Comments
I was 9 years old, first Star Trek movie I saw in theaters, and I knew it was Worf’s grandfather. Never had to ask anyone who he was.
James T Cox
2025-02-14 22:50:39 +0000 UTCAs a history teacher who loves Star Trek, I thought it an incredible story arc conclusion both in universe and out. That our TOS crew would be pivotal to the peace with the Klingons, wow, probably the most significant event since the foundation of the Federation! And out of universe, I wonder if Gene ever thought he’d live to see the Cold War end. How incredible to conclude the TOS social/cultural/political commentary with the end of the Cold War and how to treat our former enemy. Love this movie!
James T Cox
2025-02-14 22:43:28 +0000 UTCThis is one of my favorites, and it is not disappointing at all that you don't like it, and I think you provide very understandable reasons for not liking it. It's always better that you guys are honest and people like/dislike different things. I do want to, respectfully, offer a partial counter on being that dismissive of the Cold War aspect. Partial because I agree, being a Cold War allegory does not automatically make a movie good. However one of the primary purposes of TOS was deal with issues of the Cold War, both domestic and abroad. It makes sense for it to be the final TOS movie. Also, the Cold War is one of the most pivotal periods in human history (I would argue it is THE pivotal period). Anything after is still shaped by the Cold War, and very few things prior can be argued to be as impactful. - Everything major conflict/event since the Cold War is shaped by the Cold War - No period prior ever held the possibility of global destructions on the scale of nuclear war - No conflict prior had the level of impact on such a global scale over such a period of time (no, not even the Seven Years War or either World War). These are just the main points. Of course there are always arguments you can make for other periods or events, but I argue Cold War is top 3 at least. Just food for thought, and again I do agree that being a cold war allegory does not automatically make a movie good.
D Gyre
2025-02-03 22:53:03 +0000 UTCI remember that. 🤣
Michael Metrick
2025-02-03 17:59:58 +0000 UTCShazD, It's a complete miss. They don't seem to understand why so many people love this movie. The arrogance is what surprised me. I never saw that here before.
Michael Metrick
2025-02-03 17:58:26 +0000 UTCTarget Audience 🤣🤣🤣 Ok, you got me to laugh...
Michael Metrick
2025-02-03 17:56:32 +0000 UTCI will make a prediction they like the character stuff, but dislike other things about it. Kind of the same way I compartmentalize to watch SNW
Loot Narsbaar
2025-02-03 03:43:41 +0000 UTC...Although I do not think the points against the allegory for the wall coming down are as good. While it does age the movie, Star Trek has always used devices like that for storytelling. Similar to the "magic" that part of the movie, it is probably not as likely to hit for those who didn't live through it in the moment. If so, fine. It can be something that didn't work for you, but it doesn't make it a bad choice, or worthy of mockery. I think it's GOOD you both don't agree with everything the masses do. It's through civil discussions like these we learn to consider things we never thought of before. I never thought of Kirk as a deadbeat dad until now-- 35 years of Trek in, and countless viewings of the TOS movies. I do think his prejudice over David's death is 100% real, and justified (especially since Kirk admits he has a problem very early in the movie), but who am I to disagree with someone who actually had a deadbeat dad? The perspective other than mine is equally as valid if not more so.
Loot Narsbaar
2025-02-03 03:39:32 +0000 UTCSomething else helpful to understand for ST6 is that when Roddenberry created Star Trek as his vision of a future humanity that has moved past its disagreements and many of its flaws, he specifically created the various alien races so that there could still be characters with flaws and there could still be conflict in the series. To this end he specifically created the Klingons to represent the communists of the 1960s when he created the show. In other words, so much of how Star Trek 6 treats the relationship between the Federation and the Klingons really just flows right from Roddenberry's original conception of the Klingons as being *supposed* to be looked down upon, to be seen as an enemy, etc., and Star Trek 6 functions as a way to bridge that original idea of the Klingons, which is how they are always treated in TOS, with the idea of Klingons as more normal friends and allies that had developed in TNG.
Shane Coombs
2025-02-03 00:05:37 +0000 UTCThe Shakespere stuff is in there for the same reason it shows up in TNG: classic Star Trek (and by classic here I mean TOS through Voyager or Enterprise, films included) was frequently rooted in the literary tradition and sometimes its creators went so far as to place explicit references into their work. Nicholas Meyer was one of them, doing it in both ST2 and ST6.
Shane Coombs
2025-02-02 23:57:37 +0000 UTCIt's easy to see the attitudes of the crew as racist in ST 6 since we're so used to the interactions people have with Klingons in the TNG era and beyond. Yet all of that flows, in universe, from what happens in Star Trek 6. We have to try to remember that in universe, Kirk and Chekov and everyone else have lived 40 or 50 years in an era where for all of history the only relationship humanity has had with the Klingons has basically been the relationship humanity has to the aliens in the Independence Day films.
Shane Coombs
2025-02-02 23:38:23 +0000 UTCWe don't need comments from people telling them what the "best" anything is when they haven't even seen it.
ShazD
2025-02-02 23:26:19 +0000 UTCYou have to be joking...the whole reason we follow them is to see their takes?!
ShazD
2025-02-02 23:24:38 +0000 UTCWhen I was a child, I was totally fascinated by the development of humanity in Star Trek. That was what Star Trek always stood for first and foremost in my eyes: the best that humanity has to offer and a bright future. - Now I suffer from depression. - Never mind, it's not about me. - But in many ways, the movie is about humanity and humanity. (I'm afraid the English language is too poor here, so the translation tool outputs nonsense). In any case, I think it's great. - But as a big fan of Worf, I think it's great to learn more about the Klingons, to see a Klingon trial at the highest level and also to see a new planet ruled by Klingons and what it's like there (the penal colony). - And there are many funny and remarkable moments in this movie too. [Great writing up to this point - STOP NOW!!!] .... but what do I know. - I'm just some dork without a YouTube channel and without thousands of SugerFanboys. [I'M SO SORRY!!!]
Adam from Germany
2025-02-02 22:48:36 +0000 UTCIt’s interesting. I loved this movie when it came out. For me it was Star Trek back to form because we got a fun Klingon story. Also some of the dialogue between Spock and Kirk is some of my fav of the whole franchise. I am the weirdo who was put off by Star Trek The voyage home as I always thought it was more of a play for a mass audience. This sometimes can ruin a franchise as it ages. But. I recognize the movie does not age well. So at this point its just nostalgia. I totally understand the criticism. I was thinking that this was a possibility for you two. I would probably feel the same way if I was reviewing today.
Glenn Zigli
2025-02-02 20:08:57 +0000 UTCNot being so sure about their take on DS9 is now definitely a thing. Beginning to think they might actually prefer Voyager to DS9.
Lovok
2025-02-02 20:03:10 +0000 UTCOr "Star Trek, the Slow Motion Picture"
Sam Langanke
2025-02-02 19:31:40 +0000 UTC“Vainglorious” would be a good name for a metal album
Josh (Target Audience)
2025-02-02 18:59:08 +0000 UTCI don't think they were attacking your perception personally, they were just giving their true opinion. In the end, it's about their experience. We are all already fans.
PIG
2025-02-02 18:57:40 +0000 UTCYeah I saw this film as a kid and I don't remember anything standing out to me. Rewatching it, I realize how much of a nostalgia deliverer it was to the fans rather than be a true movie. That's why there's so much hate in the forum, I assume. I do think this franchise became a comfort world for many, so it's gotta hurt when people reveal it's (obvious) flaws... even though Star Trek is about better than anything out there when it comes to franchize.
PIG
2025-02-02 18:56:07 +0000 UTCThe motion picture had a distinctly science fiction feel to it... It didn't feel quite as pop culture as the rest of Star Trek. It had more of a brooding, thoughtful sort of feel, with all the dramatic visuals and music and slow burn. It was exactly not the sort of movie where anybody was going to stand there and shoot a handgun at anybody else while quipping campy lines. A lot of people want that though. They wanted that old fashioned Star Trek where there's a fist fight and a one-liner and somebody's shirt gets torn... They got something quite a bit more cerebral from the first movie. Very very filmic. I completely love it. But I completely understand why others don't.
Aaron Wells
2025-02-02 18:44:19 +0000 UTCYeah I thought they’d love DS9 but now I’m not too sure. I think, again, for 6 they’re not seeing that Kirk IS an enlightened man, that’s part of WHY he hates Klingons so much. They’re counter to everything he holds dear. You can only be tolerant of the intolerant so for so long before you’re like well you know what? Screw you. It happens to all of us. Kirk wants peace, he wants reasonable discourse, he wants starfleet to be able to continue its scientific mission in safety and enlightenment. Some have made the case that Kirk is actually more enlightened than even Picard and I think I agree with it. So how does a man like that confront and deal with an alien species who makes war and murders for the sake of it? Again these are not TNG Klingons where the society at large has made an attempt to change. TNG Klingons would take an offer of aid, TOS one’s, as shown, would not. That alone highlights a fundamental difference. Kirk, from his perspective, is well justified in hating them. It’s not weakness, it’s not intolerance. It’s a lifetime of dealing with them and getting nothing postive in return. He sees they refuse to change and if they don’t want help to avoid death then… well let them die. It’s the end of Star Trek 3 on a large scale. He tried to save a Klingon who is still trying to kill him and finally says you know what… “I’ve had enough of you.” And doesn’t just let him fall, he kicks him in the face so he will.
Paul
2025-02-02 17:36:27 +0000 UTCST1 was called by critics at the time... "Star Trek, The Motionless Picture"
Michael Metrick
2025-02-02 17:26:50 +0000 UTCNow I'm not so sure. I'm not sure about anything going forward.
Michael Metrick
2025-02-02 17:24:15 +0000 UTCDo you really think I'm going to spend an hour and a half watching you trash one of my favorite movies? That's not only presumptuous but highly vainglorious. Geez, have some respect for your fanbase.
Michael Metrick
2025-02-02 17:22:01 +0000 UTCAlthough, maybe they just get invested in the more perfect characters and then dislike when they LATER see flaws. MAybe in some future series where the characters may start out more flawed they will like them more.
Shane Coombs
2025-02-02 16:46:21 +0000 UTCI was around when Star Trek VI was released and in that pre-internet age in which information had far less ease of travel all the Trekkies I knew I also knew that the character was Worf's grandfather. One big thing that applies to many of the complaints that the guys have about guest actors, key surprises, stuff like Col. Worf, etc., is that back then so much of this stuff was widely publicized in marketing before films and episodes. The studio went out of its way to make sure people heard about stuff like Worf's grandfather, Spock appearing in Unification, Q being in an upcoming episode, etc. None of this stuff was ruined by the credits, teasers, episode titles, etc. because everyone knew about it weeks before an episode aired. Everyone was *supposed* to know about it and we all liked it as it made us get very excited to tune in. I don't say this as a criticism, but it may just be that Josh and Alex can't easily appreciate this since they've largely grown up in the era where everything is treated like a mystery box and a lot of how media in this era has tried to move people has been with big surprises. As far as everything else goes, this video has been a Eureka moment for me. As you said, Josh and Alex have been hard to understand because their likes and dislikes have often seemed inconsistent. They'll say they want one thing and then when we see an episode that has it often they will dislike it. I have not been able to predict what they'll actually like or not! Now seeing this video, it's like something really clicked for me. Looking back, the vast majority of the time when they have disliked something it has been when the characters have shown flaws and weaknesses, while a lot of the stuff fans have typically disliked because people say the characters have been stiff - ie, too perfect - they surprise us and they like it. I think they may just really enjoy the prototypical Roddenberry "evolved humanity" outlook, which is part of why they really had TOS click so well for them. Unfortunately, I predict they'll hate much of what is to come.
Shane Coombs
2025-02-02 16:32:09 +0000 UTCOr maybe it’s a bit of an understandable reaction when all you’ve known of an ALIEN species is brutality and murder. It’s not like he’s being a racist, they’re aliens, you have to put yourself in the shoes of people there. When for decades an alien race has shown you their entire culture revolves around murder and mayhem it’s not hard to come to the conclusion that’s just exactly what they are.
Paul
2025-02-02 16:24:36 +0000 UTCMaybe they thought it would be reasonable for Kirk to hold a grudge against those personally responsible for his son's death but not carry one towards an entire species for it.
Pokeysaurus
2025-02-02 15:54:19 +0000 UTCBefore this channel, I didn’t personally know anyone who thought this movie was better than just OK.
Jeffrey
2025-02-02 15:04:12 +0000 UTCA lot of Pain - a lot of words - people are getting their red october moment. Let me say this :-) There have been moments in my life when I have made stupid decisions with conviction. I made them because I was an idiot. At first I didn't understand something and then I couldn't admit that I was wrong - sometimes I was just too closed-minded about everything and everyone to accept anything that differed from my original opinion - and I was proud of it too (that ever wants to be justified) - in the meantime I had to change my mind about almost everything (since I now pray to the truth - a very uncomfortable religion) - that's really hard every time - and I can't realize that I'm not an idiot anymore, despite my adjusted opinion. - Honestly, I don't know if I should hope that everyone is like this (so that I'm “normal”), or if I should hope that everyone else is much smarter (then I'm in safe hands, right?).
Adam from Germany
2025-02-02 11:39:46 +0000 UTCI find it terribly ironic that some are feeling so vitriolic about you guys not loving this because you feel it both doesn't live up to, and in ways betrays the ideals of, Star Trek you've come to know when many of those same fans are mad at the current era of Trek for the same dang reasons. I know that's why I can't stand 'em. You'd think there's be MORE understanding about that, not less. Good on you for not intentionally turning your brains off to watch stuff.
Nolan
2025-02-02 11:20:35 +0000 UTC6 rotates with 2 and 4 for my pick of the best depending if I'm in a comedy mood, action mood, or drama mood. I could make a case for any of them. Then it goes 3, 1, taking a nap, then 5.
Ken R
2025-02-02 09:38:07 +0000 UTCI literally reactivated my account (which I disabled to save some money as money is tight) to say this: I’m sorry but this whole review falls apart when you are ripping on the worf thing. No one thought it was the worf from tng, no one making the movie, no one watching the movie. Worfs grandfather being in the movie wasn’t dumb, you guys not immediately understanding it was worfs ancestor is whats kinda dumb. Sorry but it’s true. I saw this in the theater when I was like 12 and everyone got it just fine. Just because you guys were confused doesn’t mean anyone else was or that it was an insult to anyone’s intelligent. As someone else said it was just a fun nod to tng fans. He’s even made to look different from Worf we know on purpose. Come on guys you’re better than that. As far as everything else I don’t even know where to begin. For one you are taking some things that are just nitpicks and inflating them into movie ruining flaws is silly to say the least, but the most glaring thing is just really forgetting where humans and Klingons were at this point. TNG is around 75 years after TOS. The Klingons you know in TNG are NOT the Klingons on TOS. You are kind of letting your love of worf and their depiction in TNG give you rose colored glasses. The Klingons of TOS are on the whole bloodthirsty and obsessed with war. And one literally stabbed Kirk’s son to death just to piss him off. As someone else said you might not care much about David but Kirk did. You deify Kirk too much, you think he is above hate? I’d certainly hate the people who murdered my son in cold blood. Kirk’s feelings are entirely understandable. He has never seen a side of Klingons other than blood thirsty murderers, and for an enlightened man like Kirk that’s an affront to everything he stands for. You guys are just so weird sometimes. You want more tighter personal stories and you get a beautiful one and you dislike it. I think you were expecting something that you were never going to get, something big and bombastic, but these characters are literally retirement age. You were expecting too much from them on that level. This was the perfect sort of story to send them off with, it was kind of an arc for Star Trek itself, humans and Klingons taking the first step to peace. Overcoming 100 years of war and hate. Kirk was used as the vessel for that arc and rightfully so, no one dealt with them on the level he had to, at least on screen. You see Kirk come to grips with the death of his son, and overcome his prejudice. You see sulu as captain, you see Spock despite his words be more in touch and accepting of his human side then ever before. It showed how they all grew and had changed. It was a political thriller and it pays in spades.
Paul
2025-02-02 07:58:52 +0000 UTCMe also. I will say I might like 5 and 1 about the same. Both have good parts but overall bad movies. 6 is looked as one of the top 3 Star Trek movies with the original crew. 2, 4, and 6. I do not understand any disappointment for this movie. It is just great
Carl Peterson
2025-02-02 07:03:23 +0000 UTCThe best Star Trek film is Star Trek: First Contact. You'll love it...
Allen D. Warren, MSEd
2025-02-02 04:42:23 +0000 UTCThis forum feels like the twilight zone to me sometimes; I'm so out of synch with everyone here. When this movie came out it was universally or almost universally praised. To this day look at any best lists for the films and it is up there. Before this channel I had never heard of anyone that didn't like this film, or thought 3 was better than 2, or that 1 was better than 2 or 4. Certainly nobody had ever been recorded saying 5 was better than anything.
Ken R
2025-02-02 04:29:07 +0000 UTCYou have a great point about the "magic." I can see how it's flaws are less forgivable if, say, you didn't see it in a movie theatre the day after Christmas and say it was your introduction to Trek
Loot Narsbaar
2025-02-02 03:38:36 +0000 UTCThis video makes me wonder if they can even complete the entirety of Trek. Hard to imagine someone watching 1000s of hours of shows they don't like.
Loot Narsbaar
2025-02-02 03:35:39 +0000 UTCWhile everyone has their own take, I never felt Trek REALLY went against the ideals it strove for until modern/streaming era trek. My favorite series I felt did a great job of testing those values when under duress(which in some ways I think does them justice. To struggle with but still hold onto your ideals when truly pressed shows them to be more than a passing fad. As the saying goes, it’s easy to be a saint in paradise). I think there’s a difference between individuals who have flaws, and what’s commonplace in culture. Plus I think humanity would have lost something if we feel there no more lessons to learn, or need to better ourselves any further. Be proud of how far we’ve come, but still strive to go further/do better. Otherwise society stagnates. Just an opinion. 🤷♂️
Todd “Canuck” Schmuck
2025-02-02 03:17:50 +0000 UTCThere are few things harder to get past than being massively disappointed in something or someone you truly love... that hits and hurts quite a bit different than anything else. I get it. I've seen a lot of series finales or film trilogy endings that simply failed to live up to what I'd really looked forward to, in fact at times it made me angry. But with time, I've looked back on them and considered them in the context of why they ended, the resources they had, the time they had and maybe the energy they had left. No spoilers here, but there are other films in this franchise that you'll watch that might provoke similar feelings. A few points: On Kirk's 'racism': I always appreciated that Kirk was shown as being flawed, he could be wrong. 'Obsession' was a good example, like when he blew up on the bridge and accused his crew of conspiring against him, then apologized. Kirk made many mistakes in the past, and could be very hotheaded. Remember when he flew off the handle and told Nomad that he was wrong by thinking Capt. Kirk was his creator, when it was someone else. Spock even says "That may not have been wise." You guys brought up a great point, big fans of TNG tend to measure all Captains by Picard's measured calm, he is clearly written to be a 'cool' character, where Kirk is certainly a 'hot' character. Kirk's "Let them die!" comment may have been made in anger as much as for him being pissed off that Spock arrogantly presumed to volunteer the entire crew, three months before they're due to retire, for such a massively dangerous mission, right at the end of their service time. I felt Kirk was furious with Spock for doing that, and blurted out angrily that line about the Klingons because he really didn't want to do it. Also, he was likely extremely frustrated by seeing his career coming to a close, and being forced into being used as a babysitter to, of all things, a Klingon Chancellor. There were a lot more layers to what was happening in that conference room between him and Spock than appear on the surface. The lack of the plot being 'epic': I know Josh does NOT want to hear anything about the Cold War, but this movie can't be discussed without mentioning it. This film is clearly a prisoner of its time. For those old enough to remember the intensity of the Cold War and the Berlin Wall coming down, that wasn't just news, it was HUGE news. It was THE news of the century. Enough time has passed that the Berlin Wall coming down is meaningless old news, especially to younger folks today. In a way, it'd be like making a movie today about the USS Pueblo being taking captive, or maybe the Berlin Airlift. Neat stories, but means little to folks today dealing with the firehose of insanity that we've had since 9/11. But prior to 9/11, the concept of the collapse of the USSR, and the end of 73 years of its murderous, bloody aggression, was THE BIG news of the time. Kirk's hostility to the Klingons was a pivotal underpinning of the story because in the reality it was reflecting, many in the West that felt the same way toward the USSR right after they collapsed and advocated for moving in and striking them NOW, since they were weak. It really synched up with the history of that time, but unfortunately as the years moved on they left both the USSR, and this film, behind. Other problems: The Valeris/Savvik thing, the knee-balls, the brevity of Sarek, the not-really-well hidden assassins uniforms or other issues, those are the vagaries and plot holes that every movie has, one can either look them over or not. I've been a diehard TOS fan since about 1973, I overlook a lot. I see those holes in every one of the films, but I guess I've been doing it for so long, I'm ok with it. Good example...remember in S1 "The Enemy Within" they couldn't beam up Sulu because the transporter didn't work? That was the tension that drove the whole plot of that episode, but no one ever brought up the fact they had a shuttlecraft the whole time? Duh. But I don't care. It was a great episode. I'm not trying to convince you guys to like it, all I'm saying is that this particular movie leans very hard into the times in which it was made. I think what happened here is your expectations were so colossally sky high, and the plot was something so rooted in events from 35 years ago, that held no intrigue for you today. As a result, that film had little to no chance of ever delivering. Once the film lost you, there was no going back... it became easier and easier to find things to dislike, it became easier to look for things to find fault with. Once one feels a film is a bitter disappointment, especially when it happens at the halfway point, there is zero chance of recovery. I was blessed to be able to see it new, in the context and atmosphere of the times, and as the natural conclusion to a story I'd been watching since I was about 6. It worked well for me, better in some parts than others, but overall it delivered and the ending was in fact very much earned. The older I get, the farther from those heady days of TOS being new, the more the original cast members pass on, the more I feel distance from my youth and my own life passing, the more Kirk's comment about 'First star to the right, straight on 'til morning' resonates. Kirk feels the closing of a glorious career, the end of the days of swashbuckling, the forced mothballing of his ship, the end of working with the people he calls friends...a bitter thing indeed. James T. Kirk is staring down the reality of his own end. And he responds with charming, child-like, self-aware defiance. That's what that line "We haven't run out of history quite yet..." means. We can chose to still keep moving, we can still affect things. We can still matter, even when all we know is fading away. Not sure if it occurred to you, but what Kirk was facing in those closing moments was another Kobayashi Maru...retirement, aging and eventual death. And he responded to it just like he did that other no-win scenario... "I refuse to accept it." Humans often foolishly defy the gods and think they can win but we never do; we call it hubris. And in those closing moments, Kirk is defying the god of time, with the wry look of a man too experienced to think he can win. He's saying "I know I'll lose, but I won't lose everything. Passing time can take my ship, my crew, my Captaincy, my youth... but it can never, ever take my spirit." None of us live forever, not even our most beloved heroes. Time claims us all. But we can, as he did, with a twinkle in our eye, say we don't have to like it and can even foolishly refuse to accept it. I recently retired, and I feel all the many, many miles on my frame. I know I have fewer days ahead than behind. I know I can't beat time. The clock is ticking. But that last scene resounds like echoing, rolling thunder to me because like Kirk, I can refuse to roll over and just surrender to it. So... "First star to the right...." Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country was the perfect ending for the original crew, because it brought their story to a close focusing on each of their true inner characters, who they were. It let them bow out with grace, as they aged, not as those who couldn't do it anymore, but as those who did it so well and for so long, and inspired us so much. I pray we all receive the grace to end our time in reality as well as they did in the fiction of their world. For one last time, they inspired me. I'm sorry you guys didn't enjoy the film more.
Shane Davis
2025-02-02 03:14:18 +0000 UTCI am kind of perplexed how anyone could like Star Trek: The Motion Picture so much. The one good thing I heard about the movie was that a mother said that she could put the movie on and let her kids watch it as I guess the original version was Rated-G. "When it was first released theatrically, the movie received a G rating, which was revised to PG for the director's cut." ... I assume that Shakespeare stuff was partly there as, "Both Shatner and Plummer were actors with the Stratford Festival, arguably Canada’s leading Shakespeare festival. The story goes that, after a particularly vigorous sexual encounter with a one-night stand, Plummer accidentally dislodged a kidney stone. This caused him such intense pain that he went to the hospital. By chance, Shatner was Plummer’s understudy for that performance." The only problem was that the person who created the Klingon dictionary or Klingon language decided to omit the word or words "be" or "to be" as that person thought that that would be amusing. Then someone had to create a Klingon word or words "be" or "to be" for the "To be, or not to be" speech.
Chtphr Rrr
2025-02-02 03:13:29 +0000 UTCDavid and Saavik were lovers in the novelizations.
Aramis Calcutt
2025-02-02 02:46:44 +0000 UTCFor the record, I certainly didn't intend this as an attack of any kind. It was meant as pure observation and I tried as far as I could to speak neutrally rather than to express any kind of judgment about each part as to whether I agree or disagree.
Shane Coombs
2025-02-02 02:10:03 +0000 UTCDenzel's and Keanu's characters in this play/movie are very minor. It's Kenneth's and Emma's show and they are delighful.
Sam Langanke
2025-02-02 01:51:40 +0000 UTCI enjoy this one more than any other TOS movie just because I grew up with it and didn't see anything else from TOS until I was an adult. My interest in Klingons came from this movie and was cemented in TNG. Is this movie a good one, I think so. Is it great, well I wouldn't go that far lol. We all like what we like, and as always, can't fault you guys for liking what you like. Thanks for the reaction and the hard work. 🖖
Dru Blood
2025-02-02 01:46:20 +0000 UTCThe Star Trek films were the best example we had of watching our heroes grow and age. Nowadays every film franchise is trying to bring their heroes back to prove their relevance. But Star Trek actually has Kirk and Spock realize that their world is changing and they are being left behind. Very much like Ned Stark and Robert Baratheon; two old heroes in a world where there are no heroes left. That being said; I think the way I just described it was better than what we got. It's not a bad film just not the best.
Matthew Jimenez
2025-02-02 01:21:00 +0000 UTCWhen it's a hallucinatory power. The Salt-Vampire affected people mentally.
Michael Nemo
2025-02-02 00:34:23 +0000 UTCI grew up a big fan of the original series. It defined my childhood. I was in my 20s when Undiscovered Country came out. I mildly enjoyed these movies but not one of them was something I loved, and over time, their flaws have grown stronger for me. Except Motion Picture, which bored and confused me as a 10 year old but now I appreciate a lot more as an adult. The rest of them are to me mid- to poor-grade action flicks with several really embarrassing moments. I like the way you’re making me think about what I think about these movies after all these years, because I had seen them so much as a kid that they became part of the landscape. A lot of the time I find myself agreeing with you. One thing I disagree with you about this movie is I think Christopher Plummer gave a great performance. He did well with what he was given.
Aramis Calcutt
2025-02-02 00:32:53 +0000 UTCShe appeared as a woman, she appeared as McCoy, she appeared as another guy. How is that not shape shifting?
Blane Mather
2025-02-02 00:29:53 +0000 UTCWhen did it physically change it's shape in the episode?
Michael Nemo
2025-02-02 00:27:24 +0000 UTCWatching it when it first came out we knew it was the last hurrah. We wanted so badly for it to be an “out of the park” home run. Unfortunately, it is anything but that. It failed on many levels and at the time it’s was inevitably compared to TNG which had hit its stride and is arguably some of the best television shows ever. Having said all that, I’d still rather watch this on a continuous loop over any new Trek stuff.
Kurt Linke
2025-02-01 23:50:12 +0000 UTCYou Like what you like and don't what you dont. we are not the same people so it makes sense that we would like and dislike different things. we are all still fans, until we decide we are not
harrypothead42024
2025-02-01 22:41:23 +0000 UTCLike many movies and shows that are deeply rooted in contemporary events STVI didn't age well. Nicholas Mayer himself admitted that. And there are many examples. As much I loved "The West Wing" back in the day it now looks like a naive Democratic utopia. It took a time but I fully understand now that Alex and others of younger generations who weren't there in 91 can't connect to the global political zeitgeist of the time which this movie so clearly breaths like no other Trek film. We also have to remember that this euphoria about "the end of history" and the "triumph of capitalism and western democracy" after the Cold War didn't last very long and the chaos which followed led to political turmoil and economic impoverishment in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. And unimageable cruelties like the Yugoslaw Wars that started in the very same year of 1991.
Sam Langanke
2025-02-01 22:35:15 +0000 UTCAgreed. I disliked it in 91 and like it less on each rewatch
Jeffrey
2025-02-01 22:10:09 +0000 UTCHenry V is excellent. Much Ado is good, but a waste of Denzel, and highlights the limits of Keanu’s range.
Jeffrey
2025-02-01 22:07:55 +0000 UTCPicard said it so well: "I think when one has been angry for a very long time, one gets used to it. And it becomes comfortable, like old leather. And, finally, it becomes so familiar that one can't ever remember feeling any other way."
Paul Hess
2025-02-01 21:54:30 +0000 UTCEveryone is making such great deep points, pro and con. But I'm just excited to watch all the chaos and mayhem on youtube when this goes public.
Paul Hess
2025-02-01 21:48:13 +0000 UTCWow. As General Chang might say, “He speaks poniards, and every word stabs.”
Paul Hess
2025-02-01 21:45:12 +0000 UTCUnfortunately and quite applicable. I'm now not looking so forward to my upcoming s5 favorite episodes. Going forward with trepidation.
Michael Metrick
2025-02-01 21:22:00 +0000 UTCMaybe I will suggest Kenneth Branagh's Henry V or Much Ado About Nothing whenever I finally make my bridge crew movie recommendation. I think when people use Shakespeare to make a point or make a Klingon mask seem more human its annoying, but the actual plays themselves are really amazing.
Alan Thompson
2025-02-01 21:19:00 +0000 UTCTruthfully this video more than anything so far makes me think they're just not going to like DS9.
Shane Coombs
2025-02-01 21:08:11 +0000 UTCGiven the reasons offered here for saying this film was insulting, I really have to wonder if you'll hate Star Trek more and more as the franchise runs on and ESPECIALLY once getting to some of the later series. Star Trek VI is really one of the first moments when people who disagreed with Roddenberry's vision of a quasi-flawless future humanity were fully in charge of things and from here on out they lean a lot more into this. I think back to how much you guys liked season one of TNG and how much this surprised everyone. Season 1 TNG is largely viewed by the fans as a kind of exemplar of what Roddenberry wanted to do in TOS in terms of showing humanity as advanced and evolved and without flaws, and this is a major reason that season is often regarded as badly as it is. The characters are seen as stiff and lifeless because of how perfect they are. Yet in spite of this you guys actually really liked it and so much of what you talked about enjoying was exactly some of that TOS type ethos. Then as the series has gone on some of the biggest surprises for fans were some of the fan favorites where the episode specifically starts to showcase character flaws. While many fans dislike Pulaski, your specific reasons for disliking her were really rooted in her flaws. Then we hit there premiere of season 3, Evolution, which was specifically crafted by the creators to try to start to make the characters less perfect and show more flaws, starting with Wesley, who was by then regarded as the most "too flawless" of a band of "too flawless characters." Some of the other episodes where your take is the most different from the standard fan view are likewise episodes where we start to see the cracks in the characters' veneers of perfection. Of course, there have been some episodes like this which you did like. Redemption, for example - though even in liking that one, you still did take some issues with some of Worf's more "human" decisions. I will be curious what happens as the franchise does move more and more away from that "evolved and perfect humanity" idea of TOS and early TNG.
Shane Coombs
2025-02-01 21:07:48 +0000 UTCThe Voyage Home: You mentioned how each of the films feel like it's own thing. 1 focused on exploration, Khan was more fanservice with a returning villain. 4 feels like Trek having (for lack of a better term) a romp. The stakes are there but the story is more about just having our crew getting into hijinks in 'present day' Earth. I enjoy the humor and it's fun to watch, but I just prefer a more action-based story with more moving parts, even if the parts may be more obvious on re-watch. The Final Frontier: When the people in charge said, "The fans like the comedy in 4, so let's give them even more!" Yeah, this one is low on my ranking too. The goofy moments just don't fit into a story about flying into the center of the universe to find God. There are good moments (McCoy's pain, Sybok sacrificing himself, the Bird of Prey rescuing Kirk), but they don't make up for having Scotty banging his head into a pipe like a Stooges routine.
Andrew Buel
2025-02-01 21:07:29 +0000 UTC"How can people like 1, 3, 4, or 5 less than this?" Challenge accepted! Motion Picture: I get that it's an incredible looking film, and it's cool to see our heroes again. You touched on why I wasn't crazy about it with the whole "40 minutes in Spacedock" comment. A good chunk of the movie is no talking, no interaction, just the crew flying through special effects. The plot of 6 may be obvious, but I'm more invested in seeing where it all ends up than in the Enterprise flying through a kaleidoscope. Search for Spock: This is a fun movie and the scenes of the crew stealing the Enterprise were great. I'm more a fan of Plummer's Klingon than Lloyd's (I'm a drama geek who likes Shakespeare). The buildup in 6 just hits harder for me. I'm not surprised 3 being a much-loved Trek film, but if I wanted to re-watch one of these movies I'd rather see McCoy and Kirk breakout of prison than watch Spock grow up as a planet blows up.
Andrew Buel
2025-02-01 20:58:15 +0000 UTCIt's fair that you don't like Star Trek 6. Not everyone understands Star Trek.
David Crabtree
2025-02-01 20:41:45 +0000 UTCbut she did shape shift...
Jason Lallathin
2025-02-01 20:09:25 +0000 UTCAlso, are we going to overlook what happened two seconds prior? KIRK: GIVE ME YOUR HAND. *Kruge immediately tries to pull Kirk off the edge to his/their mutual death* Kirk didn't just decide to kill Kruge on a whim. He even tried to show mercy one. last. time. My takeaway is completely different. That scene actually informs some of Kirk's bigotry in THIS movie. Even in a movie where Kirk was trying to show compassion, the Klingon acted like a "brutal savage." That's what Kirk saw. That's what informed his disdain for them.
Steven Johnson
2025-02-01 19:57:05 +0000 UTCAnd I think that’s why I love Star Trek. And Doctor Who
J Mays
2025-02-01 19:53:48 +0000 UTCI remember liking this movie a lot, at first. People make an argument about Star Trek becoming “political”. No Spoilers, but some people mention earlier in the franchise’s history; some mention later. For a minute, I felt that this movie was when Star Trek became political. But then came the point when I did this idea, myself, and watched all of Star Trek. That’s when I first saw episodes like “Drumhead”. The more I thought about it, the more I realized, for some reason, a bunch of us believe Star Trek breaks new ground socially except have our moment, one day, when we think Star Trek “became political” — but if you were paying attention from TOS, it was always political. It was just different people doing the imagining that gave us the example of our “brighter future” having its own versions of and sometimes the same tarnish. I think a lot of us believe we’ve already learned the lessons we see Star Trek teaching — and then it lands on one we hadn’t considered and suddenly we’re taking our turn again, being the irritable student who doesn’t want to accept a truth that has been a part of other people’s lives all along 💙💙💙
J Mays
2025-02-01 19:53:20 +0000 UTCI think I understand your criticisms of the movie, but I disagree and some of the things you dislike are things I really enjoyed: Nicholas Meyer and his work on the Wrath of Kahn I like for the same reasons you didn't. Other things, like Ruha Pentae and Valeris I do agree with you on. It's not a perfect film, but I think 2 and 6 bookend this era of Trek for me in a way that I fondly remember as a positive vision of male leaders, and a hopeful one for humanity and future. The characters are flawed and they suffer because of these imperfections, but they learn grow and continue their adventures. That said, I laughed at the title because it does seem like you are milking a little bit of rage bait just for a laugh. Which is fine, as long as you are having fun with the channel, and making the best of your disappointments. And if I am wrong, then that is also that. As you've said elsewhere this isn't your first rodeo with having different opinions from the mass crowd of fans. Looking forward to more TNG with you into Season 5, and Deep Space Nine shortly after that.
Kristopher
2025-02-01 19:33:35 +0000 UTCWeird, my YouTube comment got deleted...I mentioned that growing up my dad was basically a racist jerk so that's when I decided Captain Kirk was my hero..And then this movie comes along and turns my hero Captain Kirk into my dad..It wasnt as good as I remembered it to be..
Badger
2025-02-01 19:17:04 +0000 UTCThis one was much more about the crew's psychology and how they relate to each other, enemies, and a star fleet that has sort of passed them by but still needs them constantly. Kirk's cowboy style diplomacy and how he leads has changed to a more Picard style. Kirk hated Klingons in TOS and in most of the movies. Then the Klingons kill his son. IT shows that he is human. It is one reason I prefer Kirk over Picard at times. Picard is not very human like too often. He is still my favorite captain but they wrote him knowing what is right too often especially when there was no way he could know either way. The only mystery in the movie was Valeris. The rest where not so much supposed to be that big of deal. I loved Spock's emotional reaction which should be uncharacteristic of a Vulcan but he has learned much being with Kirk and crew. The whole dialogue with Valeris early in the movie is fantastic. They did a great job wrapping up character arcs from the very beginning of TOS. The dialogue, characters, and character development really make this movie with also enough action to make it fun. But it really shows much of what I love about Trek. Delving into the psyche and beliefs of the characters and challenging them. Gone is some of the stuff I cringe at a little with Star Trek. The Ultra modern worldview that the more knowledge we obtain the more moral we will be. That is everywhere in TNG and it is just a bad take on human nature.
Carl Peterson
2025-02-01 19:16:07 +0000 UTCIt was a pretty clear physical battle to the death in that scenario with the guy who had just killed his son on an exploding planet. That’s why it works.
Josh (Target Audience)
2025-02-01 19:05:42 +0000 UTCI think this movie was great. It is smaller than some of the other movies but that is fine. It is not the huge boring mess the motion picture was with just big scenes of space.
Carl Peterson
2025-02-01 19:03:16 +0000 UTCYep it is as if they did not see the movies before this one.
Carl Peterson
2025-02-01 19:00:50 +0000 UTC19:08 This is just one of those things I cannot agree with. David was never a character, and I don't think he was intended to be. He's a consequence. Just as Khan was a consequence. Kirk's actions earlier in his life lead to Wrath of Khan. David for Kirk is a piece of what his life could have been. A reminder of his weaknesses and where he went wrong(He shirked his responsibilities as a man, and a father, to go be a space cowboy.), and further, as a father... Yeah. If I had the opportunity, 15 years down the line to reconnect with my child, and then they got killed right as that bond was starting to form? I'd hate those pieces of shit hard. Absolutely. The TOS cast, in-universe, have been in conflict with the Klingons as long as they have been alive. It is perhaps, the only part of the Cold War analogy that you really do need to understand properly... People get used to hating the Iron curtain and Soviet Russia. It was comfortable. Hell, some people *still* feel perfectly okay hating Russia without any nuance, consideration, or differentiating between political authority and general population. Also, he's had a number of years since The Search for Spock for that to really set in. When feelings like that are raw, they can be healed properly, but if they are allowed to set and never be questioned, they become... As Picard said, like old leather. Comfortable. Well worn. That's Kirk in Star Trek Vi. Dare I say the two big things that DO work int he movie are Kirk and Spock dealing with their age, and Bones acting as Kirk's moral sounding board.
Steven Johnson
2025-02-01 18:49:26 +0000 UTCFirst, your opinions are a valid reflection about how you feel about the film. There is no good or bad to it... it just is. I became a Star Trek fan on September 8, 1966 when my Mom sat me down and had us watch the first night of what became 3 years of must see TV in our home. She was a sci-fi fan before and had read a lot about the new series "Star Trek", and how it was going to treat science fiction with an adult view, and with an ongoing cast, for the first time in the United States. So my Star Trek history is a lot of waiting to see if there would be more, and then waiting for it to arrive. When we got to the movies, it was a mixed bag. I liked the arc of 2,3 and 4 a lot. In 3 in particular I thought Christopher Lloyd did a fine job as Kruge. But my Mom couldn't stop seeing him as drug-addled Reverend Jim from the TV series "Taxi". Anyway, we got to see 5, and other than the camping scenes, it was pretty weak. We'd waited years for that, so the disappointment was significant. Then we heard 6 would probably be the last hurrah for this crew. And we had to wait years for it to arrive. And while I was watching it in the theater, I had the twin feelings of "well, it's not what I would have wanted out of their last outing" and "thank god it's worlds better than 5!" And so I left the theater with an overall feeling of being fairly happy, if a bit underwhelmed, by the film. Nobody encountering it today can meet it in that context, and I don't expect them to do so. I understand that you and some others were massively disappointed by this film, while many find it anything from likable to beloved. I don't expect you to change your minds; just understand some of the context of those other views.
Blane Mather
2025-02-01 18:48:06 +0000 UTCThe Salt-Vampire was not a shape-shifter.
Michael Nemo
2025-02-01 18:45:18 +0000 UTC"is it possible that you two, Alex and Josh, have grown so old and inflexible that you have outlived your appreciation of the ToS crew? Would that constitute... a joke?" Amazingly adaptable quote aside, I don't disagree with your critiques in the slightest.
Ross Townsend
2025-02-01 18:37:48 +0000 UTCGotta agree, I wasn't impressed when they released it. Still today it's meh... I like a few things, just not enough.
Jason Lallathin
2025-02-01 18:36:55 +0000 UTCWhat did you think back in Star Trek three when Kirk was fighting that Klingon on the Genesis Planet and the Klingon was hanging on the edge and Kirk said I am tired of you and kicked him off the edge? I still don’t see the original series Kirk doing that. But it worked.
Steve777
2025-02-01 18:28:23 +0000 UTCI can relate to how you guys felt about much of this. I was kind of disappointed in 1991 when it first came out, and over the years my opinion of it has only declined. I place it at about 4th place now of the first 6 Star Trek films, only better than V and The Motion Picture. So much potential and talent wasted. The main highlight for me is all of the Captain Sulu scenes.
Collin Freeman
2025-02-01 18:15:36 +0000 UTC
