From: v075q5fr@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Scott J Gorcey)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.misc
Subject: Re: Star Trek's Classics - Top 10 List
Date: 13 Apr 92 00:04:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41


Gorcey and Kanamori discussing...

[Stuff about how Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan can't be beat and that
 TNG will probably never come up with a movie to equal it...]

>I tend to agree here -- I don't know what they're planning for the TNG
>movies (and I'm not sure that a TNG film is artistically even a good idea.)

>But then, this isn't art, it's business.

     If you know what is involved in changing a tv series into a
     good movie, and if you think about it, you'll realise that
     a TNG movie is a very, very interesting concept.
     Picard begs to be given a dramatic need, as Kirk was most
     successfully in II and VI (to get over his midlife crisis,
     to get over his prejudice).  Picard is a romantic, a thoughtful
     but no less strong hero.  I can't wait to see him given
     feature film treatment.
     What I was saying was that TNG's films will be very different
     than TOS' movies.  High naval adventure and hunches and "His
     pattern indicates two dimensional thinking" (telling Kirk exactly
     where Khan is - for some reason) are acceptable in TOS and
     riveting when done right.  Not so much in TNG.

>>>>     2. "City on the Edge of Forever."

>>>I thought Shatner's acting was fine here. This episode is still one
>>>of the most hard hitting Trek episodes I've seen.

>>     Fine? God. "His head was...(inhale)...caughtinanautomatic...rice picker."
>>     With the head cocking...  Please.  I would laugh but it's too bad to
>>     even do that.  

>That scene was supposed to be goofy -- I was laughing, which was the intended
>effect. As you said, I *did* feel Kirk's emotions at the climax as well as
>his feelings for Ms. Keeler -- there's no way I would have felt that if
>Shatner hadn't been doing something right.

      He was doing something right.  He was being Kirk.  Part and 
      parcel of Kirk is BAD ACTING.  

>>     I will say that Shatner gave the performance of his
>>     career in TWOK - nicely layered, and for him, that's a compliment.

>>>>         _Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country_

>>>Urgh. Definitely not top 10 for me, not even top 20. Once the immediate
>>>impact passed, I found it a supremely forgettable movie. The perestoika
>>>allegory was a bad idea, IMO: it tried to score points with those who like
>>>"Relevant" films but as far as I'm concerned, it's unimaginative
>>>bandwagon jumping. Its treatment largely concerned itself with surface
>>>allegory and largely missed the boat in treating the underlying themes.

>>     I don't see it that way at all.  _Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home_
>>     was a supremely forgettable movie.  _Star Trek: The Motion Picture_
>>     is a supremely forgettable movie.  What's V?   

>>     TUC, I think, was imaginative 

>I disagree. A cold war termination allegory, Enterprise and Klingon
>shoot'em-up action -- these are old and obvious. Which wouldn't matter
>if they carried it off with any depth, but on the whole, it seemed to
>be largely going through the motions.

     I disagree.  I can see why you may think that.  The pacing was
     much faster than any other Star Trek film.  I think everyone
     was hoping, with Nick Meyer involved again, that this would be
     another heavy dramatic Wrath of Khan.  
     Wrath of Khan focused on the drama of the situation, not the
     action.  The drama dictated the pacing.
     The Undiscovered Country focused on the action of the situation,
     the speed with which the "final mission" of these characters
     went by, not the drama of the situation.  The action dictated
     the pacing.
     Kirk, Spock and McCoy were at their best since TWOK.  Spock was
     wittier than he's ever been - a character, as in II, at peace
     with himself: "There is an ancient Vulcan proverb: Only Nixon 
     could go to China."  "I've been dead before.  Contact Excelsior."
     Etc.  Kirk is an aged commander, with a lifetime of service
     behind him, pressed into one final, incredibly important exploration:
     an exploration into his deepest held belief: his hatred of the 
     Klingons.  They are the villains.  They are merciless animals.
     They killed David.  
     Kirk in The Undiscovered Country proves himself not just an
     unthinking, lucky hero of the hunch.  He proves himself a hero
     of trancendence and thought.  He is able to overcome and triumph
     even when the barrier to success is within himself.  

     Kirk is able to grab hold and give a good push off as history
     passes his generation by.  His time, and the time of his generation,
     is over.  The (sorry bout this) next generation is taking over and
     implementing their ideas.  Kirk is one of the few of the old
     generation brave enough to accept that his time is done and,
     more, to help bring about the world desired by the new.

     That's just the tip of The Undiscovered Country's iceberg.

     The _Hamlet_ allegory.  Meyer took a speech about death and 
     transformed it into a metaphor on life.  He took words that
     describe death and applied them to description of the future -
     because the fear of what the future will bring is, for many
     (if not most), more horrific than the fear of death.

     How can you call all this shallow?  (And there is loads more!) 

>They could. They didn't, IMO. The "thawing" was handled in a pat and 
>simplistic manner; there was no sacrifice, no tough decisions, no effort on 
>the part of our heroes. They simply rambled on about how they must face 
>the future, then decided to do so (and heavens, did Kirk's speech at the 
>peace meeting ring of lecturing at the audience.) 

     See above.  I think you missed the point of the movie if you
     can call it "simplistic."  The sacrifice was MAMMOTH: the
     sacrifice Kirk had to make was the biggest of his life (arguably).
     He had to sacrifice CONTROL: control of the Enterprise, control
     of his crew, control of his destiny.
     It was time for the next generation (please, i'm getting sick of
     this pun...) to take the reigns - to move into the positions of
     control in government, politics, HEROISM.  Everything.  

     Kirk's INCREDIBLE sacrifice was not just that he had no choice
     but to hand over those reigns but that he had to do some
     EXTRAORDINARY things to HELP the rest of his generation hand
     them over as well.  Kirk had to confront a sacred belief within
     himself - his hatred of Klingons - and acknowledge it as 
     false, before he could do any of this.

     There was a hell of a lot happening in Star Trek VI that I 
     think you have missed.  


          ^Scott Gorcey, v075q5fr@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu^