Seriously?? This thing better than episode III?

Well IV was my introduction to Star Trek as a whole back when I was a kid, so out of all the movies it probably has a special place in my mind.

I personally enjoy both movies, but at the end of the day III is pretty much a contrivance to bring Spock back from the dead, and whilst it scores high on drama many elements of the plot don't make a lot of sense when held up to scrutiny.

IV contains some interesting sci-fi concepts (e.g.: aliens being interested in other lifeforms than humans, the consequences of time travel and how our own era would be seen from the standpoint of the distant future) as well as being a bit of fun which doesn't take itself too seriously. These being basically two things that I tend to look for in a movie much of the time, it works well for me. Sure it does have some senseless bits in as well, which do work against it.

reply share

add reply

formatting help

http://nostalgiarush.blogspot.com/2016/06/five-things-i-hated-in-star-trek-ivthe.html#more

reply share

add reply

formatting help

by WheezePuppet » Fri Jul 27 2012 17:37:12
IMDb member since June 2007
I've heard numerous Trekkies remark "the even-numbered ST movies are the only good ones" as they rave about episode IV and diss III. This is absolutely unbelievable to me. "Search for Spock" was a marvelous piece of cinema, nearly as good as "Wrath of Kahn" and consistent with it in tone and character. A perfect complement to its predecessor in bringing the Genesis plotline to continuation. Its only weaknesses were in not getting Kirstie Alley back to play Saavik, and in somehow forgetting about Carol Marcus completely and not explaining what happened to her. But the decay of the planet, the struggle with the Klingons to obtain the Genesis device, the destruction of the Enterprise, and the death struggle on the surface were all first rate.

Then comes this monstrosity, seemingly aiming to be a sitcom but failing entirely. Shatner loses all his energy, Kelley loses all his savvy, everybody makes dumb jokes, and it's about time travel (*groan*), saving whales (*groan*), returning to planet Earth in 1980's (*groan*), and featuring the perfectly awful Catherine Hicks. What is there to like about this movie?! Can we please move on and continue the serious-and-compelling sci-fi of the Star Trek movie universe?

I hate to plug myself here, but read my review on this film.

It's essentially Star Trek for the masses. It's a film for people who weren't fans but did see the show every now and then and who were also familiar with the characters in that light.

I didn't really like the movie as a Star Trek movie, and was bothered by the fact that other people liked it because it did feel like an empty sitcom experience.

And, for the record, I also left the theatre after ST III thinking it was kind of dark, but also a kind of extension of the characters and their adventures, as opposed to "reading about" the voyages of the ship where both ship and crew were involved. And no, I thought killing off the Enterprise was kind of a dumb idea ... sort of like trying to top Spock's death as a dramatic moment.

None of the ST films have been what one would call exceptional films. They've all had their bright spots, but the films were more or less made for a movie going audience who happen to have a large fan base, as opposed to making an episode strictly for the fans.

And I think that's why the films, as entertaining as they can be, fall short of meeting expectations.

I hope that helps.

reply share

add reply

formatting help