Star Trek 4 - Zurück in die Gegenwart!

Page 2 of 2 Previous  1, 2

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Star Trek 4 - Zurück in die Gegenwart!

Post  Yakima Canutt on Sat Mar 08, 2014 9:25 am

well it's been a tough few weeks as we deal with the fallout from the death of Cliff Bole, founder of the Bolian race. Cliff's family asks that donations be made to the McHale's Navy Museum & Archives, or the Fantasy Island Reenactment Society.


Yakima Canutt

Posts : 8302
Join date : 2011-04-11

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek 4 - Zurück in die Gegenwart!

Post  Yakima Canutt on Sat May 24, 2014 8:31 am

Bloggen Franich speaks truth to glower -

...it takes a serious amount of angry amnesia to declare Into Darkness the worst Star Trek movie ever. Worse than The Final Frontier, a mesmerizingly narcissistic vanity project about William Shatner going mountain-climbing and killing a god using the power of his oratory? Worse than Insurrection, a movie-length away mission to a grade-Z planet? I understand people who feel like Into Darkness wastes decades of franchise mythology on empty spectacle…but I’m hard-pressed to say that it’s a bigger waste than the climax of Star Trek: Generations, which unites the two most iconic characters in Star Trek history so they can punch Malcolm McDowell.

Likewise, it’s possible to empathize with the filmmakers — who are attempting to please newcomers and generations of fandom — while also admitting that the film had a whole host of basic structural problems. Why was it still an origin story? Why bring in the Klingons if you’re just going to punch them? Why spend two hundred million dollars on a movie if the vast majority of the non-animated action is set in various undifferentiated spaceship corridors? Why does Old Spock literally phone in his cameo via Space-Skype? Why does Khan have magic resurrection blood? These were creative choices that just didn’t work out, and refusing to admit that is just a dodge. (It’s true that Into Darkness had social commentary, insofar as it seems to be about terrorism and it seems to be arguing that terrorism sure is a complicated topic.)

To me, there’s a central misconception at the core of Star Trek Into Darkness — a miscommunication, really — which helps to explain the film’s current reputation. Although Abrams wasn’t a Star Trek guy, the collective writing team behind the reboot series has a great respect for the franchise: They want to please the fans. At the same time, they want to do something new, to push the franchise into a new direction, and leave their own mark on Trek mythology — and they feel that they have to do that very carefully.

There’s a reason for this. The fanboy as a species is skeptical of anything which threatens the sanctity of a mythology. (There’s an aspect to the Into Darkness haters that reminds you of elderly Catholics who think everything went downhill after Vatican II.) That’s why the first Star Trek reboot is the most carefully architected retcon ever, with a time travel plot that didn’t really make any sense but allowed Leonard Nimoy to come onscreen and basically tell the fans, “Don’t worry: The fictional stories you grew up with are still “real” in the context of this fictional world that is not real.” And, in a fascinating interview at Grantland, Lindelof obliquely implies that was the purpose of adding Khan into the sequel:

We either do it now, and we do it as much of a touchstone back to that original movie as possible, so that no one will ever ask us after this movie comes out again, “What are you doing from the original series?” Because it’s like, that’s all they were really asking us, is “When are you going to do Khan and how are you going to do Khan, and how reminiscent of The Wrath of Khan is it going to be? Are you doing ‘Space Seed’ or are you doing Wrath of Khan or are you doing both or whatever?”

So the creators added in Khan because they thought people wanted to see Khan; at the same time, they wanted to surprise people. There was a possible timeline where this worked out perfectly, and the result was something like the new Battlestar Galactica that honored the source material while putting a whole new spin on it. In our own sad timeline, this meant basically creating an entirely new character and then retroactively naming him Khan. Old-school Khan was a randy warlord with dude cleavage; new-school Khan was a monochrome emotionless superspy. They basically turned Conan the Barbarian into Jason Bourne. Really, it’s clear that they wanted to just tell an entirely new story, but decided somewhere along the way that it couldn’t be too new.

The weird thing is, I’m not so sure anyone was really asking for a new version of Khan. Sure, fans of Star Trek are always excited by the prospect of certain trope-characters like Klingons or the Borg, but part of what made Abrams’ first Star Trek movie so exciting was that it seemed to offer a whole host of new things. So the fans were ready for something new that reminded them of something old, and the filmmakers felt the need to recreate something old in a slightly new way; they met in the middle, and the result was Spock yelling “KHAAAAAANNNN!”

No one on either side of the fan-creator divide seems particularly happy with how things turned out. Abrams has lost a bit of his reboot-kingpin sheen. Lindelof is going back to television, where at least he won’t have to take credit for Ridley Scott’s mistakes. The core fandom is now in a moment of deep pessimism, equivalent to the mid-’70s Animated Series lull and the mid-00s Enterprise decline — and this moment is arguably worse for the core fandom, because the franchise seems to have actually evolved beyond the need for core fandom. (Into Darkness didn’t make Iron Man money, but it did make more money worldwide than any other film in the franchise.) Nobody who cares enough to have an opinion about Star Trek Into Darkness is happy about Star Trek Into Darkness. It’s an essential artifact from the era of the Fan Rage; it’s also a movie where you get the sense that everyone involved might’ve been happier if they had made something that wasn’t called Star Trek.

Yakima Canutt

Posts : 8302
Join date : 2011-04-11

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek 4 - Zurück in die Gegenwart!

Post  Yakima Canutt on Mon May 26, 2014 7:34 pm

hegh, Nan was watching Star Trek 2009, and Scotty says he was banished to the snowy planet for illicitly beaming Admiral Archer's beagle.  But by the time Scotty was beginning his Starfleet career, Archer ( played by Scott Bakula on the United Paramound Network ) would be 145 years old!?!


Last edited by Yakima Canutt on Tue May 27, 2014 4:00 am; edited 1 time in total

Yakima Canutt

Posts : 8302
Join date : 2011-04-11

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek 4 - Zurück in die Gegenwart!

Post  Yakima Canutt on Mon May 26, 2014 7:41 pm


So?  That's not too implausible; McCoy was 137 years old when he gave a moving sendoff to the Enterprise-D.




Last edited by Yakima Canutt on Mon Jul 04, 2016 3:57 am; edited 1 time in total

Yakima Canutt

Posts : 8302
Join date : 2011-04-11

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek 4 - Zurück in die Gegenwart!

Post  Yakima Canutt on Tue Jun 03, 2014 5:26 pm



A few days ago marks the 30th Anniversary of the theatrical release of Star Trek III: The Search for Spoock,  the highly anticipated follow-up to Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan.  The film, which marked Leonard Nimoy’s feature film directorial debut,  was a critical and financial success and pushed the Star Trek format in new directions, ultimately being the middle film in what is sometimes referred to as “The Genesis Trilogy”, which culminated in the release of Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home in 1986. TrekMovie is marking the anniversary with a retrospective from guest author Steve Vivona, who tells us why he loves this film, and gives a sense of what it was like to be a sci-fi and Star Trek fan in the early 80′s.

I’ll always remember June 1, 1984 as the day I became a Star Trek fan.

We all know that was the day Star Trek III: The Search for Spock was released, and while it is hardly the high watermark of the film series, I believe it occupies a special place in every Trek fan’s heart (and if it doesn’t it should). It certainly does in mine.

Yes, it has some plot holes you could drive a truck through (not nearly as bad as say, The Undiscovered Country), and its title is a dead giveaway for its resolution, but for me, Trek III is the first of the films that really focuses on the familial bond between our intrepid crew. They throw their careers away, risk their very lives on the vague promise they can restore their dear friend to life.

I was born in 1970, and I’d say it’s a safe bet most people of my generation came to love Trek through endless airings of the Original Series in syndication. My Dad, who always had a sci-fi bent, loved classic films like The Day the Earth Stood Still, Forbidden Planet, and 2001. On television, he watched The Twilight Zone and The Outer Limits. Naturally, he gravitated to Star Trek with its intelligent and thought provoking brand of science fiction.

He stayed with it in syndication, and I can vividly remember him watching it and encouraging me to do likewise. Here’s the problem: by my recollection (and it’s murky at best) every time it was on there (seemingly) was some woeful third season episode being screened. One that springs to mind is the “way too on the nose” Let That Be Your Last Battlefield.

The other problem is that (for better or worse) I am a child of George Lucas. Star Wars blasted into my nascent consciousness at the tender age of seven, took hold, and never let go. To me, this was science fiction, not the cheesy sets of Star Trek. Star Wars dominated my life for the next six years. Each new movie brought breathless anticipation, and the wait for each was interminable.

Thanks to Star Wars, Trek got a new lease on life. A proposed 13-episode series entitled Phase II was scrapped in favor of a big budget feature film, with a big-name director and state of the art special effects. When Star Trek: The Motion Picture hit the dollar theater Dad insisted we go and nine-year old me….promptly fell asleep.

Obviously, I was still unmoved toward Trek.  Star Wars was all consuming for me: the toys, the comics, the novels, the cards. I devoured all of it. I was an enormous comic fan and felt compelled to buy some of Marvel’s Trek comics, and again, nothing.

Around 1982 something began to change. Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan was released, and again Dad took me to see it at the dollar theater. I came out thinking, “That wasn’t so bad.” Mind you, I was still wrapped up in the fervor emanating from a galaxy far, far away, but Return of the Jedi was still a year away.

A few months later, WPIX-TV, which aired Star Trek in the New York area, screened “Space Seed”, the episode that begat Khan Noonien Singh, the villain of Star Trek II. Dad suggested I watch it in order to better understand the events of that film. I did. Again, “It wasn’t so bad.” I was becoming more than a bit intrigued.

Around that time, my family finally took the cable tv plunge, and when Trek II arrived on HBO sometime in 1983 I watched it every day it was on. It was compulsory viewing. And yet, I still wasn’t watching TOS. I can’t quite put my finger on why. To some degree, I think the look of it hampered my acceptance of it, much the same way the look of classic Doctor Who did (and still does to an extent). I’m not proud of that, but in my defense, I was 12, and Star Wars looked amazing.

Return of the Jedi came and went, and my enthusiasm for Star Wars began to abate somewhat. To this day, I still love SW but it has taken a back seat to Trek.

In 1983, our main conduit for science fiction news and gossip was Starlog Magazine. Through it, I learned a new Star Trek film was on the horizon, and that Spock himself, Leonard Nimoy would direct. I was excited, and what cemented that excitement was a special that aired late in 1983 entitled Star Trek Memories, hosted by Nimoy.

An obvious promotional tie-in for Trek III, Star Trek Memories was like “Spock for Dummies,” and it saw Nimoy recounting the various iconic moments that shaped the Spock character during the Original Series (ones we can all recite verbatim now). He teased Trek III brilliantly, whetting my appetite for the new film while simultaneously piquing my curiosity for what came before. When the special re-aired early in 1984 I taped it with my new VCR and watched it constantly.

Around this time WPIX aired Star Trek late at night and possibly on the weekend at the dinner hour. Of the latter, I cannot be sure, but I vividly remember not being able to make it to 11:00 or midnight to start watching Trek. Having a VCR and the ability to time shift recordings changed all that.

My excitement for Trek III was reaching its crescendo in the spring of 1984. A few photos were released and Starlog gave us a few crumbs to gnaw on. I started taping (and saving) every episode of TOS. The first episode I ever taped was The Enterprise Incident. Ironically enough my collection started in the third season. I had to suffer through about a month’s worth of Trek at its lousiest before I got to the good stuff.

I was in such a froth to see Trek III that I outlined a plan for my friends and I to see it opening day. A friend’s mother drove the four of us to the theater, but not before I got my hands on the official movie magazine featuring Leonard Nimoy as Spock dead center on the cover, newly resurrected and wearing his Vulcan robes. I proceeded to spoil the ending for all my friends, as if there was any doubt.



So how was it?

Star Trek III is flawed, to be sure. As a friend recently pointed out, why does Kirk need to return to Genesis with Spock’s body? What’s the point of that? Once it’s established that Spock’s katra resides in McCoy that should be all that is needed to deposit Spock’s essence in the Hall of Ancient Thought. Sarek cannot know that Spock’s body has been regenerated on Genesis, nor can Kirk.

I remember reading Vonda McIntyre’s excellent novelization of Trek III, and I vividly recall that the movie does not pick up until about 100 pages into the book, so it’s possible I am not remembering some detail that explains this seeming hole.

Star Trek III is no Star Trek II, but it provides some of my favorite moments of the film series: Kirk and Co. steal the Enterprise accompanied by James Horner’s rousing score, the gradual injection of humor in just the right spots setting the stage for the all-out fun of Trek IV, the depiction of that bond I mentioned previously as evidenced by every member of the cast having their moment in the sun, my favorite being, “Don’t call me Tiny.”

As a director, Nimoy inherently knows how to pace a film. He steps back and allows these actors who have lived in the skins of their characters for nearly 20 years something of a free hand to express themselves the way they should. He carefully and gently guides William Shatner through one of the most poignant scenes of his storied career: Kirk’s reaction to the death of his son.

Thanks to the seeds planted by Producer Harve Bennett, in concert with Nimoy, Spock’s return to life is neither contrived (by sci-fi standards) nor silly. No “Obi Wan shimmer” here. It is obvious that while the grand mysteries of life and death have not been solved by Vulcan mysticism, they have a better handle on them than we do. It is a happy coincidence, however, that they happen to have a ceremony meant to reunite body and soul in case of…you know….unexpected bodily resurrection.

Trek III marked a return to prominence for the Klingons, and a offers a characterization that would be adopted for subsequent films and The Next Generation. Christopher Lloyd blows the doors off as Kruge, an obsessed Klingon captain who is more than a match for Kirk. Robin Curtis does her best trying to fill Kirstie Alley’s shoes as Saavik, but she brings little dimension to the role. She’s become a great ambassador for Trek though, and I applaud her for that.

With the release of Star Trek III, I began consuming as much Trek ephemera as I possibly could and none more so than DC’s excellent comic series that began eight months prior to Trek III’s release. Writer Mike Barr did an amazing job weaving his story into and out of the film, setting the stage for the incredible “Mirror Universe Saga” which in my opinion is the finest Trek comic storyline ever.

Star Trek III is also famous for being the first budget priced video cassette released at that price point ($29.95) when it debuted on home video. Paramount had already experimented with cassettes priced to buy, but only after they had been priced for rental for several months. That meant I could get my grubby little hands on the actual VHS! I remember pre-ordering it at my local video shop, picking it up sometime in February of 1985 and sitting through a lengthy dinner at a restaurant with my parents before I could go home and watch it (twice). Paramount continued this trend with other high profile releases such as Beverly Hills Cop and Star Trek IV.

Star Trek III was definitely a hit, ensuring yet another sequel and a return to the director’s chair for Leonard Nimoy. Does it suffer from the odd-numbered slump? I suppose if you measure it against immediate predecessor and successor Trek II and Trek IV, it does. It’s a film whose existence is predicated on the need to resurrect a beloved character that had an amazing send-off and a subsequent change of heart. Is anyone really annoyed at the fact Spock came back and the manner in which he did? Pick nits all you want. It was wonderful.

It’s the film that proved Nimoy could direct. It’s the film that showed us what was at the heart of Trek: the friendship of these amazing characters. It’s a brisk, rousing adventure with an uplifting score (no offense to maestro Jerry Goldsmith but James Horner is the right man for this job). It’s a film with heavy themes punctuated with humor and levity at exactly the right moment every time. It’s the film that made me love Star Trek.




Note: Steve forgot that Captain Krik explains why he is goes back to Genesis Planet at the end of STTWOK


Yakima Canutt

Posts : 8302
Join date : 2011-04-11

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek 4 - Zurück in die Gegenwart!

Post  Yakima Canutt on Thu Jul 24, 2014 2:37 am

Les Whitt is counting down the 19 most cringe-making moments from the pre Abramsverse.



19. McCoy’s Vulcan Nerve Pinch – from Episode III: A Search For Spock

For the most part, Star Terk 3D - Search for Spock is every bit as innocuous (read: boring) as the first movie, but it does contain a few moments that simply don’t work. It’s particularly galling if a scene is played for comedy when the underlying significance of it is serious. Such is the case of the scene in which McCoy, suffering from his mind meld with Spock, goes to a bar to hire an illegal shuttle flight back to the Genesis planet. It’s particularly problematic.

The scene begins with McCoy stating that ordering “poison” (as in “what’s your poison?”) in a bar is “illogical” (hilarious!), followed by his being joined by an alien who’s just come from a GWAR concert. After having a rib-tickling conversation with this syntactically-challenged alien [ Harve Bennett says this was a Yoda reference, -Yak] about getting back to the Genesis planet, McCoy is confronted by a member of Starfleet Security, who has been watching him. The agent tries to take McCoy into custody…only to have McCoy try to take him down with a Vulcan nerve pinch, which instead makes it look like he’s trying to give the man a shoulder massage. Har! Or not.

There’s actually some significance to this scene in that it is the first sign that McCoy is being adversely affected by his mind meld with Spoock, which he doesn’t even know about yet. It culminates with his humiliating arrest by the security officers of the very organization he works for, before being shipped to a facility for treating mental illness. Naturally, they play all this for laughs, because it’s a Star Terk movie.

Yakima Canutt

Posts : 8302
Join date : 2011-04-11

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek 4 - Zurück in die Gegenwart!

Post  Yakima Canutt on Thu Sep 04, 2014 6:46 am

i was looking at the Find-a-Grave resources and I saw that Merritt Buttricks, who preformed as Captain Kirk's son, Dave ( in STTWOK and STTSFS), died at age 29. I wonder how


Yakima Canutt

Posts : 8302
Join date : 2011-04-11

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek 4 - Zurück in die Gegenwart!

Post  Yakima Canutt on Thu Sep 04, 2014 6:50 am

toxoplasmosis, with an immune system weakened by AIDS





Yakima Canutt

Posts : 8302
Join date : 2011-04-11

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek 4 - Zurück in die Gegenwart!

Post  Yakima Canutt on Thu Sep 04, 2014 7:02 am

Buttricks ... Buttricks ... hey holdup ... didn't Buttricks appear on season one of TNG playing a dude really desperate for medicine Question Exclamation





AIDSfact - Buttricks has at least two panels dedicated to him as part of the NAMES Project AIDS Memorial Quilt

Yakima Canutt

Posts : 8302
Join date : 2011-04-11

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek 4 - Zurück in die Gegenwart!

Post  Yakima Canutt on Tue Sep 09, 2014 3:55 pm

Flinging magnetic curses amid the toil of piling job on
    job, here is a tall bold slugger set vivid against the
    little soft cities;

Fierce as a dog with tongue lapping for action, cunning
    as a savage pitted against the wilderness,
         Bareheaded,
         Shoveling,
         Wrecking,
         Planning,
         Building, breaking, rebuilding,
Under the smoke, dust all over his mouth, laughing with
    white teeth,
Under the terrible burden of destiny laughing as a young
    man laughs,
Laughing even as an ignorant fighter laughs who has
    never lost a battle,
Bragging and laughing that under his wrist is the pulse.
    and under his ribs the heart of the people,
              Laughing!


Yakima Canutt

Posts : 8302
Join date : 2011-04-11

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek 4 - Zurück in die Gegenwart!

Post  Yakima Canutt on Wed Apr 01, 2015 11:36 am

the scene in ST4 with the early Macintosh computer is pretty cringe-worthy

Yakima Canutt

Posts : 8302
Join date : 2011-04-11

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek 4 - Zurück in die Gegenwart!

Post  Yakima Canutt on Mon Jul 04, 2016 3:34 am

In 1965, Leonard Nimoy said the first words ever uttered in the Star Trek universe. “Check the circuit!” says Spock at the start of “The Cage,” the original pilot for Star Trek and the first time Star Trek was boring. To modern eyes, Spock doesn’t look like Spock: Eyebrows too big, hair too mussed, a noose-collar atop a too-baggy uniform, flanking an un-Kirk Captain who looks too much like Jay Leno’s chin chest-bursting out of Ray Liotta’s face.

NBC didn’t like Star Trek, didn’t like Spock. A year later, Gene Roddenberry filmed a new pilot. He fired everybody — he fired his mistress! — but he kept Nimoy.

Twenty years later, Roddenberry was gone — to Next Generation, not for long — and Nimoy was in control. Tricky thing, applying words like “control” or “authorship” to anything Star Trek. Nimoy directed Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home, and received a “Story By” credit. So did Harve Bennett, the producer of Movie Two through Movie Five, making him another Man Who Saved Star Trek and another Man Who Almost Destroyed Star Trek. Bennett shares screenplay credit alongside three other men. One of those writers later wrote Double Impact, the movie where Jean-Claude Van Damme headbutts Jean-Claude Van Damme.

And one of those writers was Nicholas Meyer, the man who made Wrath of Khan. Meyer’s generally credited with writing the film’s 20th Century-set Act 2. Perhaps not coincidentally, The Voyage Home has one of the greatest and daffiest Act 2’s of any film ever. Here is a movie that begins as A Race Against Time To Save The Earth and then takes a sharp detour into aquarium etiquette and Bay Area geography; a movie where the stakes are global, and there’s plenty of time for Kirk to take a marine biologist out for an Italian dinner; a movie where Kirk is a noble romantic protagonist who makes his date foot the bill. There’s a wonderful lack of seriousness powering The Voyage Home, recalling Howard Hawks’ loopy genre exercises To Have and Have Not or The Big Sleep. It is the kind of movie where characters spend the whole movie taking a break from the movie.

So it was a team effort, in front of the camera and behind the scenes. But it was a team effort with a leader. And the leader wanted to make a different kind of film. Nimoy later explained the core concept: “No dying, no fighting, no shooting, no photon torpedoes, no phaser blasts, no stereotypical bad guy.” His previous Star Trek film had all those things, and outer space, and aliens, and sets. Nimoy wanted to make a movie about Earth, right now, shot on location, with human people.

Nimoy was an actor, a director, a photographer, a memoirist, a musician, a cameo cartoon voice, a face in advertisements that baited your nostalgia and dared you not to smile. In all things he was Spock. Sometimes that bothered him: He wrote I Am Spock, but also I Am Not Spock. Nimoy was never a dilettante, a preening highbrow — never the Alan Rickman character from Galaxy Quest, that self-loathing Shakespearean slumming for fanboy dollars and residual fame. Nimoy liked Spock, truthfully. He liked the work, occasionally. He liked the money, naturally: $2.5 million for Trek IV. (That’s more than Hemsworth made on Avengers — and that’s mid-’80s dollars, unadjusted.) Nimoy was frustrated with Spock, but it wasn’t merely the frustration of typecasting or of repetition. It was the internal struggle, the human condition: Nimoy struggled with Spock the way Hamlet struggles with Hamlet.

And Nimoy loved people. That sounds like a simple thing to say, until you watch The Voyage Home, one of the loveliest and strangest and lightest comedies ever made, and you realize that “loving people” can be something tangible, like an added filter on the camera. Nimoy loved the supporting players, and his film bestows each of them with a Hall of Fame moment. Scotty: “A keyboard. How quaint.” Chekov: “Nuclear wessels.” Uhura: “But where is Alameda?” McCoy, undercover as a surgeon, asks an old lady in a hospital what’s wrong with her. Kidney dialysis, she says. “Dialysis!” McCoy sputters — an actual honest-to-god sputter, DeForest Kelley’s voice like an old engine cackling. “What is this, the Dark Ages?”

Sulu was supposed to get a showcase scene meeting his own great-great-great-grand-something. It didn’t work out — the kid got scared — and Nimoy was still bummed about it a decade later when he wrote I Am Spock. But oh, how I treasure Takei, in his baritone voice, narrating the Enterprise’s warpspeed run into the center of our solar system: “Nine point five! Nine point six! Nine point seven! NINE POINT EIGHT!” (And The Voyage Home continues one of the great embedded subplots in Trek history: The love story between Sulu and the Excelsior.)

Did I mention that they’re warping straight into the sun so they can travel through time? [they're whipping around the sun. - ed] There’s an energy-sapping probe destroying Earth, apparently because no one can respond to the probe’s message. Is the probe saying “hello” to humanity? “Only human arrogance would assume the message must be meant for man,” Spock chastises.


Yakima Canutt

Posts : 8302
Join date : 2011-04-11

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek 4 - Zurück in die Gegenwart!

Post  Yakima Canutt on Mon Jul 04, 2016 3:43 am


It’s been said there are no villains in Star Trek IV. In the future, the probe hails from some unknown intelligence that almost destroys Earth by accident. In the past, every hint of antagonism is quickly undercut. At one point, Chekov is captured by the FBI, and there’s a much simpler, more on-the-nose version of this movie where the FBI becomes the bad guys. Maybe that wouldn’t be terrible; maybe it would be sharp, playing the utopian sensibility of the Federation against Cold War paranoia. But in The Voyage Home, it’s an opportunity for a “Who’s On First” routine:

FBI AGENT: Let’s take it from the top.

CHEKOV: The top of what?

FBI AGENT: Name?

CHEKOV: My name?

FBI AGENT: No, my name.

CHEKOV: I do not know your name!

FBI AGENT: You play games with me, mister, and you’re through.

CHEKOV: I am? Can I go now?

At this point, the FBI agent — who looks like the uncanny valley between Paul Rudd and Armie Hammer — whispers to his partner, “What do you think?” His partner says, “He’s a Russkie.” The FBI agent, completely deadpan, missing a beat: “That is the stupidest thing I have ever heard in my life.” Every one-scene character in The Voyage Home is smarter than they should be, wittier than they have to be. Chekov grabs his phaser and tries to fire it, but it’s run low on batteries. He tosses it to the FBI agent. The actor is Jeff Lester — who naturally played both “Lane Brody” and “Lance Jarvis” on Baywatch — and he catches the phaser with a look of weary amusement. Here’s a film where the shady FBI guys feel tired, and a bit embarrassed, about being shady FBI guys.

The Voyage Home reminds me of something Dan Harmon told Vulture regarding Cheers: “The characters were so distinct. As with Peanuts, you could put them in outer space and still know which one was Charlie Brown.” The Voyage Home is the inverse of that theorem: It takes its characters from outer space and sets them down on the streets of San Francisco, in the halls of the Monterey Bay Aquarium, in the front seat of a truck. And here’s something strange. You’ve seen Kirk and Spock on alien planets production designed like pop art comic strips, in cosmic mountain ranges battling aliens beyond our ken; you’ve seen them battle gods and monsters.

Yet I don’t think there is any single moment in Star Trek history where Kirk and Spock look better — at once grander and more approachable, like statues of the Founding Fathers buying rounds at sports bar — than the moment when they walk along Marina Boulevard. Behind them: The bay, the Bridge, the fog.

Kirk’s still wearing his magenta-maroon disco suit, looking like the communist dictator of Studio 54; Spock’s wearing a karate bathrobe. You can giggle at the buried joke of the movie — they fit right into pre-digital San Francisco — but you can also appreciate how the movie makes them seem so much bigger by bringing them down to Earth.

No other Star Trek film has done location shooting like this; maybe The Voyage Home is Trek as neo-realism. Legend holds that the “nuclear wessels” scene was shot in secret, with Walter Koenig and Nichelle Nichols talking to random passers-by. That’s maybe not true — counter-legend holds that those are all paid extras — but in the most memorable part of the scene, Russian Chekov asks a nearby policeman for directions to the closest nuclear reactor. The cop says nothing, doesn’t even move; he was an actual San Francisco, working with the production crew in an official capacity. So, actually, hang the neo-realism: The Voyage Home is as close as Trek ever gets to the start of “Duck Amuck,” when Daffy walks off his own film strip.

The humor of The Voyage Home is playful without ever becoming sarcastic, self-aware without ever feeling like self-loathing. The characters feel engaged — watch how Takei is constantly looking around San Francisco, a great grin on his face. Think of how this movie shifts from Act One to Act Two: Spock says they need to save the whales; Kirk says “Let’s time travel!”; and then they aim their ship right into the sun. [they slingshot around the sun. - ed] Think, too, of Catherine Hicks, in a tricky role. She plays Gillian, the whale-loving marine biologist. She thinks Kirk and Spock are crazy, but intriguing; she doesn’t really believe they’re from the future, but she intuitively understands that they’re people she should hang out with.

A lesser film might try to architect this interaction somehow. (Maybe Gillian is an FBI agent; maybe the wrong thing for America circa 1986 is the right thing for the world.) Hell, one of the greatest hours of television ever is a Star Trek time travel episode where Kirk goes to the past and falls in love with the most important woman in history. The Voyage Home has no time for such pretensions. Gillian’s an obvious love interest, but they never really have a “romantic” scene. Gillian thinks Kirk is interesting; Kirk likes how much she cares. And Gillian is allowed to come to the future — where she promptly says goodbye to Kirk, because there’s just so much more to see.

Their final scene together is one of the most graceful light-comedic romance moments in any movie I can think of. “How will I find you?” he asks her — kidding but not quite, Shatner’s laugh a bit too forced. “Don’t worry,” she says. “I’ll find you.” Nimoy holds his camera for two long moments, first of Gillian saying farewell. Then of Kirk, astonished. What do you think is going through his mind?

Is he amazed that, for once, he’s the one left behind? Is he bemused at the grand divine comedy of existence? Maybe I’m a shameless romantic, but I can’t help but imagine his thought bubble in Shatnerian overspeak: “My god, Bones! I think I’m in love!”

Shatner! My god, Shatner! Another one of the graceful jokes powering The Voyage Home is that, here in the past, Captain Kirk remains the most confident man in the galaxy, despite all indications that he doesn’t know what the hell he’s doing. Needing money, he pawns McCoy’s birthday glasses at an antique shop. The owner will pay a hundred dollars for them. “Is that a lot?” Kirk asks, smiling wide like a con man.

Later, at the aquarium, Kirk spots Spock swimming with the whales, and his wild overreactions belong in a silent movie museum.

Of course, Kirk is a con man in The Voyage Home. To his crew, he pretends to know everything about the past. (“Double dumb ass on you!”) To people in the past, he offers one BS line after another. (“I think he had a little too much LDS.”) The joke of his brimming confidence paired against Spock’s Holy Fool confusion reaches Chico-and-Harpo levels.

But the film isn’t some shallow self-parody of Kirk, or Star Trek. It has heart, and passion — Save the Whales! — and a tremendous sense of fun. When the crew crash-lands into the Bay, they need to climb out of their sinking ship. The whales start singing; the probe is vanquished. Another film might cut away, but Nimoy’s camera lingers, and we watch the crew of the Enterprise cheerfully jump into the water. The line between character and actor falls away, phasered into nonexistence. James Doohan does a bellyflopping dive into the water; Nichelle Nichols splashes water toward DeForest Kelley. At one point, Kirk pulls Spock into the water — or maybe that’s Shatner and Nimoy, fooling around.

And yet, there is a seriousness to the wonderful, exuberant silliness of The Voyage Home. At the film’s beginning, the resurrected Spock is asked a question: “How do you feel?” At the end of the film, Spock has traveled across space and time, has rescued a dead great species from the dustbin of existence, has saved the Earth one more time. And none of that plot stuff matters half so much as Spock saying, nonchalant: “I feel fine.” To feel “fine” is not to feel “perfect” or even “happy,” does not imply tremendous success nor some massive personal change.

To feel “fine” in The Voyage Home is to be aware of your place in the great scheme of existence, content in your place among your fellow creatures. There is such optimism in this movie, and perhaps that optimism is residual from Roddenberry — but Roddenberry preferred grand statements, not whimsy. The Voyage Home needed Nimoy, a thoughtful man with a sense of humor, a leader who loved his people, and loved people in general, and damn it, who loved the whales, and Earth, and the Golden Gate Bridge, and the nightmare intersection where Columbus and Kearny and Jackson hit each other right in front of the Zoetrope Building.

Nimoy died last year, age 82: A long life, and prosperous. Spock will live forever, of course — and The Voyage Home is his magnum opus. Quickly, listen to the theme music for Voyage Home by Leonard Rosenman.

Can you hear the festive melody? Aren’t those bells ringing vaguely yuletidal? There’s no obvious comparison in movie history for Star Trek: the Voyage Home, not many time travel message movies about family and friends and the fear that we’re all doomed because of sins in the past, and how that fear will always crash like waves against the shore of the eternal human hope that it’s not too late, that we can change.

But there is that famous story about heavenly visitors and time travel, a myth about how any person can change a dark-sad future into a happy-better one, a parable that argues that the great heroic act of existence is being an engaged part of a community. So maybe The Voyage Home is our new A Christmas Carol. Maybe Ebenezer Scrooge can save Tiny Tim; maybe the Earth isn’t doomed; maybe, in 2286, whales will still be swimming through oceans unrisen; maybe our descendants will be here, too, in this world someone saved for them. Probe bless us, every one.


Yakima Canutt

Posts : 8302
Join date : 2011-04-11

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek 4 - Zurück in die Gegenwart!

Post  woo on Fri Nov 11, 2016 4:22 pm


woo

Posts : 2344
Join date : 2011-04-11

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek 4 - Zurück in die Gegenwart!

Post  Yakima Canutt on Fri Nov 11, 2016 5:03 pm


Laughing

Yakima Canutt

Posts : 8302
Join date : 2011-04-11

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek 4 - Zurück in die Gegenwart!

Post  woo on Sun Nov 13, 2016 11:59 am

Yakima Canutt wrote:
Laughing




woo

Posts : 2344
Join date : 2011-04-11

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek 4 - Zurück in die Gegenwart!

Post  Yakima Canutt on Sun Nov 13, 2016 5:03 pm




Yakima Canutt

Posts : 8302
Join date : 2011-04-11

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek 4 - Zurück in die Gegenwart!

Post  woo on Mon Nov 14, 2016 1:17 am

I very much enjoyed that.

woo

Posts : 2344
Join date : 2011-04-11

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek 4 - Zurück in die Gegenwart!

Post  Yakima Canutt on Mon Nov 14, 2016 6:21 am





Yakima Canutt

Posts : 8302
Join date : 2011-04-11

Back to top Go down

Re: Star Trek 4 - Zurück in die Gegenwart!

Post  Sponsored content Today at 7:37 am


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 2 Previous  1, 2

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum