• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

The Undiscovered Country apocryphal?

Status
Not open for further replies.
According to Star Trek Movie Memories Gene Roddenberry angrily phoned his lawyer and wanted 15 minutes of TUC's more militaristic aspects edited out of the film.

My friend, Ernie Over, was Roddenberry's carer and chauffeur at the time, and was at the theaterette screening, and Ernie denied that Shatner's version is true. Ernie said that GR was simply too ill to angrily phone anyone after seeing the workprint of ST VI. GR's only direct quote re ST VI was a feebly uttered, "The fans will like it."

Months earlier, GR did send memos of concern regarding the militaristic scenes he'd read in script form. (But why wait until they were filmed before demanding they be cut?)
 
He saw the movie literally days before his death. I doubt he was angrily doing anything or calling anyone. He'd had a series of stokes already by then hadn't he?

Maybe he expressed his concerns over the Fed involvement in the conspiracy at the script stage and they went ahead anyway.
Later when they were asking Meyer to tighten the movie--they perhaps used Roddenberry's name to, say, suggest cutting the Col West scene or maybe the scene where Scotty calls Azetbur a bitch.

I can see where Paramount would do something like that just to get the movie cut down to 109 minutes the theatrical was.
Interesting how fast and easy Meyer dropped in those scenes just five months later for the video release---
No double-dipping back then, a longer cut right off the bat, first release.
 
I can see where Paramount would do something like that just to get the movie cut down to 109 minutes the theatrical was.
Interesting how fast and easy Meyer dropped in those scenes just five months later for the video release---
No double-dipping back then, a longer cut right off the bat, first release.
I could be mistaken, but weren't those scenes all part of the longer international release?
 
I could be mistaken, but weren't those scenes all part of the longer international release?

Was there really a longer theatrical release internationally? Certainly not in Australia. We got it a few weeks after USA, and had no "West reveal" scene until the VHS came out.

The theatrical version has never actually been released commercially on home video or DVD.
 
I could be mistaken, but weren't those scenes all part of the longer international release?

Was there really a longer theatrical release internationally? Certainly not in Australia. We got it a few weeks after USA, and had no "West reveal" scene until the VHS came out.

The theatrical version has never actually been released commercially on home video or DVD.

I still swear that the West reveal was in the cut I saw in the theaters... It's certainly within reason that my memory is flawed, but I really remember his scenes being in the cut I saw in the theaters...
 
I still swear that the West reveal was in the cut I saw in the theaters... It's certainly within reason that my memory is flawed, but I really remember his scenes being in the cut I saw in the theaters...

His early scene was, but not the reveal.

I guess it's possible an early cut got into distribution - a friend of mine swears she saw a version of ST III in Perth, Australia, while on vacation, which included the little Vulcan girl on premiere night, and early prints of ST II had no "II" in the opening credits - but there was great excitement about new footage when the ST VI home video came out. If people were seeing that version a whole year earlier, surely it would have hit the gossip networks and newsletters.
 
Hated this movie vehemently, both theatrical and video versions. Having seen it just now via the Rifftrax version, I still hate it with the white-hot passion of a thousand red-hot suns.
 
The 'Operation Retrieve' scene was NOT in the theatrical version of TUC.

That, the torpedo bay scene with Spock, Scott & Valeris and the 'reveal' of Col West were the 3 additions of the home video release.
 
I've just watched TUC and read that Roddenberry said he considered parts of the film apocryphal. Which parts did he mean specifically? I thought the film was great and an important entry into Star Trek canon.

It is the best of the original series' movies...it still looks great 17 years later
 
Bite me very much. Thank you, ass. :rolleyes: I added an equal amount of substance to the post prior, so FOAD.
 
I added an equal amount of substance to the post prior

No, not at all. I have stated it elsewhere, whereas you have not

One thing that makes Star Trek 6 excellent is that it is the last movie with the original cast and it shows how some are prejudice and how to overcome it in the end, just one of the many things that the original series was about
 
Okay, fine...poorly written, poorly executed. Ignored established Trek lore (Klingon blood is suddenly bright pink? News to TNG). Trite scripting and an overly dependent concept based on the political situation of the day (making it immediately dated and disposable).

In Trek V we were chums with the Klingons...now we're bitter enemies again? This movie was TEH SUXOR! And it had the stink of Nick Meyer all over it. How many movies has he directed again? He got kinda lucky with Khan. He did NOT recapture it with VI.
 
Okay, fine...poorly written, poorly executed. Ignored established Trek lore (Klingon blood is suddenly bright pink? News to TNG). Trite scripting and an overly dependent concept based on the political situation of the day (making it immediately dated and disposable).

In Trek V we were chums with the Klingons...now we're bitter enemies again? This movie was TEH SUXOR! And it had the stink of Nick Meyer all over it. How many movies has he directed again? He got kinda lucky with Khan. He did NOT recapture it with VI.

6 is so much better than the overrated 2 (though it is still good) So what if the movie deals with politics of then, does not make it dated, it still stands today as a movie about how prejudice is a bad thing
 
Okay, fine...poorly written, poorly executed. Ignored established Trek lore (Klingon blood is suddenly bright pink? News to TNG). Trite scripting and an overly dependent concept based on the political situation of the day (making it immediately dated and disposable).

In Trek V we were chums with the Klingons...now we're bitter enemies again? This movie was TEH SUXOR! And it had the stink of Nick Meyer all over it. How many movies has he directed again? He got kinda lucky with Khan. He did NOT recapture it with VI.

They had to use pink blood for the Klingon in order to get a "PG" rating.
 
so, don't use blood or make it PG-13, get Kim Catrall to show some skin and see how McCoy earn his "Bones" nickname in prison.
 
I can see where Paramount would do something like that just to get the movie cut down to 109 minutes the theatrical was.
Interesting how fast and easy Meyer dropped in those scenes just five months later for the video release---
No double-dipping back then, a longer cut right off the bat, first release.
I could be mistaken, but weren't those scenes all part of the longer international release?

Well, not here in Germany.
 
Okay, fine...poorly written, poorly executed. Ignored established Trek lore (Klingon blood is suddenly bright pink? News to TNG). Trite scripting and an overly dependent concept based on the political situation of the day (making it immediately dated and disposable).

In Trek V we were chums with the Klingons...now we're bitter enemies again? This movie was TEH SUXOR! And it had the stink of Nick Meyer all over it. How many movies has he directed again? He got kinda lucky with Khan. He did NOT recapture it with VI.

He directed nine movies.

As for TFF: Don't we all wish that had never happened?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top