beep
It cites the same book **chrisk **read… I’ll have to hunt it down and read it over.
I notice many postings where Star Trek V is abbreviated to STV.
Maybe it’s a coincidence, but couldn’t that also mean “Straight To Video”, which in the case of Star Trek 5 might have been the most merciful thing to do ?
Actually, the official title of the movie is “Star Trek V: The Final Frontier”. Borrowing a phrase from Zucker Abrams Zucker, a better title may have been
“Star Trek V: The Final Insult”.
Yes. It is correct that Star Trek V is most definitely the worst Star Trek ever and quite possibly the worst movie ever. Oh. That wasn’t the question. :smack:
Obviously, you’ve never seen Battlefield Earth or The Star Wars Holiday Special, those films take “bad” to a whole 'nother level. The problem with STV is that it was an interesting idea, but poorly executed. In one of the other STV threads, someone made the claim that Paramount kept cutting the budget and futzing around with everything. If true, then it’s not entirely Shatner’s fault.
Bill wanted to have the stone monoliths come to life at the end. They could’ve done this with CGI for the DVD release, but Paramount wouldn’t cough up the $1 million it would have taken.
As for the Star Wars Holiday Special, I triple dog dare Lucas to release this on DVD. Ya hear me George, TRIPLE DOG DARE!
As I accidentally posted this question in a totally different thread (purely by accident, mind you), I raise the question here:
. . . I distinctly remember a scene where Spock shouts out a “Goddamn you sir, you will try . . .”–a distinctly emotional reaction. Isn’t this Vulcan supposed to be emotionless? Yeah, he’s half human and all, but isn’t he supposed to be pretty straight and narrow on the emotion stuff.
I wish I had a copy of the show–solely to research that scene. Anyone else remember this part?
Tripler
If Spock were a '49er: “Live long, and prospect”.
At a guess, I’d say it was “Amok Time”, where he undergoes pon farr and has to bone a chick or die tryin’ but, really, it could be from any one of half a dozen “Spock is emotional due to _____” episodes.
I’ve always felt a certain scene in Star Trek II violates this badly. When Kirstie Alley gasps for breathe because Kirk smashes a glass panel, that just seems like an emotional response brought on by fear.
Vulcans have emotions, just like anyone else… they just try to suppress them, sometimes not with the best results.
Plus, Saavik was originally intended to be half-Romulan and was possibly played as such by Kirstie Alley. Or else, she just sucks as an actress.
Both explanations are equally plausible.
Who said anything about denial? That was a command!
<Serpentor>
“There IS NO STAR TREK V! This, I command!”
</Serpentor>
It always struck me as just an instinctive response brought on by a sudden sound in a tense situtation. Actually, a few other bits have been attributed to emotion when it doesn’t really apply, including this paraphrased moment from Nimoy’s appearance on Star Trek: TNG:
Spock: I have no regrets.
Data. No regrets. That is a human emotion.
Not it isn’t, you yellow-eyed doof. Having regrets is emotional. Not having them isn’t. Yeesh.
Saying you don’t have them can still be an emotional thing, usually in a sort of defiant, individualistic way. Otherwise I don’t think “My Way” would’ve been such a big hit.
I’ve heard that Battlefield Earth saps the will to live from people.
I believe he says “Damn you, sir…”
I figured he wished to impress the importance of the action on the Klingon.
<spock>Actually, no. A sentence about the existence or nonexistence of an object or a part of history cannot be a command, only a statement. A statement that contradicts with observable facts is, I believe, the defintion of denial.</spock>
Not that there’s anything wrong with denial, as I said.
The line is not ‘a human emotion.’ Data says that “no regrets” is a human EXPRESSION.
The implication, I always thought, was that a true vulcan would never comment on having no regrets because they would not even consider having them - not to mention that humans tend to use the phrase to express satisfaction - which is an emotion, I think.
I consider myself a pretty big Trek fan, but not obsessive about it. I don’t read the books or technical manuals and I don’t go to conventions. Maybe someone can explain something to me. I understand that the movie wasn’t particularly good (I wouldn’t go so far as to say the worst ever) but how is it apocryphal? I haven’t seen it in a while but I don’t understand how it doesn’t fit into the canon. If being bad was the only criteria you would have to eliminate the first movie, some episodes of each of the series and almost all of Voyager.
I get what you’re saying, but I’m going to hijack here and chime in with a pet peeve of mine.
ST:TFF may be bad on a lot of levels, but’s it’s a much better “Star Trek” story than ST:TVH. “Voyage Home” started with a pretty cliche idea : a journey back in time to save the future, which already been done a couple of times in Trek, most notable in City On The Edge Of Forever. They then spoiled the idea a bit by making it into an eco-activist infomercial on the plight of the whales.
Then, they really ruined it: they made it a parody. The actors, in particular poor Walter Koenig, were reduced to spoofing themselves. Spock mind-melding with a whale, and wearing his stupid hippy headband. Chekov and the ridiculous Nuclear Wessels nonsense. The whole scene on the bus, from ‘exact change’ to the punk rocker to the discussion of profanity. Our intrepid heroes became bumbling comic relief. Instead of humour being injected into scenes, we went from gag to gag, with the ‘action’ tacked on at the end.
Lame, lame, lame. The WORST Trek ever.
ST:TFF may have been badly executed, but at least it dealt with a serious issue and allowed for a few dramatic and moving moments.
thwartme
Loach, the biggest problem was the timing in getting to the center of the Galaxy. They did far to quickly. A few othernitpickly points were the cooperation among Humans, Klingons, and Romulans, especially in regards to the planet of peace or whatever they called it. And, of course, proving that every species’ God was simply an imprisoned imp. Ignoring the movie allows for Ardra, Voyager, the Prophets, etc…
The biggest problem that most hardcore Trekkers had with it, tho, was Shatner himself. Everybody loves Kirk, even the people that hate him. But no one likes seeing an actor so full of himself that he sacrifices Trek for his own ego.
But, then again, if they had let Shatner actually free reign, he might have been able to do a superb job. We’ll never know, now.
As for TVH being a fanboy wank fest, that seems to be what they wrote it for, and it certainly has succeeded. Actual merit in the series? Well, it introduced it’s own canon and timeline problems. But, most trekkers seem to enjoy it very much. It’s the Duck Soup of Star Trek.
Truth be told, TMP and Generations were more torturous to watch than TVH or TFF