It's not mentioned in the trivia, but I just watched The Bridge on the River Kwai, and the Rura Penthe arrival speech is too similar to be the speech given by the Japanese commander to the POWs arriving to build the bridge in Kwai.
This can't be coincidence? When I saw the scene in Kwai, I immediately thought of the scene in ST6.
Literary reference?
homage?
Plagiarism?
"After years of fighting with reality, I am pleased to say that I have finally won out over it."
Nicholas Meyer liked to fill his scripts with references and homages. Either that or he was just a lazy writer. Half of Khan's dialogue belonged to Captain Ahab, and Spock quotes Sherlock Holmes during the search for the missing gravity boots. Rura Penthe was the name of a penal colony in 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea.
"If stupidity got us in this mess, why can't it get us out?" - Will Rogers
That stuff and the Shakespeare (obviously especially, since it's clearly stated) were clear homages. Just wasn't aware of the Kwai homage.
Any chance Kwai itself is an homage to something else before it?
The ending of Kwai (don't want to spoil it just in case you haven't seen it) is now a cliche... but I'm not sure if the ending of Kwai back in its day was a cliche, or if Kwai possibly was the beginning of it all.
For an IMdb top 250 and Oscar winner, i sure didn't think much of Kwai. The people who say you can watch the 1st 20min, fall asleep for two hrs and then watch the final 20min and get the same story are pretty accurate.
Alec Guinness' portrayal after being let out of the "oven" won him an oscar... but can't even touch Kevin Bacon's acting in Murder in the First (or whatever the Alcatraz movie was). Even Patrick Stewart as JPL in the TNG ep where he's held captive by the David Warner Romulan guy was a better performance.
I don't get how walking 100 yards wins one an Oscar.
But this homage stuff would be nice to have in the trivia section.
edit: I should clarify - ST:TUC is my fav Trek film. Just surprised after 22+ years I wasn't aware of the Kwai reference.
Since then actors have won Oscars for yelling or mumbling with funny accents. I'm not sure what criteria the Academy uses: does the actor's performance need to stand out, or does he need to act so fluently that you don't realize he's acting? It's a mystery to me why Peter O'Toole didn't win for "Lawrence of Arabia", yet many today consider his performance hammy.
And there are probably lots of films you could sleep through without missing out on the plot. There are plenty of films where you can "get the same story" from a trailer or an action figure -- but it's not the same as watching the film. "Kwai" is built around a clear linear plot and a moral conflict, while something like "The Undiscovered Country" (for example) has more activity but less substance, perhaps. If you skipped 20 minutes of TUC, you'd wonder why Kirk and Bones are in an ice cave and what all the fuss was about. That sort of thing doesn't necessarily make for a better movie, just one with more plot.
I'm surprised the Kwai reference isn't listed in IMDb's trivia section too. It's also not mentioned on Memory Alpha, the Star Trek wiki, which considering the wiki's strict citation guidelines I guess means that it's never been confirmed by Nicholas Meyer. Maybe he thought it was too obvious.
"If stupidity got us in this mess, why can't it get us out?" - Will Rogers
The simple tactics that audiences today have shorter attention spans -- there has to be more action, prat least major plot twists to hold an audience today. Exploring a situation or character just doesn't hold a modern audience's attention. "rocky" or "ordinary people" just wouldn't sell these days.
Look at the new treks vs. the old. The difference isn't that JJ is a monster, the new ones simply reflect today's movies, while the old treks reflect films of their time.
"After years of fighting with reality, I am pleased to say that I have finally won out over it."
The simple tactics that audiences today have shorter attention spans -- there has to be more action, prat least major plot twists to hold an audience today. Exploring a situation or character just doesn't hold a modern audience's attention. "rocky" or "ordinary people" just wouldn't sell these days.
Personally, I think Abrams showed great respect for the characters and setting... But yes, speeded up the pace for modern audiences.
The fact may be that if we want Trek done as it was in the sixties, we simply won't get any new trek at all. I think he did a fine job of walking a rather narrow line.
(Personally, I don't think the scenes of pre-teen Kirk and Spock were necessary.... But in this context, the fact he took the time to show them has tone a point in his favor.)
(By the way, that should have been "The simple fact is..." -- iPad autocorrect.)
"After years of fighting with reality, I am pleased to say that I have finally won out over it."