Star Trek Movie FAQ - v 1.2.5 - updated 7/23/09

[Therin of Andor]

Re: Star Trek Movie FAQ

Re: the Klingon under the toppling tree shot in TSFS
Year of Hell said:
What is this one?

Before the Klingons arrive on the Genesis planet, Saavik and David witness a tree falling during a tremor, and careful inspection by viewers can reveal part of a Klingon trapped within its branches. It's simply an editing error. The editor realized that footage of a tree was needed, but he selected a scene from much later in the movie, when the Klingons were closing in on Saavik and David.

 

[Zeppster]

Re: Star Trek Movie FAQ

I think Kirk's hair changes should atleast be talked about in this thread. I've seen it talked a lot about on many boards.

 

[Maurice]

Re: Star Trek Movie FAQ

Lord Garth said:
2. Khan had a baby?

• There is a picture of a small child in the transporter room of the Reliant when Khan detonated the Genesis Device that has circulated around the Internet but is not . Whether or not it's Khan's child is never said, it's not in the script either. Draw your own conclusions. Mine would be that it was a production member's kid and they took the picture for kicks.

I have to take issue with this. The child in question is in the shooting script, and there are production photos (I have to dig them up and scan them) of the child looking out the window in the side of the cargo containers, and in the transporter room. In fact, editing the child out causes Terrell and Chekov to jump from one compartment to the other. They also looped one of Terrell's lines to "What about the tricorder?" from "What about the child?" when Chekov says, "We've got to get out of here, now!"

 

[Ru'afo]

Re: Star Trek Movie FAQ

I've never believed that each cube has a Queen; that would be a little silly. Remember her rejoinder, in reaction to Picard's confusion, when he said "But that ship was destroyed": she said, "You think in such three-dimensional terms. How small you've become." There's a more complicated answer here. William Shatner speculated in his written sequel to Generations, "The Return", that the Borg have the ability to move in, and control, a fifth dimension of space, and that it gives them power and understanding that other creatures lack. I think she just shifted herself out of that ship, that perhaps, as the collective personified, she has the ability to move instantaneously (electronically? perhaps her form, her body, is from a mold that's recreated wherever she moves; remember, she once said in Voyager, that she was a member of a species herself; 135, was it?).

 

[Lord Garth]

Re: Star Trek Movie FAQ

I have two options. Either I can edit this stuff in when I rotate back on as admin or one of the forum mods can edit this stuff in. Who knows when I'll be an admin again, so Option #2 makes more sense.

 

[MarianLH]

Re: Star Trek Movie FAQ

DS9Sega said:

Lord Garth said:
2. Khan had a baby?

• There is a picture of a small child in the transporter room of the Reliant when Khan detonated the Genesis Device that has circulated around the Internet but is not . Whether or not it's Khan's child is never said, it's not in the script either. Draw your own conclusions. Mine would be that it was a production member's kid and they took the picture for kicks.

I have to take issue with this. The child in question is in the shooting script, and there are production photos (I have to dig them up and scan them) of the child looking out the window in the side of the cargo containers, and in the transporter room. In fact, editing the child out causes Terrell and Chekov to jump from one compartment to the other. They also looped one of Terrell's lines to "What about the tricorder?" from "What about the child?" when Chekov says, "We've got to get out of here, now!"

The child is also in the novelisation.


Marian

 

[Lord Garth]

Re: Star Trek Movie FAQ

biggles, Wookiee, help me out here. I feel like the dodgeball target at recess in elementary school!

 

[cardinal biggles]

Re: Star Trek Movie FAQ

I'll be damned. It was in the script.

http://www.geocities.com/uss_patriot_4/Star_Trek_II.htm

Scene 18 is when Chekov sees the child looking at him through the porthole. And indeed, in Scene 213A, the child wanders into the transporter room and gets next to the Genesis device during the countdown.

 

[Maurice]

Re: Star Trek Movie FAQ

Yep, and it was shot, too. Somewhere I have pix from those scenes with the kid, both on Ceti Alpha V and in the transporter.

 

[Therin of Andor]

Re: Star Trek Movie FAQ

DS9Sega said:
I have to take issue with this. The child in question is in the shooting script, and there are production photos.

The FAQs aren't disputing the child's existence. When it says, "Whether or not it's Khan's child is never said, it's not in the script either", it means the relationship to Khan is not spelt out by the script.

 

[Maurice]

Re: Star Trek Movie FAQ

Therin of Andor said:
The FAQs aren't disputing the child's existence. When it says, "Whether or not it's Khan's child is never said, it's not in the script either", it means the relationship to Khan is not spelt out by the script.

"Draw your own conclusions. Mine would be that it was a production member's kid and they took the picture for kicks."

^^^
That's the problem, Therin.

 

[Clym]

Re: Star Trek Movie FAQ

it's Kirstie Alley, not Kristie.

how can you make such a glaring mistake?!

 

[cardinal biggles]

Re: Star Trek Movie FAQ

Oops.

Fixed it.

 

[Therin of Andor]

Re: Star Trek Movie FAQ

DS9Sega said:
"Draw your own conclusions. Mine would be that it was a production member's kid and they took the picture for kicks."
^^^
That's the problem, Therin.

Well, it wasn't a production person's set visit snaps. The child actor did exist. In my interview with Paul Winfield he discussed the child's appearance at the porthole, which "caused" Terrell (played by a white stuntman in blackface) to fall down a sand dune.

 

[Maurice]

Re: Star Trek Movie FAQ

I think we've fairly well established that said child was part of the production...so when does the FAQ get fixed?

 

[cardinal biggles]

Re: Star Trek Movie FAQ

When Lord Garth tells me what he wants it to read. This is his project, and I don't feel comfortable about changing it in such a substantial manner. It's not like I'm just fixing a typo.

 

[Lord Garth]

Re: Star Trek Movie FAQ

Just quote one of the posters of your choice in the answer.

 

[Good Will Riker]

Re: Star Trek Movie FAQ

santa biggles said:
Oops.

Fixed it.

Good.

 

[Maurice]

Re: Star Trek Movie FAQ

It's been almost a year since the error has been pointed out about the FAQ re the child in TWOK. How long does it take before someone makes an edit?

 

[Therin of Andor]

Re: Star Trek Movie FAQ

DS9Sega said:
It's been almost a year since the error has been pointed out about the FAQ re the child in TWOK. How long does it take before someone makes an edit?

Maybe Lord Garth remains unconvinced?