Undiscovered Country Dinner Scene

[Charles Phipps]

It's taken me years but only now do I realize General Chang as a man with extensive knowledge of Earth culture is baiting Kirk the entire scene.

He knew exactly what he was doing with the breathing room line.

 

[Maurice]

I don't think his perplexed "I beg your pardon?" supports that.

 

[USS Triumphant]

I don't think his perplexed "I beg your pardon?" supports that.

I took the "I beg your pardon?" as indignant, not confused, and I thought he was about to make a bigger issue of it if he hadn't been derailed by the continuation of conversation. I didn't think he was previously familiar with Kirk's quote, but he knew who Hitler was and that that wasn't good.

 

[Maurice]

He knew exactly what he was doing with the breathing room line.

"I beg your pardon" makes no sense if he "knew exactly what he was doing".

 

[Vger23]

Unfortunately, this is one of the most awkward, poorly edited scenes in the entire movie franchise.

I've seen different edits of this scene that flow far better. The scene that made it into the final film barely qualifies as a cohesive conversation

 

[WarpFactorZ]

Unfortunately, this is one of the most awkward, poorly edited scenes in the entire movie franchise.

I feel that sums up the editing of the whole movie (and I like the storyline!).

 

[Agony_Boothb]

The Klingon that is shoving food into his face who Uhura tries to start a conversation with is basically me at every dinner gathering i go to.

That Blue spaghetti did look tasty btw.

 

[Charles Phipps]

"I beg your pardon" makes no sense if he "knew exactly what he was doing".

I took that as him playing a role. Remember, Chang is trying to make Kirk look like a complete ass because he plans on framing him as a Klingon hating terrorist with the Klingons as victims of his aggression.

 

[Maurice]

YMMV but to me his tone made him sound like "wut?". He wasn't expecting a zinger from Kirk. The 5th draft of the script has Kirk saying "I beg your pardon?", and the revised 5th Tan pages (revision color) has Kirk's reply as "Earth. Germany. 1938." And while there's a clear scene direction for Chang to play the "To be or not to be" bit "with a malicious twinkle" there's no such clue-stick for how to play the "I beg your pardon" line, except that it indicates Kerla "hastily" interjects thereafter, which suggests Kerla was trying to smooth over the awkward moment Chang just got caught in.

TUC Trivia: It's still Saavik in revised 5th draft pages as late as June 14, 1991, well into principle photography, and I've seen a call sheet for June 20 what identifies Kim Catrall playing Valeris, so my guess is they changed the name so late they didn't bother to change the script pages to avoid confusion with the various departments. They just changed it the few times it was said in dialog.

 

[Kor]

I have seen a script online with Saavik's name. And I have to question whether the Vulcan character was still meant to be the same Saavik we already knew, as she is introduced as a totally new character in her first scene.

Being the doubtful and suspicious type, I have always thought that somebody just did a "search and replace" to insert Saavik's name everywhere throughout that script before they posted it online.

Kor

 

[johnjm22]

It's sort of a weird scene. To this day I don't fully understand parts of it.

That said, I still like the scene. I just think "dinner with the Klingons" was a fun idea with lots of potential that could've been a classic scene. Instead it's just a decent scene.

 

[Kor]

It's sort of a weird scene. To this day I don't fully understand parts of it.

That said, I still like the scene. I just think "dinner with the Klingons" was a fun idea with lots of potential that could've been a classic scene. Instead it's just a decent scene.

Another thing in the movie that makes no sense is the Federation president's speech toward the end.

Kor

 

[TheCrankyCardassian]

Another thing in the movie that makes no sense is the Federation president's speech toward the end.

Kor

You mean the one where he’s clearly discussing the planned evacuation of Qo’noS?

 

[Kor]

You mean the one where he’s clearly discussing the planned evacuation of Qo’noS?

Of course he is. But if you listen to everything he says, it makes no sense as a coherent speech.

Kor

 

[TheCrankyCardassian]

Of course he is. But if you listen to everything he says, it makes no sense as a coherent speech.

Kor

You have piqued my interest, I will be certain to check this out.

 

[Green]

Vintage printed scripts had Saavik in them. I bought one at a convention well before the movie even came out. I could hardly believe I was buying the script for the movie that wasn't coming out for months! But it was genuine and I was sorely disappointed that so much of the story that I read was cut out of the final cut.
$20 and well spent.

 

[Tosk]

...Which you can read here:

http://www.st-minutiae.com/resources/scripts/tuc.txt

 

[Maurice]

...Which you can read here:

http://www.st-minutiae.com/resources/scripts/tuc.txt

The scan of the script I have has a lot of page changes from that version, but it's not been OCRed so not easily shared.

 

[Firebird]

The scan of the script I have has a lot of page changes from that version, but it's not been OCRed so not easily shared.

OCR? Is that the number written across each page so any copied portions could be traced back to the owner of that copy?

 

[Timo]

Of course he is. But if you listen to everything he says, it makes no sense as a coherent speech.

Why should it? It's just snippets, and you can't tell coherent from incoherent via mere snippets. And it's actually two totally separate speeches anyway.

First, there's the welcome, which appears to be short, at most Gettysburg Address long, that is, it's allowed to feature perhaps two actual points, both of which have to be memorable phrases but aren't required to contain much meaning. We get the opening platitude ("Madam Chancellor, members of the diplomatic corps, ...honoured guests. The UFP welcomes you to Camp Khitomer.") and then a cut of unknown length plus one of the points ("Let us redefine progress to mean that just because we can do a thing it does not necessarily follow that we must do that thing."). Then it's off to Azetbuhr before the second half of the speech.

The second half is pretty clear-cut. The Prez, in charge, explicates that he's telling what happens next in this conference ("The proposed agenda is as follows...") and then goes into detail, laying down a timetable where many phrases emphasize urgency and scheduling. All of these phrases seem to come from one and the same context, that is, from the aforementioned agenda.

So where's the problem?

Timo Saloniemi