The whole point wasn't "I have to have sex every 7 years" it was "I have to go back to Vulcan and mate or die." One time - like the salmon. The ancient drives were just too strong, Spock hoped he'd be spared it. Etc. So the Pon Farr scene was really a result of the usual misreading of the whole thing.

Otherwise, I totally love this one. I like Trek II on about the same level, but Trek III really touched me in how it illustrated the depth of feeling they ALL had for each other. This was when they crossed over from good friends to a family.

So there.

 

[Myasishchev]

Not to get into the whole thing, because I have literally talked this subject to death, but...

The salmon only mates one time because it releases its ejaculate onto thousands of eggs, each of which are potentially viable.

Vulcans, as placental K-strategists, are not having that many children per coupling. They aren't even portrayed as having litters.

Of course, neither are the Ocampa, the only mate-once-or-never species that I know of in Trek, whose reproductive biology is a billeresque farce of the usual proportions.

However, that's still a great observation--it is weird that it took till, what, his late twenties/early thirties in Amok Time, but only until his (biologically) late teens in TSFS. Maybe it's a cultural thing, and feral Vulcans like Frankenspock don't even bother trying to suppress it.

Otherwise, I totally love this one. I like Trek II on about the same level, but Trek III really touched me in how it illustrated the depth of feeling they ALL had for each other. This was when they crossed over from good friends to a family.

This I could not have said better myself.

Plus, when people died in TSFS, they stayed dead. There is no Star Trek IV: The Search for David.

 

[wekkuli]

ST III was my first ever Trek movie I saw as a child and it made me a huge impact. I'm not sure if I understood the plot completely back then, but it offered me lots of highly emotional moments such as:

The intro /w James Horner's beautiful score
Enterprise arriving home
Stealing the Enterprise
Destruction of Enterprise
Arriving to Vulcan

No doubt it will always remain my fave Star Trek movie.

 

[Peach Wookiee]

I adore the "Stealing the Enterprise" track. It's so fun!

 

[RandyS]

"Strictly middle of the road" about nails it. I loved it when I was 14 but I seldom bother with it now.

Interesting take. I also loved it at 14, and still do now at 39.

Plus the movie gave us Robin Curtis. Any movie that does that will always be gold.

 

[Greg Cox]

Definitely the best of the odd-numbered Trek movies (not counting the new movie). It suffers in comparison to Khan and The Voyage Home, and the plot is basically an excuse to bring Spock back, but it's done in a fun and affectionate manner. If you're Trekkie, who loves these characters, it's an enjoyable movie. And you even get Mark Lenard back as Sarek . . . .

Drawbacks: Poor Robin Curtis is bit bland compared to Kirstie Alley, and Kruge is a real letdown after Khan. (But who wouldn't be?)

 

[Brutal Strudel]

"Strictly middle of the road" about nails it. I loved it when I was 14 but I seldom bother with it now.

Interesting take. I also loved it at 14, and still do now at 39.

Plus the movie gave us Robin Curtis. Any movie that does that will always be gold.

Really? Robin Curtis does very little for me.

 

[Kegg]

"Strictly middle of the road" about nails it. I loved it when I was 14 but I seldom bother with it now.

Interesting take. I also loved it at 14, and still do now at 39.

Plus the movie gave us Robin Curtis. Any movie that does that will always be gold.

Really? Robin Curtis does very little for me.

Quite. As far as the rotating Vulcan women in the TOS films go, I was most partial to Kim Cattrall as Valeris.

Performance-wise, she's quite serviceable as Saavik, but she lacks the deadpan humour Kirstie Alley had in the role.