Star Trek 6 randomness

Destructionator XV · Post by **Destructionator XV** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 6:48 pm

I just watched my tape of ST6 again, taking note of a few things.

First: in Kirk's quarters, he said "never could forgive them for the death of my son". In the trial, the recording said "never been able to forgive them for the death of my boy".

Out of universe script error or in universe fabrication? I lean toward the latter.

Chang and Worf at the trial reminds me of Channcellor and Pierre in Chrono Trigger:

Worf: Objection! His political views are not on trial here!
Chang: Kirk's political views are at the very heart of the case!

Pierre: Objection! Crono's personal views have no relevance whatsoever on this case!
Chancellor: His views are at the very heart of this case!

And the imagry of the trial looks very similar to CT as well. It is a fact that the Square RPG devs are big Wars / Trek fans (see Biggs and Wedge among many other references), so it being a deliberate homage is pretty likely.

Some things I find hilarious about the film time and time again are the fight between Kirk and the shapeshifter:

"I can't believe I kissed you!"
"Must have been your lifelong ambition!"

And the general look on William Shatner's face as he stands there to take a punch. Hilarious.

And the ending is a good laugh:

Spock: "If I were human, I believe my response would be "Go to hell." ... If I were human."

I love that.

Anyhow, great film.

Ra · Post by Ra » Mon Sep 11, 2006 7:20 pm

I suppose that OOU, the change was due to a script error or somesuch, but IU, it could have indeed been the Klingons doctoring the recording, or even something as innocent (unlikely, though) as something being lost in the UT.

My own "pet theory" is that they doctored it to have words that perhaps to the Klingons, carry more emotional impact. Like, "never been able to forgive" might carry more propaganda value than "I can never forgive".

Wierd, unlikely, but it's a thought.

Otherwise, TUC's neck and neck with TWOK as my favorite Trek film, and it's one of my favorite movies beyond Trek as well.

LadyTevar · Post by **LadyTevar** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 7:20 pm

Personally... I thought that movie sucked. :(

Ra · Post by Ra » Mon Sep 11, 2006 7:27 pm

heretic

Batman · Post by **Batman** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 7:32 pm

I wholeheartedly agree with Ra. Thusly, I'm going to
Ahem. WM, married to a BM, Master Bruce.
glower at you, m'lady, and be really dissapointed. :sad:
TUC is the bestest Trek movie ever.

LadyTevar · Post by **LadyTevar** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 7:38 pm

Bats, Ra, I will simply state that we have a difference of opinion, and not turn this into a raging flamefest like some Trekkie-sites would.

I, personally, did not like it. I did not like the story, I did not like the scenario, and I thought it was a waste of my money, same as all three ST:TNG movies were a waste *in my opinion*

But opinions are like bellybuttons, everyone has one.

Destructionator XV · Post by **Destructionator XV** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 7:41 pm

I prefered TWoK to it certainly. Between VI and IV though, I am split, leaning toward IV.

WHAT?!

Yeah, I really enjoyed TVH's comedy. I am a big comedy fan, and also many of my favourite TOS episodes were comedy ones too. IV really worked, it was good film.

But VI is nice in a few ways: one is Nicholas Meyer. His style worked for both II and VI, doing little things to beefen up Starfleet. Second is the plot and message were well done. Third is it gave a nice send off to Kirk and crew. Fourth are the scenes mentioned above plus a couple more I really liked:

"What ship is that, over."
"We is thy freighter Ursula"
"What is your destination, over."
"Rura Penthe. We is condeming food... things and supplies."

"Know anything of a radiation surge? Chekov?"
"Only the size of my head..."
"I know what you mean."

Some Sulu moments:

"Should we report this?"
"Are you kidding?"

"She'll fly apart!"
"Fly her apart, then!"

"Target that explosion and fire."

Again, I must say it: good film.

But oh man, I want to watch IV now. Maybe tomorrow I'll watch II, III and IV in order. That will be awesome.

Stofsk · Post by **Stofsk** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 7:44 pm

LadyTevar wrote:But opinions are like bellybuttons, everyone has one.

Some belly buttons are sexy.

no, there was no deep meaningful comment there. Just something random I threw out.

Batman · Post by **Batman** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 7:54 pm

Technically there are 3.75 TNG movies and as the only human being who actually preffered ST:I over FC I think I can emphasize, m'lady.

Josh · Post by **Josh** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 10:42 pm

Actually, I'd take ST:I over FC too, Bats. I found the Kirk parts of Generations to be mildly tolerable and deplored the rest of the TNG movies.

As for TUC, I'm with Tev on this. In part, it was the shoehorned US/Soviet theme I disliked. Yeah, I get that the Klingons were portrayed as the Space Soviets and all, but they shouldn't have constrained the storyline that way. We never really get why the Federation is so keen on the Klingons in TNG anyway, given how barbarous (and stupid) Klingon culture is depicted to be.

(Beyond the usual heaping of TNG moral relativism. Yeah, they're warmongering assholes, but that's okay for them.)

I will agree with Adam on TVH. Honestly, it made for a great change of pace from agonizingly long (TMP), dramatic and depressing (TWOK), tense and heavy (TSFS). TVH was cool inasmuch as it lets you just sit back and enjoy the cast, knowing that pretty soon the movie run for the original cast is coming to an end soon.

That said, damn TVH to hell for inspiring Shatner to one-up Nimoy by directing one of his own.

Cynical Cat · Post by **Cynical Cat** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 10:48 pm

Star Trek V was screwed up in so many ways that you have to go fairly far down the list to get to Shatner's direction.

Josh · Post by **Josh** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 11:11 pm

Cynical Cat wrote:Star Trek V was screwed up in so many ways that you have to go fairly far down the list to get to Shatner's direction.

Shatner had a habit of butchering productions that he wasn't in charge of by playing his 'lead actor' card. I shudder to think how much butchery he committed on TFF in the form of script rewrites, etc.

Something Awesome · Post by **Something Awesome** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 11:00 am

Ra wrote:I suppose that OOU, the change was due to a script error or somesuch, but IU, it could have indeed been the Klingons doctoring the recording, or even something as innocent (unlikely, though) as something being lost in the UT.

That's pretty much what I think. The English (or Federation Basic or whatever they use) is translated to Klingon for the Klingon court, which is probably differs slightly in meaning. Then, the Klingon is translated back to English for Kirk and the viewers, which could have easily used an alternate synonym. Like, the English phrase "I can" in French would be "Je peux," which can be translated back to English as "I am able to" because of the relative meaning of the verb.

I liked VI a lot, and it seems like a fitting conclusion to the TOS cast's era. They've saved the galaxy yet again, the Klingons are becoming allies, everyone's getting old, and the Enterprise is being decommissioned. It's clear that times are changing, and it's time to consider retirement, and letting new heroes take over. Whether those new heroes live up to the original legend or not...

IV just had too many awesome scenes to not like. Scotty and McCoy with the computer, Spock's colorful metaphors, Chekov and the "nuclear wessels," "Won't you change your mind?" "Is there something wrong with the one I have?" They're all classics.

Narsil · Post by **Narsil** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 12:00 pm

I thought Star Trek VI was a great movie. It's TOS Trek, which is a plus, and it's before the advent of the most ridiculous technobabble that later plagued the show in TNG, VOY and the first three seasons of ENT. Sure, it wasn't a perfect movie, but to be quite honest, I've never actually seen the perfect Sci-Fi movie, so I'll merely settle for 'great', The Undiscovered Country falls into that category.

I also liked FC, I might add. It was among the one or two decent things that the later editions of Trek actually did, and it showed Picard's still suffering from his assimilation, which is as it should be.

Josh · Post by **Josh** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 12:50 pm

Narsil wrote:and it showed Picard's still suffering from his assimilation, which is as it should be.

Which also showed why he shouldn't have been captain of the ship after BoBW, but that's a story for another thread.

Batman · Post by **Batman** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 1:11 pm

The fun part is that nobody seemed all that concerned about his condition in post-BobW TNG (and indeed there were no symptoms), yet as of FC they SUDDENLY deem him a security risk...

Josh · Post by **Josh** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 3:28 pm

Batman wrote:The fun part is that nobody seemed all that concerned about his condition in post-BobW TNG (and indeed there were no symptoms), yet as of FC they SUDDENLY deem him a security risk...

Especially curious given how often the Enterprise ran in with the Borg afterward, too. You'd think that as soon as the 'We are the' rolled out over the speakers, Riker would have to take command or something.

Batman · Post by **Batman** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 4:18 pm

Either that, or they should have realized that since Picard DIDN'T freak out on those occasions there's no reason to assume he'd do so during the FC battle (which he didn't, in fact he won the battle for them-he didn't go psycho until the Borg started assimilating the E-E). One would expect them to want the one Starfleet captain who has extensive experience with the Borg and happens to be in command of one of SF's more powerful ships to be at the battle.
But then, they thought Picard had issues, STILL gave him command of one of Starfleet's premiere ships, and THEN sent them off to do make-work. How about, I dunno, giving Picard a desk job somewhere he can't do not harm, or some insignificant command or other? If you think the guy is a security risk you do NOT put him in command of a major fleet asset and then try to minimize the risk by wasting said asset on pointless jobs.
Starfleet is simply nuts.

frigidmagi · Post by **frigidmagi** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 10:15 pm

I said it before I'll say it again. Starfleet is filled with political rot.

Destructionator XV · Post by **Destructionator XV** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 9:44 pm

I just thought of something that never came to mind before: when Kirk asks Valeris if she knows anything about a radiation surge (right before the Chekov line I quoted above) her response was "sir?": notice that she didn't actually answer the question.

Vulcans don't lie, and she knew the plan, so she would know. Nice little thing there.

Anyway, speaking of Valeris, in the original drafts, they wanted to bring back Saavik from 2 to be the traitor, but Gene countered that saying that Saavik was too well liked to be turned traitor.

What if that didn't happen? Do you think the film would have been any better / worse bringing back the known character?

Josh · Post by **Josh** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 9:58 pm

I would've purely hated for Saavik to be the traitor. The whole Romulan halfbreed thing would've made it too easy a storyline, for one.

Cynical Cat · Post by **Cynical Cat** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 11:17 pm

Destructionator XV wrote: Vulcans don't lie, and she knew the plan, so she would know. Nice little thing there.

Vulcans most certainly do lie. See "The Enterprise Incident."

Destructionator XV · Post by **Destructionator XV** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 11:30 pm

Cynical Cat wrote:Vulcans most certainly do lie. See "The Enterprise Incident."

I know they lie, but not when they can avoid it as a general rule, something mentioned a couple times in ST6 itself.

Stofsk · Post by **Stofsk** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 11:45 pm

They don't lie, they 'exaggerate', omit, obfuscate, lie - but they do not sleep around!

Ra · Post by Ra » Thu Sep 14, 2006 3:46 am

Adam wrote:Anyway, speaking of Valeris, in the original drafts, they wanted to bring back Saavik from 2 to be the traitor, but Gene countered that saying that Saavik was too well liked to be turned traitor.

What if that didn't happen? Do you think the film would have been any better / worse bringing back the known character?

I would have thrown the DVD in disgust if Saavik had been the traitor. VI would have turned from one of my favorite Trek films into one I loathe as much as Generations. She is and always has been one of my favorite Vulcans, second only to Spock himself and Sarek, and my absolute favorite Vulcan female. I also think she was too much of a model officer and "knight in shining armor" to do be involved in such a wanton betrayal of Starfleet ethics.

Well, like there were many alternatives in the Vulcan woman department; you have the aforementioned Valeris, T'Pau from ENT and TOS, who was interesting but otherwise not nearly as cool, and you had T'Pol the CRACK WHORE (cookie for the reference), whom I dispised. But otherwise, Saavik was awesome.

LibriumArcana.Games

Star Trek 6 randomness

#1 Star Trek 6 randomness

#2

#3

#4

#5

#6

#7

#8

#9

#10

#11

#12

#13

#14

#15

#16

#17

#18

#19

#20

#21

#22

#23

#24

#25