FULL DISCUSSION - Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country
Added 2025-01-12 13:00:08 +0000 UTC100 minutes of talking about Star Trek 6. We tried to include as many Patron Takes as possible, even ones that relate to what we are talking about but not reading directly. Thank you everyone for the takes.
Comments
STVI isn't a favorite movie of mine. It's a fine movie, it's not actively bad, but it doesn't have that Trek way where it grabs you and pulls you in. "Guess who's coming to dinner?" Whew that drags the movie down. 1:19:00 I love that you guys love Star Trek III as much as I do. I watch Star Trek II to get to Star Trek III.
Dante Hopkins
2025-02-01 05:31:51 +0000 UTCYT Link for a perfect upload of the cutscene by a fellow Trek Fan for anyone who sees this and fancies a look: https://youtu.be/bdSJ01L4amg?si=aKdbYyhVtDvYZ2BU
James Knight
2025-01-27 12:37:15 +0000 UTCIf you're curious to see how General Chang lost his eye, watch the intro cutscene for the videogame Star Trek: Klingon Academy, it's pretty cool and adds another layer to the character (live action cutscene).
James Knight
2025-01-27 12:15:56 +0000 UTCSo what is their favorite TOS movie and I wonder how they gonna like Generations which I actually like.
Lyric
2025-01-19 21:48:52 +0000 UTCNo it didn’t it died with paramount plus series and the kelvin timeline
Lyric
2025-01-19 21:40:21 +0000 UTCDude DS9 oh my god the stories. Grade A
Lyric
2025-01-19 21:38:40 +0000 UTC?
Lyric
2025-01-19 21:36:52 +0000 UTCI love the motion picture
Lyric
2025-01-19 21:36:04 +0000 UTCIt wasn’t my favorite but I did like it. I the special edition version a little better. Did u guys watch that version
Lyric
2025-01-19 21:32:05 +0000 UTCOk. Im late to the game, only because I had to digest this reaction. I took your reaction, and just re-watched it now. That “magic” as you call it isn’t there. You’re right. I think we all thought you’d love it because we know you guys love murder mysteries (If I remember correctly). Its purely a political “who done it” story. But there is no exploration of any kind. Maybe that was it? They were really hindered by the budget, and wanted it to be big, but Paramount was stingy because of ST V. Its a good movie. Personally Star Trek 2 and 4 are my favs. Could they somehow have done an actual exploration story with the Klingon/Khitomer link? Im not sure how you’d do it. I was a little rough on you guys at first, the first act is excellent. The 2nd act slows down, and I see that. Then, at least with the battle in the end, it ramps back up a little. But this was the only film that was political, and that isn’t very “Star Treky” in nature, so that could been the problem. Well, good job. Time to move on, but there’s more Trek to enjoy moving forward!
Chris S.
2025-01-18 17:25:39 +0000 UTCIt had been 20 years since I'd seen this. TNG is my home base. So this time when I re-watchec it with you both, one admittedly tiny little thing that jumped out at me is that the Klingons didn't do the death howl when one of them died. It felt like that was a bit of an oversight, or at least a missed opportunity. I'm just curious if anyone else caught that.
Gweneviere
2025-01-17 09:28:26 +0000 UTCTwo observations not really about the story or the reaction: I watched on paramount+, and the color correction on my TV and the extremely caked-on makeup made everyone look like our former/future orange overlord. The sync scenes sometimes lined up with Klingon dialogue and the fraction of a second timing offset made for some hilarious echoes that were too enjoyable for me to sync it. Bokh-bokh cha-cha mekh-mekh and so forth. 🙃
rear adm. crackbiscuit
2025-01-16 19:51:11 +0000 UTCMy recollection is that Paramount was concerned about the TNG fans that were not TOS fans skipping the movie. So they cast Dorn as Worf's grandfather and heavily promoted his cameo to the TNG audience.
captveg
2025-01-16 08:24:39 +0000 UTCI don't have much to add except to say this film is actually rather soberingly accurate, in my experience, in showing how some progressive 20/30-somethings can become biased judgmental 60/70-somethings as the years pass. "Okay boomer" didn't become a thing for no reason. The film would be even more real to life if the crew *didn't* own up their prejudices at the end of the film.
captveg
2025-01-16 07:47:05 +0000 UTCThe difference is, you can do exploration things with a Navy. But you can't fight a war with a research vessel. They are not interchangeable. The military aspect has to be paramount because the exploration aspect cannot fulfill both roles. That's why they're still walking around doing military things everyday, following orders, practicing with their weapons, standing at attention and saying yes sir when told to do something... ....While on an exploration mission to chart gaseous anomalies or whatever lol. I agree that it's a dual purpose... But logically the makeup of Starfleet must be militaristic first in order to be functional for both roles. The ships must be extremely powerful. The crews must know how to fight. And they must maintain that rigid military hierarchy at all times. Orders must be followed. This next level of militarism would not be necessary on a research ship. But it's absolutely necessary on a Starfleet ship because a Starfleet ship must be ready to fight at any time. When it's not cataloging gaseous anomalies.
Aaron Wells
2025-01-16 02:26:08 +0000 UTCThey probably named him Worf so that people KNOW he's related to TNG Worf, because if they named him something like Klunk most people would think it's just a cameo. Plus we have enough info to know that it couldn't be TNG Worf.
Evan Guthrie
2025-01-16 01:08:04 +0000 UTCLove the back and forth between you two, especially about the "racism".
Evan Guthrie
2025-01-16 00:54:52 +0000 UTCI get that it didnt work, but thats what they were going for.
paultardspambot .
2025-01-16 00:45:07 +0000 UTCand this character, even though you didnt like him, is supposed to be this very historically minded person who sees himself as the tragic hero in a shakespeare play. The line "in the original klingon" was meant to sort of showcase this type of klingon, where shakespeare had made it into their culture but they believed it was so great it had to be an original klingon work that humans took credit for, if you think about it Shakespeare does fit in with Klingon culture.
paultardspambot .
2025-01-16 00:44:36 +0000 UTCthe "to be or not to be" harkens back to when he said that earlier. From his point of view he sees a treaty with the federation as the end of the klingon empire, so the quote is emphasizing what he thinks the stakes are here to try and give him a bit more characterization then a mustache twirling villian. I get why you think its corny, but its not just a random quote with no meaning
paultardspambot .
2025-01-16 00:42:30 +0000 UTCBut "vulcans never lie" was shown as BS in the episode its introduced, where Spock uses the legend to stage an elaborate intelligence operation to steal the Romulan cloak. So it's clearly not an actual thing, and while i get its a value of logic, there are times when its logical and ethical to lie.
paultardspambot .
2025-01-15 21:11:25 +0000 UTCI think Valaris was supposed to be above suspicion because she was a Vulcan. I feel like this movie does start an overused trope of "evil vulcans" where it goes from "oh, this is surprising" to "actually, vulcans are kind of dicks other then Spock" making you think it was the combination of human and vulcan that made Spock so unique. A problem with Vulcans seems to be there arrogance, where once they are convinced they have arrived at the logical path they will undertake extreme measures along that path, which does sort of make sense with how vulcans used to be before logic and even the romulans.
paultardspambot .
2025-01-15 21:07:37 +0000 UTCI feel different about O'Brian hating the Cardassians. I feel that's more... understandable.
paultardspambot .
2025-01-15 20:59:46 +0000 UTCwith the crew disgusted, yes, it seems out of character, but you have the death of kirk's son and their less human appearance maybe as factors, plus they've presumably never seen a klingon meal
paultardspambot .
2025-01-15 20:49:12 +0000 UTCYour question can be flipped; if Starfleet are not the Federation's explorers then who is? Is there a fleet of exploration vessels out there somewhere that just sits around while the military is for some reason doing their job for them? Starfleet is the Federation's military, yes. That is one of many functions that they provide. However, it is not their primary function therefore I do not categorise them as a military organisation. Their primary mission is exploration. They only perform a military role when it is necessary.
Richard Stone
2025-01-15 18:57:08 +0000 UTCYeah. Even a real world military spends 99.9% of its time not fighting. That's normal. I mean think about what you're saying. You're saying they look like a military and act like a military and have the same capabilities as a military... But magically aren't a military. It's like saying a fire department has fire trucks and fire hoses and is busy putting out fires... But it's not a fire department. Because most of the time they're actually just sitting there playing cards and cooking meals and posing for calendars. But it doesn't matter. They are still a fire department. The question I keep asking, and that everybody keeps ignoring, is if Starfleet is not the federation's military... Then who is? If Starfleet is not the military, then why is it that Starfleet fights the wars? Why is it that Starfleet enforces the borders? Why is it that Starfleet has entire security and intelligence branches specifically designed to monitor the enemy? Starfleet isn't the military. But other than Starfleet... Who is there? Is there an actual Federation Navy somewhere that is completely absent and never shows up even when hostile powers attack? So Starfleet isn't the military, but the actual military just sits there and doesn't do anything while Starfleet does the military's job? That way Starfleet can pretend it isn't the military? Is that what you're saying?
Aaron Wells
2025-01-15 18:26:33 +0000 UTCWe know that Starfleet perform military responsibilities. That is clearly depicted many times. Where we can differ is if that inherently means they can be categorised as a military. Far more often than we see them acting as a military, we see them performing exploration, scientific, and diplomatic missions so I consider it a completely valid interpretation that Starfleet is primarily a scientific organisation that also performs a militaristic role when necessary. I do not believe that their purpose is to be a military. I do not believe that their intent is to be a military. I do believe that they are required to act as a military under certain circumstances. As evidence of this, I would point to Starfleet's motto: "Ex astris, scientia" (From the stars, knowledge). Compare this to the Royal Navy's motto "Si vis pacem, para bellum" (If you wish for peace, prepare for war) or the US Army's motto "This we'll defend." Consider also the Enterprise's mission which is to seek out new life and new civilisations. This is multiple times described as Starfleet's founding principle. Does that sound right for a military? Isn't the purpose of a military to defend borders and protect a state from external threats? Although we do see the Enterprise perform this role on occasion, it has always been both presented and explicitly stated that their primary mission is exploration.
Richard Stone
2025-01-15 17:33:08 +0000 UTCYeah, and firefighters wear uniforms and have ranks. Doesn't mean they are military. If on the other hand, firefighters were not civilians but were part of Starfleet and were operating gigantic ships with unthinkably powerful weapons on them instead of fire trucks, we'd be having a different discussion. As Benjamin Sisko himself pointed out to Picard, Starfleet is not a civilian service. As for the surgeon general, I'm not sure if you're aware but that's not a military uniform. There is a difference between an admiral in the Navy, and a ceremonial admiral in charge of the public health service. Basically the commissioned services use uniforms because originally way back in the day they branched off of what used to be military organizations. Starfleet officers, on the other hand, are actually commissioned officers within Starfleet. They hold military ranks because they are in a military organization. The surgeon general of the United States doesn't need to have any sort of military affiliation at all. The current surgeon general is not and has never been in the US military.
Aaron Wells
2025-01-15 08:33:06 +0000 UTCYeah, but we're not talking about something ceremonial. We're talking about a literal organization that operates a literal fleet of actual literal giant ships with actual literal heavy weaponry mounted on them. Today, we call such a thing a Navy. In the future, they'll call it a Starfleet. To distinguish between a maritime fleet, one would assume. It's not like it's one or two points. Starfleet checks every single box that denotes a military. There's literally nothing missing. Obviously, the Federation needs to be able to defend itself. Your contention is that Starfleet is not the Federation military. Okay. Sure. So who is? Again, I ask. If Starfleet isn't the military, who is? The military has to be there. Everyone else has one. If Starfleet doesn't fill that role, who does?
Aaron Wells
2025-01-15 08:24:28 +0000 UTCI watched this reaction, never having seen any of the TOS movies or show.
Sainjl
2025-01-15 00:39:53 +0000 UTCAs much as I would've loved to see Saavik again, I can't see her betraying The Federation. It certainly would've been more impactful, though. 6 is right next to 5 for me, which isn't a bad thing. I give it a C+.🖖
Grey Invader
2025-01-14 23:27:06 +0000 UTCI agree with all of your points.
Collin Freeman
2025-01-14 22:02:38 +0000 UTCnot a real trial but debate on the floor of the United Nations
Derek Orr
2025-01-14 22:00:51 +0000 UTChow is their more racism in those minor changes in the directors cut/
Derek Orr
2025-01-14 21:58:11 +0000 UTCIts a jacket
Derek Orr
2025-01-14 21:56:29 +0000 UTCthat is the most bizarre take lol....Alex and josh are the only people Ive heard who like TMP uniforms AND hate the red wrath of khan uniforms
Derek Orr
2025-01-14 21:56:06 +0000 UTCthat will be interesting...
Derek Orr
2025-01-14 21:53:30 +0000 UTCagreed, especially earlier TNG.....they are clearly less military like than TOS era starfleet
Derek Orr
2025-01-14 21:52:14 +0000 UTCjust wait till Alex Kurtzman era lol
Derek Orr
2025-01-14 21:48:34 +0000 UTCKlaa got a nasty demotion lol
Derek Orr
2025-01-14 21:47:15 +0000 UTCno because TNG ones are closer to the ones in Star Trek 3, 4 and 5
Derek Orr
2025-01-14 21:46:52 +0000 UTCIt was if I recall a bit of a weird and controversial choice to not go with any of the earlier very well known TOS movie composers....and they had sought permission to use Gustav Holsts "The Planets" but did not get permission ...so they got a new composer to basically just rip off Holsts work.
Derek Orr
2025-01-14 21:44:46 +0000 UTCseparate from the racism of the crew...I was particularly bothered by the dumbing down the crew.....Chekov was now a buffoon who forgot basic facts about ship operations and also can't notice peoples feet....and he had already left and gone and been promoted to XO of a ship....now years later is still living out his career effectively demoted. And Uhura not know Klingon was just dumb...all to make a simple little meh joke moment. And Scotty continues the decline into comedic relief ...I really really miss the serious leader, 3rd in command scotty from TOS...when he spoke slow and with authority....now every line he delivers in the later TOS movies is always this breathless excited goofy old man vibe.
Derek Orr
2025-01-14 21:41:39 +0000 UTCWhich clearly isn't useful for new viewers today. I'm referring only to what can be gleaned from the film as presented.
Julie Carter
2025-01-14 21:41:06 +0000 UTCpretty tough to do with limited screen time and no emotions allowed
Derek Orr
2025-01-14 21:36:56 +0000 UTCthey did not have future plans for Saavik they just did not want to go there and/or could not get the actor.
Derek Orr
2025-01-14 21:36:18 +0000 UTCbecause the interactions with the Klingons in V where quite minimal and not at all central to the plot
Derek Orr
2025-01-14 21:32:40 +0000 UTCI wish the 4k edition left in those small things they took out but had added in for the earlier non 4k director edition
Derek Orr
2025-01-14 21:31:11 +0000 UTCthat and it was released info before the movie came out
Derek Orr
2025-01-14 21:30:25 +0000 UTCYa I was young but I do clearly recall it being VERY well known (and remember there was no internet) that they were going to have Worf's grandfather be in the new movie.
Derek Orr
2025-01-14 21:29:56 +0000 UTCthe reality is we can just say Saavik changed her name to Valeris and its quite believable..after all we dealt with her face change between 2 and 3 and there is nothing in 6 that really comes into conflict for continuity with that character
Derek Orr
2025-01-14 21:28:52 +0000 UTCya it was always really weird. Valeris is really no different than Saavik...we simply do not have enough screen time (especially with 2 actors) in previous movies to establish a lot of detail about Saavik and then the same problem with Valeris....limited screen time because its one movie and the same general character bio....and being Vulcan....like honestly they could go back today and use AI and edit the audio dialogue to replace Valeris with Saavik and it would fit just fine
Derek Orr
2025-01-14 21:26:23 +0000 UTCnot really...he more just used elements of the original BSG
Derek Orr
2025-01-14 21:22:38 +0000 UTCits intellectual science fiction that shows us actually exploring and learning about an alien entity that turns out to actually be about learning about ourselves and the duality of love and knowledge....its is absolutely pure core Star Trek.
Derek Orr
2025-01-14 21:20:47 +0000 UTCThere will be at least 1 and maybe 2 of the TNG movies that they will love.
Derek Orr
2025-01-14 21:12:01 +0000 UTCRepeating yourself isn't a rebuttal. I mean I can just repost everything I've just written above? You're trying to pretend that Starfleet is something akin to NOAA. You know, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Which is a civilian service that operates a bunch of science and research ships. The thing is, if someone starts shooting at NOAA, or attacks the United States, NOAA can just call the Navy. If Starfleet isn't the Navy, who is? Who does Starfleet call to fight the war? Obviously if Starfleet isn't a military organization, it wouldn't have been involved in warfare. So who does Starfleet call? As for warp capable species not going to war... Have you even seen Star Trek? There are entire interstellar empires ruled by warlike, expansionist and militaristic leaderships. Neutral zones. Demilitarized zones. Terrorist organizations set up to fight all of these warp based civilizations that you think... Don't fight? I'm sorry. I just don't know what you're trying to say with that one. We have an entire franchise of canon that is absolutely opposite of you're claiming.
Aaron Wells
2025-01-14 21:11:33 +0000 UTCBecause organizations draw influence from the culture and civilization they are in. For example the USA has clearly had militaristic things infiltrate into all sorts other organizations and language since 9/11. Corporations and products are tactical this and that and organizations have "strike teams" etc etc....NASA initially only had military pilots becoming astronauts. Civil aviation refers to a "Pilot in Command" not just the lead pilot or something.
Derek Orr
2025-01-14 21:10:38 +0000 UTCThe surgeon general of USA wears a military uniform and carries the rank of Admiral....but have absolutely no military duties or direct connections to the military
Derek Orr
2025-01-14 21:06:15 +0000 UTCon the contrary any race that reaches the level of warp drive and space travel is going to have to have let go of warfare. Starfleet is not a military and Star Trek is not a military show
Derek Orr
2025-01-14 21:04:29 +0000 UTCand what's wrong with stories about peaceful exploration and only meeting aliens who are also peaceful?....its arguably far far more realistic that any species that makes it to that level of advancement are going to be peaceful.
Derek Orr
2025-01-14 21:02:25 +0000 UTCIts wild that they think TNG era comes off as MORE militaristic
Derek Orr
2025-01-14 20:44:28 +0000 UTCI really appreciate the lengthy, passionate discussion. I follow you guys (and pay you guys) because you all strike me as legit, authentic, and dedicated to the reaction. I would much rather prefer that you do NOT put on a "face" and fake it. That's what makes it so enjoyable to see y'all's take on the different phases of Trek as a sort of litmus test. That being said, I still maintain my opinion that Star Trek VI is my favorite of the core Trek movies, but--for sure--the plotline does stuff "FOR THE MOVIE" more than for the characters or for the lore. The most obvious bastardization for the sake of storytelling is how extremely prejudicial the main characters have been made after an entire series established them as open-minded. As someone who actually digested the movies BEFORE indulging in TOS, I accepted it at surface value and I like how it makes for compelling drama. Funnily enough, I don't place this film on the same shelf as Wrath of Khan, because I feel both movies have extremely different plotlines. Granted, there are cool-ass space battles in both, but VI is a great deal more forward-moving while II is more slow-paced and contemplative, imo. As for the apparent allergic reaction being had to the Cold War symbolism, you gotta remember when this film came out (1991). The Fall of the Soviet Union was still prevalent in the minds of Western pop culture, and Trek--being a show that began in the 60s when the Cold War was taking shape--probably felt it was their duty to make some commentary on the matter... albeit a tad bit on the nose, I suppose. Anyways, I'm truly glad you both have seen the first six films and I am curious (albeit with a certain degree of schadenfreude) how you'll react to the Next Generation films. Good friggin' luck~
Shortskirtsandexplosions
2025-01-14 13:41:58 +0000 UTCI think they'll dislike Season 1 of DS9 cuz it's boring and suffers from identity crisis. DS9 more or less gradually gets viewers integrated into a more militaristic plot, but who knows how they'll react to it. Although, from how they've reacted so far, I'm tempted to say they might enjoy Voyager a lot more.
Shortskirtsandexplosions
2025-01-14 13:33:38 +0000 UTCNow I love Star Trek (it's why I do my own ChatCast - the Replimat, go find it DS9 fans), but there is plenty within Trek I do not like. And I absolutely love and thoroughly enjoy your discussions on Trek. I like the honesty, I love when you unintentionally tap into future plot lines and episodes, and I love how you two don't always agree with each other. I've been here through you whole Trek journey so far, and I'll stick with you for as long as you continue. The sky's the limit! Oh, and my view on Trek VI wavers a lot, but generally I enjoy it and appreciate much of what it sets out to do (no doubt a lot of that comes down to me being around at the time of release), but I do tend to agree with you guys as it relates to Trek II and III.
Andy Frankham-Allen
2025-01-14 10:47:50 +0000 UTCAww, you didn't like it. :( I loved the Cold War parallels. I do think the weakest parts of the movie were on the Rura Penthe Prison, and General Chang was underutilized.
SuicuneSol
2025-01-14 07:39:50 +0000 UTCIn the episode The Drumhead, Picard comments to Worf about the importance of vigilance. In that case it was a reference to how easy it really is for an otherwise enlightened society to revert back to a witch hunt mentality. No matter how far you have progressed, that progress is fragile. The difference is in that case Picard remains the voice of reason, whereas in this movie Spock is the only one initially filing that role. It's a bit of a dilemma cause it does make for a compelling character arc for Kirk, but it does go against his traditional role as the voice of reason in TOS. Normally it's an admiral that fills the morally flawed leader role. For the record I support Kirk wrestling with those feelings. I do think him fully embracing them at the beginning is a bit much.
Paul Noad
2025-01-14 06:16:44 +0000 UTCI'm not sure if Alex and Josh are aware yet, but at the time there was a general consensus that only the even numbered Star Trek movies were good. It's fascinating to see how much their ranking differs. I think a lot of the reason why fans forgive the bad writing in these movies really comes down to just being happy to get more time with the characters. The attitude basically comes down to "I still love the universe, so it's fine". Historically I've been quite guilty of that myself. It's really just in the last few years that I've grown skeptical of shows/movies that I grew up loving. It took me hating a Star Wars movie enough to drop the franchise for me to realize how forgiving I had been until then. Some people will get very defensive when it comes to analyzing something they grew up loving. At this point I find it fascinating. It's exactly the reason I'm here.
Paul Noad
2025-01-14 05:48:34 +0000 UTCStar Trek 5 was when the fan narrative developed that “odd-numbered films are bad.” But I’ve always loved 1 and 3.
James H
2025-01-14 04:36:57 +0000 UTCTheir reaction to Star Trek VI makes me think they're not going to enjoy the TNG movies at all. They're contentious among TNG fans as it is for how different they are. A lot of the elements they didn't like about VI only become more pronounced in the series as time goes on, and are much more prevalent in Voyager and the TNG movies. I'm a little concerned they might give up on Star Trek before they make it through DS9/Voyager because the tone shifts so much.
Bret Kay
2025-01-14 04:19:05 +0000 UTCThey'll like DS9. It's not *my* favorite, but they'll be all over it.
Jovet
2025-01-13 22:34:24 +0000 UTCThe franchise declined after Roddenberry died. No doubt about it.
Jovet
2025-01-13 22:32:15 +0000 UTCTake the example of the example of the Enterprise D. Basically they built a warship with the capability of detaching its saucer section so that the drive section can proceed on its own into combat...smaller, lighter, heavily armed with both torpedo banks and also the warp drive and it's effectively endless energy reserves. It's literally got something called a battle bridge on it. They then added a bunch of science labs and expanded crew quarters so that people could bring families on long duration exploration missions. Yes, it can stand toe-toe with purpose-built warships. Because it might need to if someone attacks the Federation. But they created a dual role for it. I'm not saying it's purely a military ship. I'm not saying that Starfleet is purely a military force. I'm saying that they are primarily and fundamentally a military outfit. They *also* do all this science and exploration and diplomacy and blah blah blah. You can put a bunch of science Labs on an aircraft carrier if you want. It's still an aircraft carrier though. It's still a weapon. And the people that operate that weapon do know how to shoot you. In any case, I suspect it's an ideological thing. People who are anti-military are going to focus on peaceful side of starfleets mission. Those who are a little more pragmatic about the need for defense are going to focus on that. One of the things that make Star Trek interesting is that middle ground. There's only so much of a middle ground though when we're talking about battle bridges and phaser shooting ranges and extremely powerful weapons mounted to gigantic ships.
Aaron Wells
2025-01-13 21:38:50 +0000 UTCSo true. I remember the teaser trailer of 'GoldenEye! beginning with "It's a new world with new enemis and new threats but you still can depend on one man".
Sam Langanke
2025-01-13 20:59:25 +0000 UTCWe've learned our lesson. You will hate DS9, you will hate the rest of TNG, everything sucks from now on. It's all season 1 from here on out. Have no expectations.
Chris Mickelson
2025-01-13 20:26:47 +0000 UTCGentlemen, we've come home. Finally, the 2025 equivalent of Siskel and Ebert. I say that with the upmost compliment..Siskel and Ebert were HUGE in their day reviewing movies. This relaxed, inviting format you have and comfortability with each other, able to politely disagree, and this much engagement. I know there are a lot of full-time movie reviewers out there, but-You bring a little more edge.. I feel you could go far beyond Trek reviews and observations. Let's get you national. About the discussion: I am 59. I remember going to see STTMP with my mom who passed away this year when I was 14 years old. So I get the excitement when young like Josh, did with Willy Wonka. I stood in line outside the theater for 2,3 and 4..and remember that excitement for the next movie. I remember 6 feeling like such a good movie when I saw it. But as we age and watch these things back-I feel embarrassed and a little ticked NOW on how they treated my favorite characters. Just like you have shown me with TOS and a few episodes I hated as a kid but now think are something special. With Alex and Josh growing up in the social media age, so much TV, movies saturating everything-you have the advantage of catching everything, the good and the ugly your first run through and see it with different eyes than we did. The movie really missed the mark on some levels-I understand Nimoy got the feather in his cap for the environmental IV and now the Cold War story making peace but..I am sorry but when i grew up my dad was a dick-so Kirk was my hero-that's why I loved the show so early on-but to make him just as racist as my dad..ugh..why do that to my Shat? Now the bad: You have now come to the point where I think you are noticing that the dreaded Corporation that control everything Star Trek are making some Trek that doesn't align with what the fans want or expect or want. It's like my room of Trek stuff - I enjoy collecting things that make no sense. Like Star Trek Bubblegum or Romulan bottled water. Just because it has the Name Star Trek on it....well..doesn't make it Star Trek.. No spoilers or even tainting you on a future movie or series, but obviously there are more movies coming and different series down the road. Some of them adored by the fans and some not so much. This is going to be such an interesting journey with you because maybe some of the movies or series coming up that were disappointing to me - were just my point of view at the time. Just don't pop the bubble on the ones I love Alex and everything will be gravy. I am so kidding! That's half the fun! Thanks Guys!
Badger
2025-01-13 20:14:54 +0000 UTCAn organisation can be rooted in military traditions without itself being militaristic. For example, the Boy Scouts were based on military organisations. Gene described Starfleet as coming from naval traditions and using command structures for the purposes of efficiency and clarity but that its primary mission was exploration, not defence or warfare. The most important point I make is that this is open to interpretation. Gene wasn't necessarily right that it wasn't military and Nick Meyer wasn't necessarily right that it was. I think it's been portrayed in different ways at different times. The part of your initial argument I object to is that viewers should have to get onboard with one particular interpretation in order to appreciate the franchise.
Richard Stone
2025-01-13 19:55:41 +0000 UTCI actually like almost all TOS movies. I think they are great. Of course I think fifth movie is weakest. I think it is about me liking these movies when I was small kid. So I am not so impartial about these movies.
Kimmo Siniluoto
2025-01-13 19:13:44 +0000 UTCThe trouble is that in TOS Starfleet is directly modeled on the US Navy in its traditions. The Enterprise is named after the world War II aircraft carrier USS Enterprise. Yes, there are courts martial, and uniforms, standing at attention, rank structures, people calling people sir at the end of every sentence... Even boson's pipes. If Starfleet was never intended to be military... Then why is any of that in there?
Aaron Wells
2025-01-13 19:07:39 +0000 UTCIt doesn't. The arguments about roddenberry's vision grow tiresome because it paints the franchise into a corner. Peaceful exploration only works as long as everyone out there you run into is *also* only interested in peaceful exploration. Expanding the scope of the Trek universe was nothing but good. DS9 is my favorite series, personally.
Aaron Wells
2025-01-13 19:04:32 +0000 UTCI too, think DS9 is going to be a very interesting turn for this channel.
Aaron Wells
2025-01-13 19:02:29 +0000 UTCThat's just it though. Three seasons of TOS where it was about that 5-year mission... And then there's the rest of the franchise. Frankly, it doesn't make sense trying to bend everything else around to suit those three original seasons. The show became much more pragmatic during the TNG DS9 era.
Aaron Wells
2025-01-13 19:00:37 +0000 UTCYeah, I'm aware of that. My statement stands. It's also supposed to be a post scarcity moneyless society... And yet the toilets get cleaned and the Federation interfaces with the rest of the Galaxy economically. It's an interesting can of worms, logically speaking.
Aaron Wells
2025-01-13 18:58:33 +0000 UTCAlthough I understand where people are coming from with this argument, I will throw some shoes into the automation of it anyway. I have never liked Star Trek VI but I’ve always loved DS9. It’s my second favourite series after TOS. I don’t believe it conflicts with Roddenberry’s vision.
Richard Stone
2025-01-13 16:07:58 +0000 UTCIt's one thing to be able to have weapons and armaments to deal with situations as you are boldly going into the galaxy to places where no one has gone before. It's another thing to have a war fighting machine with battle fronts and long term campaigns etc. Roddenberry's vision was the former, but as budgets and appetite for action increased we started to get more of the latter midway through TNG. IMHO both types of drama made for great Trek, but made for very different positioning in the fermament of Science Fiction. Kirk was more of an explorer and IIRC never got involved in any long term wars.
Paul Hess
2025-01-13 15:56:32 +0000 UTCDS9 is going to be interesting. Without spoiling anything, you will have to either evolve/reevaluate what Star Trek means to you, or you will find it the biggest insult to Roddenberrys vision. I have a feeling that you will despise it at first (esp the first season), but as you get comfortable with the characters, plots, and tone, I DO still think it will be your favorite Trek. I think itll be a slow getting-used-to, but I still hold out hope! Either way, I will be watching your reactions. :)
River Acheron
2025-01-13 15:35:34 +0000 UTCGene and the people who believe him can say whatever they want. The problem is it doesn't match up with how Starfleet is consistently portrayed as a military that is heavily involved with research and exploration. They even use a "court martial" which is something specific to the military. I stopped believing the science and exploration bit when we found out that Stafleet is capable of raising thousands of heavily armed ships when necessary. They're far more militaristic than they are willing to admit. Roddenberry might not have originally intended for Starfleet to be a military but I do feel like that's what it became over time.
Spencer Loften
2025-01-13 15:27:08 +0000 UTCBelow are Gene Roddenberry’s notes from the TNG writers’ bible. Now I know that Gene wasn’t always consistent and I know that art is always open to interpretation but you can’t present this as being as clear cut as you suggest: “Starfleet is not a military organization. It is a scientific research and diplomatic body. Although the duties of the Enterprise may include some military responsibilities, the primary purpose of the Enterprise — as with all Starfleet vessels — is to expand the body of human knowledge.”
Richard Stone
2025-01-13 14:15:36 +0000 UTCA lot of good points. I think you both may have slapped the rose colored glasses off of my face for this movie. I never loved it, but I've always liked it pretty well without thinking through a lot of its shortcomings. I will say I still easily prefer it over 5 and I'd rather 6 be their sendoff than that one. Before rewatching all six, I thought of 6 as one of my favorites. As of now, I think the first 3 are my favorites. 1 has grown on me, and I think the newer director's cut / remaster helped with that. 3 has also grown on me, and I'm less into 4 than I used to be. I agree that Trek just doesn't work as well as a movie. TV Trek is best Trek.
Forbidden Donut
2025-01-13 13:57:47 +0000 UTCPorky's and Police Academy are more her speed.
thebeefmaster
2025-01-13 08:53:02 +0000 UTCTOS was born of the Cold War. Star Trek was always a cold war situation...it wasn't until the TNG era that this changed. The Klingon situation was simply the 1960s on screen. It was born of the 1960s. Cold War parallels aren't some sort of fluke that was only introduced in this movie. It was there from the very beginning. I mean, you guys noticed that the hideously ugly and cartoonishly greedy ferengi were created specifically to be capitalist contrasts to the relatively socialist federation do gooders, right? This stuff was always there. It was never particularly subtle.
Aaron Wells
2025-01-13 07:34:01 +0000 UTCOK. Guys. Starfleet is ABSOLUTELY the Federation's Navy. It has a military command structure. A military tradititon. It operates a massive fleet of heavily armed ships that can stand toe to toe with Klingon or Romulan warships. You really need to come to terms with this moving forward....its not going to change... A gigantic space faring civilization with dozens, if not hundreds of worlds and hundreds of billions of citizens, surrounded by expansionist enemies, MUST have a military. It must be able to defend itself. Or it ceases to exist.
Aaron Wells
2025-01-13 07:26:18 +0000 UTCI should say, personally when I try to offer up potential reasons for you guys not liking something, I'm more trying to examine factors that may play a role in those feelings in you and others. What difference in perspective lead to the difference in general opinion. It's never been an accusation of "well, you OBVIOUSLY didn't take X, Y & Z into account." But more "I wonder if they did or didn't know or have feelings about X, Y & Z, and if that impacted their viewing?" It's all just my curiosity about differing opinions, which I am glad you are honest in giving, showing and digging into. To be honest, I feel like this sort of divide between what you like and "the fandom" likes is going to happen more often in your journey. Star Trek 6 really is a sign post of fan opinion divisivness. The further you go in, the more contentious the feelings of fans liking or hating entries will be. DS9 was in general largely disregarded by huge swathes of fan when it aired. The series after is loved or hated, depending on how one feels about its potential, and the one after that got a lot of complaints online. And then the modern iterations hit and opinions got even MORE contentuous. It's going to be a facinating, unpredictable journey. And I am. Here. For. It.
Nolan
2025-01-13 07:17:45 +0000 UTCHe means the literal unmasking.
Nolan
2025-01-13 06:59:56 +0000 UTCGuys. I gripe a lot. But I really appreciate your honest reactions, and your in depth analysis and reasoning for your takes. As for the parallels with the Cold War...the point isn't that these parallels make the movie good... It's that they make it *interesting* ... Make it topical, etc. Making it "good" or not, isn't really the point. That is not what was being said. Good is just subjective. All those parallels are objective. Good is just a matter of whether or not you enjoyed the movie. Drawing those parallels with the real world, though, is extremely central to star trek. Dismissing the value of it to the movie doesn't make a lot of sense in the star trek context.
Aaron Wells
2025-01-13 05:55:50 +0000 UTCHaving not watched the video yet, but just thinking about my views on the TOS movies: I've long been of the opinion that the top three are 2, 6, and 3, in that order. After rewatching them with you two, I've changed that to 3, 2, and 6.
Jeff Cornell
2025-01-13 05:12:55 +0000 UTCCan I just say how much I've loved the discussion on this movie, both in the video and in the comments. It is, to coin a phrase, fascinating to hear all the different perspectives on it. As someone who's never liked the movie but is aware of what a great reputation it has, I've found it very enlightening to hear what people do and don't like about it. I'm in some ways surprised and some ways not surprised to discover that it's a much more divisive movie than I ever realised.
Richard Stone
2025-01-13 03:39:26 +0000 UTCThere's also a certain submarine movie that's better if you lived through the Cold War...
Joe Concepts
2025-01-13 03:14:53 +0000 UTC😐
Bret Kay
2025-01-13 03:14:20 +0000 UTCInterestingly, Nimoy was himself dissatisfied with the finished film. He had wanted the story to explore the Klingon culture but Meyer wanted it to be a political thriller. In his book I Am Spock, Nimoy described the film as "a serviceable but simplistic Manchurian Candidate in outer space."
Richard Stone
2025-01-13 03:10:34 +0000 UTCOh. Then I've just been utterly blind to the quality of prosthetics in this franchise up till now, lol.
Nolan
2025-01-13 03:09:16 +0000 UTCYes
Josh (Target Audience)
2025-01-13 03:03:06 +0000 UTCYes, but those show are romanticized, stereotyped renditions of historical periods. They aren't also about helping their audience obtain emotional catharsis about those events. I bet a number of post 9/11 shows that were made to get society through that and were praised aren't as fondly regarded, while some are lauded as timeless. In that aspect at least, it really does seem to be a toss up.
Nolan
2025-01-13 02:58:12 +0000 UTCYou lack a connection to times when the primary evil in the world was governmental/ whole country. Most younger idealists struggle with that. Have been too isolated from the reality. Culturally, the USSR pushed propoganda to hate everything that "The West" stood for. Same with cultures like WWII Germany and Japan. And all the Cold War Communists. Most of the wars we've seen in the last 20-30 years have been splinter extremist factions. In the Trek Universe, Humans and Klingons have been in conflict for hundreds of years. The Klingons are an Empire seeking conquest. So, people who have lived their lives at threat of war would see that as what most/ all members of the opposite represent. Same situation as which Israeli Jews and Muslims view each other, on the primary level. Its about not trusting a radically different culture.
Nathan Cline
2025-01-13 02:55:56 +0000 UTCWait, do Alex and Josh know yet that Kligon foreheads are a genetic trait and that different families have different forehead crests? That not all Klingons are supposed to have the same foreheads?
Nolan
2025-01-13 02:53:38 +0000 UTCI imagine the thinking being: "Yeah, and Dorn can play Worf's grandfather! But how will people know it's Worf's grandfather and not just a random Klingon? I kniw we can call him Worf too because this is obviously too early to be TNG Worf, so people will assume it's grandfather Worf." Intent was not reality if this is so.
Nolan
2025-01-13 02:51:16 +0000 UTCOh, the Director's cut does add back in an additional layer or two to the conspiracy, even a whole cut minor character. And I think it adds a bit more in-depth talk about the torpedos. But it also adds some "are you paying attention audience?!" things, though frankly in my late teens early 20s I needed them.
Nolan
2025-01-13 02:43:58 +0000 UTCIt's my favourite Star Trek movie by far and one of my favourite movies of all time. I could list so many moments that are memorable to me but none more so than Spock's realisation in sickbay that his pursuit of pure logic has been a mistake. He finally makes peace with who he is. It pays off his character arc from TOS and leads to the serene Spock that we see in Star Trek II. That right there is how I like to see character development done in Star Trek.
Richard Stone
2025-01-13 02:40:49 +0000 UTCWell not an absolute rule
Greg Quinn
2025-01-13 02:40:11 +0000 UTCI think initially I WAS leery about your reception to this film given the response to Wrath of Khan. But then "The Wounded" and "Ensign Ro" hit and elements of those are in VI, so I think that got people thinking you'd like this. So I assume that's why no one said anything. NOW I've gone from thinking you'd love DS9 to thinking there's a VERY good chance you won't like it. There's stuff in there you guys have said you don't like. So who knows? As for THE COLD WAR... that was Nimoy's idea for the film. Because he saw that Starfleet and the Klingons were in a Cold War (Cause it's both that specific event, but also a type of war, which isn't confusing at all) and thought it'd be a good way to explore society's feelings on current events through analogy. Much as BSG was emotional catharsis for 9/11. And it raises questions on the validity of media like that when the history isn't so raw as when it was released. Nimoy's whole pitch for the film was "What if the Wall fell in Space?" And at the time that was SUCH an Earth shattering event. 40 years people spent under the threat of 2 superpowers pushing the "End the planet" button with a clear "Those guys are the enemy. Fear them and their ideological differences." Media struggled to cope a bit after that ended. James Bond, other political thriller stories and even the news media suddenly had to find new threats to face, the safety net of familiar fears was gone. Just like how 9/11 kinda changed how mass media was made and watched. Now I work with Russian and Ukrainian immigrants. I think THAT is what gives this film it's feeling of finality to fans. It's not just the end of an era of history in the real world and fictional history in the franchise, it's our heroes ushering in that era, ensure it gets born, and then bowing out, flying into the sunset now that all those cold war narratives that had been the cornerstone of mass media for decades, and a large portion of what Trek was commenting on, was over. The TOS crew were heroes of the Cold War era, and now that war was over, and so was their time. And unlike Bond and the rest, they didn't fight it. They gracefully bowed out knowing their time was done. Knowing the Next Generation would take up the mantle.
Nolan
2025-01-13 02:37:39 +0000 UTCThat was a good cow to have
Greg Quinn
2025-01-13 02:26:57 +0000 UTCI agree with you about the Cold War thing.
Josh (Target Audience)
2025-01-13 02:16:55 +0000 UTCFYI, regarding Lawrence Konner and Mark Rosenthal - all of their ideas were so terrible that every single thing they came up with was removed before filming. The studio forced those two on the team, and those two sued successfully to get credit even though everything they came up with was tossed.
Michael Ducharme
2025-01-13 01:31:17 +0000 UTCYou've just created a safe space for all the Star Trek fans who don't actually like 6 at all. That's cool lol. I actually did not grow up during the Cold War, I have no particularly magical memory of seeing this movie. I don't even remember when I first watched it. It's been a while since I saw all the movies. I sat down and rewatched all these films with some friends who had never seen them and I still think it's the best Trek movie and I wasn't alone. So I'm just a tad frustrated at how many comments I'm seeing about how it's good if you grew up during the Cold War. I just think it's good lmao
Deep Red
2025-01-13 01:24:58 +0000 UTCEver since you started Star Trek I have always loved the discussion aspects. Most of us have seen Star Trek so many times and have discussed it with our friends/family to the point that there is no more discussion to be had for it (at least for classic trek). So no matter how much you like or dislike an episode or movie, I will always appreciate and enjoy your nuanced discussions and your honest opinions whether they align with the majority or not (Star Trek 4 is my fav ToS movie which is def not up there amongst most fans).
Tristan Rose
2025-01-13 01:04:38 +0000 UTCMany flaws in this film. Why did they just sit there and wait for the Klingon cloaked ship to hit them? Maybe fire phasers and torpedoes in a spread to try and hit them.
AzoriusMage
2025-01-13 00:42:50 +0000 UTCI appreciate the in depth discussion immensely everything that was said was true. It was a two year pair I believe from Star Trek V to Star Trek VI in that time I believe they could have gone with Nimoy instead of Meyer and arrived at a far better conclusion with him at the helm as he did (as director) Star Trek III and IV. Star Trek III and IV I view as book ends of Star Trek II TWOK. And those movies elevate the gravity of that movie and place redeeming elements of hope, exploration, adventure and enduring friendship in place of sorrow, loss, revenge and combat. Star Trek VI is dark and angst as the 90s was sometimes prone to being and so is it both a product of the times and a lesser writing effort ? Both can be true Star Trek is not a sacred cow..we love something that much that's why it can fall short and we care enough to critique it.
Kicked In The Dicebags
2025-01-13 00:42:19 +0000 UTCOne interesting aside from all of the film reactions/discussions from you two is that you harp on the uniforms, and even though you prefer the original colorful shirts from the series you do seem to enjoy the TMP suits. And I don't remember hearing this from any of the videos, maybe I missed it somewhere, but 2-6 uniforms are just the TMP hero jackets dyed red. Jumping in to drop some OFFICIAL POWER RANKINGS I guess: I. 1 == 6: The alpha and omega. TMP has fantastic model wankery and some pretty sweet music (main suite was even lifted and sped up to be TNG's opening theme obviously) and just seeing the cast again, on the big screen no less, forgives all other sins in my mind. The 25th and 30th anniversary edition cuts have elevated this film in my mind, as it was middling with the original theatrical cut. Undiscovered Country was just enough of a send off for me to forgive any real major mistakes, and the minor stuff like recasts without proper rewrites were just par for the course at the time. Fully driven by nostalgia and the whole thing ending. Anyone who has a problem with a rose tinted take can quite frankly get fucked. II. Wrath of Khan was the second chance the franchise needed on film and the direct continuation of an episode model is completely fine for me. Good music, good stunt gags, great showdown, and the whole thing had a western showdown vibe to it while they screamed the classics at each other. III. Search for Spock was a bit of a cop out for me narratively, but I understand that the franchise would not have survived without Spock and that ignoring the Genesis project's tech was not an option with this fanbase. Would've been better if they toned down the scope of the project in II, but what are you going to do? Lloyd's Klingon performance was a mixed bag for me at the time just because of his harsh accent but especially after rewatching it after seeing BTTF/Buckaroo Bonzai (and Postman/Cuckoo later on). It was fine, the original version, but the remaster definitely elevates this like TMP. IV. Final Frontier had some...interesting stuff, I guess. Wasn't as bad as the critics said at the time, but also wasn't a cohesive vision. Only reason it's not last is because the one with the fucking whales exists. V. Voyage Home has some excellent shots of the bird of prey and that's it. Lazy horseshit written for the everyman to hopefully get more butts in seats. This is the peak of cynicism in this run of films for me, even worse than the Assignment: Earth in my mind. Time travel gimmick, particularly in TOS and its flicks, is awful. Nuke the whales.
tkitez (take it easy)
2025-01-13 00:42:01 +0000 UTC100% this.
Column Meanie
2025-01-13 00:37:37 +0000 UTCI did and it is a very average movie
AzoriusMage
2025-01-13 00:36:44 +0000 UTCSame applies to any movie.
Column Meanie
2025-01-13 00:35:58 +0000 UTCI think part of the reason is they were expecting more of a focus on just this being the crew's last voyage, where it was more of yet another adventure in which they acknowledge it's the last. Plus I do think in this and some of the other movies, the general idea from directors/writers is that it's a Kirk/Spock/McCoy story, with the other getting involved a little. I can see some fans hoping for more of an ensemble story.
Joe Concepts
2025-01-13 00:23:45 +0000 UTCI don’t know if you’ll see this, but I appreciate your honesty—even when I don’t agree. (Though, you and I do agree about this movie.) I’m a storyteller, currently finalizing work on my dark fantasy trilogy. Honest analysis of story arcs and character arcs is incredibly important to me.
Tom Occhipinti
2025-01-13 00:21:17 +0000 UTCHere's a take from a real non-trek fan... https://youtu.be/Bzgf9-ezRXE?si=N55U74hgx3OBs7iY
Michael Metrick
2025-01-13 00:14:31 +0000 UTCRon Moore used this idea in BSG...
Michael Metrick
2025-01-12 23:46:21 +0000 UTCWow. 100 minutes of my favorite aspect of your channel…the DISCUSSION! 💜 🖖
T’Pynyn of Vulcan
2025-01-12 23:44:57 +0000 UTCThey wear a similar style of double-breasted tunics in Battlestar Galactica (2004), but they look much better in that than they do in the Star Trek movies. They really needed William Ware Theiss for the costumes.
Aramis Calcutt
2025-01-12 23:42:09 +0000 UTCGrowing up, I never felt the impact of Pearl Harbor like my parents did. Now I'm 70, and I can more understand what they felt. JFK assassination, Vietnam, RFK, MLK, gas lines, 9/11... etc. Hindsight gives you enormous perspective.
Michael Metrick
2025-01-12 23:39:44 +0000 UTCI do think this movie is better if you grew up during any aspect of the Cold war. Josh and Alex hadn't been born yet when the Soviet Union dissolved.
Greg Quinn
2025-01-12 23:30:29 +0000 UTCI still don't get liking Motion Picture...other than the transporter death scene it has nothing memorable.
Greg Quinn
2025-01-12 23:28:53 +0000 UTCI was actually shocked by their reaction. But I ain't going anywhere.
Michael Metrick
2025-01-12 23:20:27 +0000 UTCShazD, the irony is that "Undiscovered Country" also refers to the closing scene. Brought a tear to my eye at the time.
Michael Metrick
2025-01-12 23:17:26 +0000 UTCOr Picard...
Michael Metrick
2025-01-12 23:15:30 +0000 UTCI remember watching this in the movie theater. My friends and I all knew it was an ancestor of Worf immediately. Sorry. I was there.
Michael Metrick
2025-01-12 23:14:16 +0000 UTCI thought he said he rewatched 5 at 1.5 speed
Jeffrey
2025-01-12 23:09:32 +0000 UTCSnarky Alex is my favorite Alex lol
penoyer79
2025-01-12 23:08:30 +0000 UTCI always thought they had purposely given them a half Klingon look to bridge the gap between the heavy prosthetic look of TNG to the ‘guys with a fake tan’ look of TOS. Reading other comments about the tight budget, I think maybe they just ran out of silicone?
Worf and Riker Ride Again
2025-01-12 23:06:05 +0000 UTCSpeed should be "Constant as the northern star"
Paul Hess
2025-01-12 23:04:43 +0000 UTCThe score is one of my favorite things about movies. I'm a musician and I notice how a great score can save a mediocre film. ST6 is my second favorite score of all the Trek movies. Although Cliff Eidelman should have offered apologies to Gustav Holst...
Michael Metrick
2025-01-12 23:01:26 +0000 UTCHold the phone. Did Alex say that he rewatched the movie at 1.5 speed? I’m sorry but if you’re going to critique a movie you can’t do that and still experience the movie as it’s meant to be seen. A little like reading the Cliff Notes to a book instead of reading the book.
Column Meanie
2025-01-12 23:00:29 +0000 UTCCorrect, they're taking a critical look for their opinion of a good Star Trek episode/movie (nothing wrong with that). But, they know there are years more episodes in front of them. I was just happy to get new Star Trek.
startrekiborg
2025-01-12 22:57:08 +0000 UTCQuite right. Plus these guys are getting more picky each episode.
Michael Metrick
2025-01-12 22:46:48 +0000 UTCI still love this movie but watching your critique does make me look at some aspects in a different light. For me it will always have that magic as I was about 8 when I first watched it, I loved how real it seemed with both the acting and the visuals, especially the ship interiors and external models 😘👌. I remember pausing the video for hours so I could make a Lego USS Excelsior. Watching again, the first act is perfect, the 2nd act drags (I now remember fast forwarding the VHS tape we had) and the 3rd act is too short. There’s too much detail over the assassination evidence, I’d rather they build tension over the peace summit and the ramifications of what would happen if the President were assassinated. I never noticed before how long the guy took to assemble his sniper before, and it seems odd he’d need a massive scope to snipe the president who was 10 metres from the window. I still think they had no clue why they randomly added Worf, this always confused me and I first assumed he was just really old in TNG. Star Trek was never good for continuity… All in all I’m always going to love it but I can see why you guys were disappointed.
Worf and Riker Ride Again
2025-01-12 22:44:59 +0000 UTCOriginally, Chekov was going to be one of the conspirators.... but Roddenberry had a cow.... so they respected his opinion, and walked away from this idea.
Tom Occhipinti
2025-01-12 22:37:24 +0000 UTCThe studio wanted Saavik to return. Sorry to use AI for this, but I'm multitasking, and have limited time: Saavik was originally intended to be the conspirator in Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country. Here's the breakdown of why that changed: Original Script Intent: In early drafts of the script, Saavik, a beloved Vulcan character introduced in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, was planned to be part of the conspiracy to assassinate Chancellor Gorkon and sabotage peace efforts with the Klingons. Kristie Alley's Refusal to Return: Kristie Alley portrayed Saavik in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan but declined to reprise the role in subsequent films due to contract disputes and career decisions. Decision Against Robin Curtis: By the time Star Trek VI was being developed, the studio and filmmakers decided they did not want Robin Curtis to return. This could have been due to a desire for a fresh take on the character or perceived differences in reception between her portrayal and Alley's. Creation of Valeris: To avoid tarnishing the legacy of Saavik—a character well-loved by fans—the writers opted to create a new Vulcan character, Valeris, played by Kim Cattrall. Valeris became the traitorous Starfleet officer in the story, fulfilling the role initially intended for Saavik. Fan Backlash Avoidance: The decision to replace Saavik with Valeris also avoided potential backlash from fans who might have objected to seeing Saavik, a trusted ally in previous films, betray the Federation.
Tom Occhipinti
2025-01-12 22:32:51 +0000 UTCI agree with both of you. No magic in this movie. It's a fine movie... But it didn't have the HEART of the series ... or even the heart of the MOVIE series. Alex also explained how the movie wasn't much of a "who done it" mystery angle. It was all obvious. And I can't get emotionally involved by how a new character, like Valeris.... betrayed.... what, precisely? MY trust? MY expectation? Nah, I wasn't there for it. We see Spock offended, or disappointed, or whatever. Okay, I can feel badly for HIM.... but my emotions are a tad removed from the offense itself. (In what Valeris does.)
Tom Occhipinti
2025-01-12 22:03:49 +0000 UTCThe Valley Of The Dolls movie is so bad its good.
Ken R
2025-01-12 21:47:50 +0000 UTCThanks for showing my take during the Saavik talk, I stand by that opinion. Would she still have been a fairly obvious suspect? Sure. Would it have a much greater impact on the franchise? Yes, and it would have been awesome. Someone both Spock and Kirk trusted betraying them. She would have made sense to "replace" Spock as he says. And while I certainly like Kim Cattrel's performance, Robin Curtiss is the perfect Vulcan actress and would have elevated those scenes and I would have enjoyed her take on the mind meld interrogation. It also would have brought back around the "a lie?" type of questions she asks Spock from Wrath of Khan but flipped around. While I think the whodunnit aspect as-is is rather obvious, I do really enjoy the thought that Valeris was the one who planted the boots in Crewman Dax's locker as the fall guy, only for it to blow up in her face when they see his feet.
THE LORE!!!
2025-01-12 21:43:33 +0000 UTCWow I can’t believe people saw that as Worf, including the big fans that you said. Now sure, back in the day we knew it because the press told us, but the name “Colonel Worf” and the fact he doesn’t look just like TNG Worf made it obvious I think. And his age. I will grant you it maybe would make more sense if Klingons had last names. 🙂
Joe Concepts
2025-01-12 21:24:55 +0000 UTCI agree with just about everything you said here. I will say that the only clue the Lawyer Worf isn't the same Worf is the brow plate. The bump pattern is different from TNG Worf and you can pretty reliably see those patterns like fingerprints.
Julie Carter
2025-01-12 21:06:29 +0000 UTCStar TMP Directors 4K edition is a very different cut to the original version. Some things added, some subtracted. I was pretty indifferent as a kid. It dragged. It doesn’t now.
Jon1701
2025-01-12 21:00:13 +0000 UTCThere is way too much emphasis on whether or not people lived during this time or that time and history. I did not live in cowboy times or ancient Rome, but I still love a bunch of westerns and the Spartacus tv show.
Ken R
2025-01-12 20:47:12 +0000 UTCThe only films that count for me are 2 - 4 and 6. The other two do not connect with them at all.
Ken R
2025-01-12 20:44:19 +0000 UTCI watch only the even numbered movies. I have an evil twin that watches only the odd numbered movies
Paul Hess
2025-01-12 20:37:01 +0000 UTCAlso Kirk in Errand of Mercy got mocked by the Organians for arguing the Federation had the right to wage war.
John M.
2025-01-12 20:31:37 +0000 UTCI’ve completely lost my perspective on these movies now. I’ve watched them all so many times I neither love or hate any of them. 😂
Jon1701
2025-01-12 20:30:47 +0000 UTCMy basic answer to that is I pretend V didn’t happen.
John M.
2025-01-12 20:29:35 +0000 UTCThis discussion washed away the slightly sour taste your reaction video left me with. You seemed bored and it ended a bit abruptly and I thought that was it, end of. I should've known this was coming to sweeten the deal. Thanks guys.
Leyton Jay
2025-01-12 20:05:29 +0000 UTCHyping an entire show is fine imo. As Richard Stone said, even going into TNG excited and "hyped up", they enjoy it a lot. Obviously indeed with the typical rollercoaster of episodes. BUT one thing I do think they will latch onto hard is how deep the characters are delved into. Given how strongly they're both character-driven people, I think DS9 is going to rock their world.
Paul
2025-01-12 20:04:17 +0000 UTCBy now I think they understand that the rollercoaster of good and bad continues through all of Star Trek, both TV and movies. The good DS9 episodes are worth the wait. I personally liked Voyager more than DS9, being set on a ship, like TNG.
PFCoffey
2025-01-12 19:58:44 +0000 UTCI have to ask the people who say Kirk’s attitude towards Klingons is perfectly understandable - where was that attitude in Final Frontier? None of the hatred of Klingons he shows in VI was there in V - to me, it is just a plot contrivance that ignores previous character experiences, rather than being a good follow up to them
Jeffrey
2025-01-12 19:42:32 +0000 UTCNo it’s ridiculous you’ve said it’s ridiculous I said it was ridiculous. It’s absolutely not the best Trek film, I would possibly place it 4th out of the 6 in my personal rankings, but the level of antipathy towards it in the reaction and discussion is… surprising at the very least. As always I appreciate Alex and Josh’s alternative views of course.
Utterlee
2025-01-12 19:36:52 +0000 UTCAlex keeps coming back to "there's no bigotry on the bridge," but I would point out that the bigotry in that instance was from a subordinate under his command, who was aiming it at Kirk's very close friend Spock. That changes it a little. Plus, the Klingons (one of whom killed Kirk's son) have been gunning for Kirk ever since ST3. Their ambassador literally called for his execution in IV. Captain Klaa attacked the Enterprise for NO reason except to kill Kirk in V. Don't you think it would become personal after a while?
tyranusfan
2025-01-12 19:36:25 +0000 UTCI think you nailed why I like it but you guys don’t: I love all the paramilitary realism in 2 and 6. Like how in this it looks like a naval ship and we see the lower deck stuff. Dunno why. Just always liked it. Maybe cause I’m a ship nerd.
Karl Dutton
2025-01-12 19:25:33 +0000 UTCYou can thank Gene for that, he nixed Saavik’s appearance as the traitor,
tyranusfan
2025-01-12 19:20:12 +0000 UTCKnowing history is not the same as living through it. Josh & Alex are good guys, but they're still a product of their generation. They cannot understand what it was like to suddenly have the cold war end (40 years of war to end without warning). Just like how future generations won't understand what it was like on 9/11. Knowing facts doesn't generate feelings. Also, I really believe the rate they are watching, is having an effect. What they've watch in 1.5 years, took us 12 years. That, and they're crazy.; If anybody in my click said Star Trek 5 is better than Star Trek 6, their credentials would've been stripped and they would've been mocked relentlessly.
startrekiborg
2025-01-12 19:19:34 +0000 UTCI think the hate they have is similar to what NFL fans feel about fans and or players for the other teams. It’s a deeper level because the fight is life and death. We have tried to evolve past hating the people and more hating the leaders of those entities. Also I know you are focused on the ‘Ism from the star fleet cast but it was just as bad the other way from the Klingons too. This was mutual hate on both sides. Does it make it right , nope. But it’s actually a very natural arc to have hate and learn from it. You’ll see a similar arc in rocky when he fights in Russia etc.
Lt Dan I scream
2025-01-12 19:10:38 +0000 UTCGood point, alright we all gota dehype the hype
Colby Scovil-Turton
2025-01-12 19:00:43 +0000 UTCI think hype itself is being overhyped here. There’s nothing they were more excited for than TNG and they love it. They’re smart enough to form opinions when watching and their analysis of why they liked or disliked something is always well considered.
Richard Stone
2025-01-12 18:59:14 +0000 UTCI think we all need to start De-Hyping DS9, it's totally meh, you might like it..... Oh and this movie probably has my favorite sound track of all the movies.
Colby Scovil-Turton
2025-01-12 18:51:20 +0000 UTCThat’s awesome Ian, thank you
Josh (Target Audience)
2025-01-12 18:44:01 +0000 UTCThey’re supposed to be double-breasted tunics. Ordinarily you would open them only when you are about to undress. I don’t know why they leave them hanging open so much in the movies. Maybe it’s an analogue to classic Kirk’s ripped tunic. Or McCoy’s chest-hair baring 1970s top with new age medallion.
Aramis Calcutt
2025-01-12 18:41:02 +0000 UTCOkay, so instead of just telling me, you made me go find that scene. He seems to be very familiar with Jacqueline Suzann and Harold Robbins. So he is into mid 20th century mainstream sexy pulp romances. Unfortunately, not very quotable.
Aramis Calcutt
2025-01-12 18:39:12 +0000 UTCGene Roddenberry would agree with you guys in that Star Fleet was about exploration and hated the military angle as time went on, especially for the movies, but Meyer and Paramount wanted a different take.
Collin Freeman
2025-01-12 18:39:03 +0000 UTCI would agree but I would only say so to say that I think it's ridiculous to say that someone's opinion about something subjective like a movie is ridiculous. This is possibly my favorite Star Trek movie and it would have been a little funner to watch if they agreed with me more, but I don't watch people to agree with them. And regardless of the difference in subjective opinions, I still like their reactions and their humor. And likewise I like some of their insights and the other ones I just shrug.
Zack
2025-01-12 18:38:12 +0000 UTCYes that’s fair, there was publicity about Worf’s inclusion at the time, I expect it was in order to entice the TNG fans in. It is a little bit lacking in context when you watch the film with no awareness of that.
Utterlee
2025-01-12 18:37:19 +0000 UTCThis is moreso regarding Josh's final few words in the video as a whole rather than about Star Trek VI, but I wanna say that I personally appreciate you guys. I'm only 20 years old and no one my age loves Star Trek (both TOS and TNG) like I do, so seeing you guys, roughly being the same age as me, digging so deep into Trek is so cool to see and engage in. You two really rekindled my love for the franchise in the past year or so.
Ian Meyers
2025-01-12 18:35:30 +0000 UTCUnfortunately or fortunately you are spot on about Valeris(Kim Cattrall from Sex in the City) and Saavik( Robin Curtis) they did retcon it because they had plans for Saavik. It is inferred more maybe implied but confirmed later in the Pon Farr scene with young Spock they mated. And another redaction from the Voyage Home where she stayed behind she was supposedly pregnant with Spock's child. That was what I heard the reasoning was later on and I had also heard Gene Roddenberry saw an advance preview of some of the shooting of this before he died. And he didn't like this movie at all. But yes the Berlin Wall came down about two years BEFORE this movie so this movie for whatever the reason used the symbolism of that event and combined the Chernobyl event which I believe was close in years to that part of the history as well.
Kicked In The Dicebags
2025-01-12 18:33:28 +0000 UTCYeah he's great.
Zack
2025-01-12 18:32:48 +0000 UTCThis is why I love the target audience and Josh and Alex. We can all sit down and listen to an almost two hour discussion about a star trek movie and agree or disagree, but at the end of the day no one does this unless we actually care about and Love this show and their characters. The idea that Josh and Alex are just saying they hate something just to troll their viewers is crazy talk. What kind weird of long con would that even accomplish? We all love ST for different reasons and TA is no different. Thanks for being Passionate, Genuine, and self aware.
D Jammers
2025-01-12 18:32:05 +0000 UTCI think you're points about the comments are valid. What you see in the comments coming through as higher grades I attribute to the "nostalgia" factor: where and when people first saw the thing. That factor boosts their/our grades.
Collin Freeman
2025-01-12 18:31:12 +0000 UTCIt’s good
Josh (Target Audience)
2025-01-12 18:29:19 +0000 UTCI for one thought Kim Cattrall was terribly miscast in this. I don’t think she succeeded in creating a three-dimensional character. She did do a good job in the mind meld scene though.
Aramis Calcutt
2025-01-12 18:28:30 +0000 UTCI like their perspective on this. I grew up with Star Trek and was in my 20s when this came out and of course I knew in advance that Michael Dorn would be playing Worf’s ancestor, because it was written about in news stories. It’s interesting to me from the point of view of folks who were not in that context that this could be confusing. He’s played by the same guy who plays Worf and his name is “Worf.” And there’s literally no other information about who he is in the movie. It makes sense for someone to be confused about who he is supposed to be.
Aramis Calcutt
2025-01-12 18:24:35 +0000 UTCThat's a good TV show tbf 🤷🏼
ShazD
2025-01-12 18:24:12 +0000 UTCDid he really just say he was annoyed that we found out what the undiscovered country meant too early on? That's a new level of pernickety 😂
ShazD
2025-01-12 18:23:08 +0000 UTCYou're both right: we should have seen this coming after your reaction to Wrath of Khan. For me, I felt kind of disappointed and letdown when it first came out, but would still have given it a B/B-. Over time, I have come to "forgive" it and like it a little more, but would still not give it more than a B+. You both did a good a job pointing out some flaws, and there are others that bothered me (like Shatner being too Shatner-esque in his portrayal, dialog being to espositional from Chekov and Valeris, etc.). The main thing that saved it for me were the scenes with Sulu and the Klingon courtroom scene.
Collin Freeman
2025-01-12 18:22:33 +0000 UTCI see EXACTLY what they are saying and I agree with it. However all of the TOS interactions with Klingons Kirk has had Koloth in the Trouble with Tribbles. Kang..the Day of The Dove. Kor( John Colicos) from the Errand of Mercy. All of those interaction were tense and distrusting not out and out hatred. But it is clear we can't be friends here because of the opposing ideologies of conquest and expansion and territoriality vs humanitarian aid, exploration and peaceful colonization and alliances.
Kicked In The Dicebags
2025-01-12 18:22:00 +0000 UTCDS9 is nothing like this movie.
Aramis Calcutt
2025-01-12 18:19:41 +0000 UTCOne thing that I love about 6 that I was a bit surprised didn't come up at all during either the watch or the discussion is the score. I love the opening theme with the slowly ratcheting cello and choral notes, culminating in the explosion of Praxis. I think the action theme adds some nice tension to the battle sequences. I like the soft, tinkly, nostalgic stuff that plays over the epilogue. It's not necessarily the best of the TOS film soundtracks, and there's some really nice stuff to come, but it is a good dynamic score. Just curious if people have thoughts, especially since Josh has said he's a big score guy.
Avaria
2025-01-12 18:17:33 +0000 UTCAngry and depressing... I can think of an upcoming ST movie that is ten times as much.
ShazD
2025-01-12 18:12:43 +0000 UTCThat’s a great point, and I sometimes wish I had more of that mindset also
Josh (Target Audience)
2025-01-12 18:06:36 +0000 UTCIn Star Trek IV on the bus Kirk reveals his literary tastes.
Paul Hess
2025-01-12 17:57:07 +0000 UTCIntrospecting a bit here, and this isn't directly about Star Trek 6, but about media in general, as it was touched on towards the end of your discussion of the Rura Penthe arc: I tend to give more weight to what I love about a film than what I dislike about it (and this applies to tv shows, music, videos games), even if it's not the best approach for constructive criticism The negatives will still have impact in my mental calculus so to speak, to some extent, but it's like a rigged scale where I purposefully don't allow the negatives to overwhelm the good unless they're truly overflowing (like "Justice" from Season 1) To be clear I'm not saying this is objectively the best approach, from a critical standpoint is certainly not. If everyone was like me, there'd be less pressure on studios, artists, game developers etc... to improve. And I think that's what I love about listening to your takes most. You shine a spotlight into corners of a show that I've tuned out. The more you talk about it, the more I see what you mean, and it opens new caverns into my own psyche. It's like a non-addictive drug. (Oh, what am I kidding - this is all highly addictive.
Paul
2025-01-12 17:56:11 +0000 UTCI think a Paramount studio suit made Meyer use Worf as a tie- in to TNG . But you’re probably right in that he had no idea who Dorn or Worf were.
Collin Freeman
2025-01-12 17:52:37 +0000 UTCWhat i appreciate is that you guys are honest, if there is something you don't like you say so, which a lot of reactors don't. Not everyone is going to like the same things. As i said in a previous reaction this isn't just my favourite Star Trek film, it's my ninth favourite movie of all. I did think you'd love it more, but i understand the reasons you explained you didn't, even though i think very differently. For me this is faultless. There are some moments of dialogue i often rewind a few times when i watch this. We might have agreed about Darmok, but not this😋. I'm now worried you'll hate DS9.
jon bolton
2025-01-12 17:50:12 +0000 UTCKlingon makeup: My theory is they had so many top and/or name brand actors and those actors demanded or thought heavy makeup would interfere with the performance. I can imagine actors thinking they can’t act in heavy makeup but in this case it was misguided, for instance Tony Todd looked great in heavy Klingon makeup and did an amazing acting job in the makeup, as did many of the TNG Klingon Civil War arc actors (K’mpec for instance).
Paul Hess
2025-01-12 17:48:26 +0000 UTCAt this point, they’re likely to love Discovery.
Ron Hubbard Jr
2025-01-12 17:44:04 +0000 UTCIn case you guys didn’t catch this: the actor who played Gorkon, David Warner, played the human Federation representative on Nimbus III in Star Trek V. Also, the Klingon interpreter who provided the English translation during the trial was played by Todd Bryant who also played Captain Klaa (the Klingon captain) in Star Trek V.
Ron Hubbard Jr
2025-01-12 17:41:12 +0000 UTCI’m going to make a prediction that based on their reactions to TWOK and TUC there will be one specific plot/arc of DS9 loved by many fans that they will not really care about at all. If I’m correct, it’s also one that while it is interesting, it’s not what makes DS9 great.
Column Meanie
2025-01-12 17:38:42 +0000 UTCYeah I never liked them either, especially the weird handkerchief bits they sometimes pull down, when they are off duty?
Worf and Riker Ride Again
2025-01-12 17:36:52 +0000 UTC😆
James Bottas
2025-01-12 17:34:01 +0000 UTCIman was married to David Bowle. If you don’t know who he is check out YT.
Ron Hubbard Jr
2025-01-12 17:32:39 +0000 UTCIt's not anything like "just an episode of TOS" either.
Utterlee
2025-01-12 17:24:00 +0000 UTCAlex did you wear that shirt on purpose??? 🤣
Paul Hess
2025-01-12 17:18:20 +0000 UTCBeen on the list a long time
Josh (Target Audience)
2025-01-12 17:13:25 +0000 UTCNicholas Meyer directed the 1979 movie “Time After Time”. Great movie. You guys will probably hate it though.
Ron Hubbard Jr
2025-01-12 17:11:48 +0000 UTCIn perfect agreement with you guys on the fact it should’ve been Saavik. Just a much better storytelling choice. And good point that you wouldn’t have suspected her as quick as Valeris.
Joe Concepts
2025-01-12 17:09:04 +0000 UTC“Ridiculous” is an understatement.
Ron Hubbard Jr
2025-01-12 17:03:00 +0000 UTC“Their version of Avengers Endgame” 😂 It’s the other way around. Endgame borrowed from this movie with the signatures at the end.
Ron Hubbard Jr
2025-01-12 17:01:01 +0000 UTCChang's final words and death scene are absolute cinema
James Bottas
2025-01-12 16:59:57 +0000 UTCPersonally I think the problem is that it's so on the nose its barely an allegory. Maybe a more original end to the Federation - Klingon hostilities might have been more interesting.
Utterlee
2025-01-12 16:57:34 +0000 UTCTo our defense, it's been years since you saw Star Trek 2. You've gotten a lot more viewers since then. That's about when I started watching you. And, we were probably under a false sense of security that you've grown and matured since then. ;
startrekiborg
2025-01-12 16:56:23 +0000 UTCLooking forward to the cameo later this season(5) and if it will have any impact.
Stephen Wright
2025-01-12 16:54:04 +0000 UTCI don’t think there was racism regarding the Klingons. If this was the Soviet Union we are talking about a culture and political structure. The movie still works for me but its impact is not what it was. This was a movie that opened only a few years after the fall of the Berlin Wall and Desert Storm. Current events definitely made an impact.
Stephen Wright
2025-01-12 16:50:42 +0000 UTCI wish my Patron take would have been something like this: “while I enjoy the movie for nostalgic reasons, there are superior and even inferior Trek films I choose to watch before revisiting The Undiscovered Country. Nicholas Meyer’s approach to Star Trek is jaded and cynical, and that cynicism is on full display here. He made an angry and depressing Star Trek movie which is a disservice to the legacy of the original cast. I wanted to have fun, but there is no fun or joy in this movie.”
Column Meanie
2025-01-12 16:48:44 +0000 UTCThat’s fine. I’ve definitely heard the opposite argument: this isn’t Star Trek — it should have allegories like Star Trek VI!
John M.
2025-01-12 16:38:24 +0000 UTCMight be the biggest missed opportunity of the movies
Josh (Target Audience)
2025-01-12 16:34:49 +0000 UTCNo I don’t think so, but there’s no way to know
Josh (Target Audience)
2025-01-12 16:32:54 +0000 UTCThat’s not what Star Trek is to us.
Josh (Target Audience)
2025-01-12 16:31:46 +0000 UTCMy buddy Greg also thinks it
Josh (Target Audience)
2025-01-12 16:30:25 +0000 UTCThe Rua Penthe section is a highlight of the movie. It is not universally disliked.
James Bottas
2025-01-12 16:30:11 +0000 UTCWait…. Holy shit
Josh (Target Audience)
2025-01-12 16:30:00 +0000 UTCI despise the other cuts of this film which make the characters look even more racist (and remember: only Kirk has the moment where he comes to peace with his racism). The changes made to the Spock/Valeris mind-meld are so unnecessarily added. Nope, the theatrical release is the best version.
Column Meanie
2025-01-12 16:29:50 +0000 UTC❤️
James Bottas
2025-01-12 16:26:05 +0000 UTCWell, if Patrick Stewart did play his paternal grandfather, his name would be Picard.
startrekiborg
2025-01-12 16:24:49 +0000 UTCWell yeah, but I'm trying to lower expectations.
TomEmilioDavies
2025-01-12 16:23:48 +0000 UTCYes, Saavik would have been a better choice over Valeris. It’s so obvious they switched them out when you hear Spock’s exposition about who she is. Missed opportunity.
Collin Freeman
2025-01-12 16:21:59 +0000 UTCI was totally confused when it was said that TNG has a more military feel. That's the show where children roam the ship, the restaurant is a main set, their day to day life is so unthreatenng that the captain can spend hours on end playing VR video games, and we watch them attend painting and violin classes when they're not visiting the day care center.
Ken R
2025-01-12 16:21:40 +0000 UTCI think Gene Roddenberry would agree with Alex about the racist attitude of Star Fleet. He was very optimistic and idealistic about the human race. Meyer and others thought that even 300 years would not be enough to change human behavior.
Collin Freeman
2025-01-12 16:18:41 +0000 UTCOh, there is plenty of stuff in it they will like. And I thnk they really will dig the Captain and the Engeneer.
Sam Langanke
2025-01-12 16:16:34 +0000 UTCI'd have to disagree with eye opening. I just don't agree with him. But I agree that there's no reason you have to agree everything a contact creator thinks to enjoy their content.
Zack
2025-01-12 16:10:36 +0000 UTCThere’s a contradiction between ‘This movie is not very Trek-y’ and ‘Why did they do a Cold War allegory’? That’s what makes it Trek-y.
John M.
2025-01-12 16:04:34 +0000 UTCLol there’s literally no one else other than Josh and Alex who thinks that the addition of Colonel Worf is a complete fail. All you had to do was connect the dots to realize it wasn’t the character from TNG. It’s 80 years before TNG, TNG Worf’s name is literally said as “Worf, son of Mogh” multiple times, and even in our society there is a tradition of passing down family names. By naming him anything other than Worf, there would have been no evidence that he was an ancestor of the TNG character.
Column Meanie
2025-01-12 16:00:50 +0000 UTCOk, fine. You guys are going to hate DS9.
TomEmilioDavies
2025-01-12 16:00:13 +0000 UTCYour level of dislike for this film is a bit ridiculous. The Klingon make up is absolutely fine. Michael Dorn being Worf’s grandfather was absolutely intentional. I think you’ve just moved on and your hearts lie with TNG, which is entirely fine, it’s a better series.
Utterlee
2025-01-12 15:56:58 +0000 UTCAbout Kirk’s favorite author—unlike Picard, I can recall seeing Kirk read a book only once, when Spock gave him a copy of Charles Dickens’s “A Tale of Two Cities”—interesting if this movie had been full of Dickens quotes —“Bah, humbug, let the Klingons die!” —“Are there no prisons? Are there no workhouses? There’s one on Rura Penthe!!!!” —“No one is useless in this world who can learn to speak Klingon from a book in real time!” — “I hate the Klingons against reason, against promise, against peace, against hope, against happiness, against all discouragement that could be.” —“Never close your lips to those who have already changed shape twice.” —“Assassinating Chancellor Gorkon is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done.”
Aramis Calcutt
2025-01-12 15:49:33 +0000 UTCI am total fine with Alex' disinterest in the cold war. But he has to understand that in 11991 this wasn't history. It was history in the making. Gorbachev stepped down 19 days AFTER the release of the movie. The Soviet Union seized to exist 6 days after that.
Sam Langanke
2025-01-12 15:46:54 +0000 UTCI kind of like it when you guys hate something and you can explain in detail why with rational explanations. I like having different opinions. One of my biggest pet peeves is when I’m criticising something and the other person comes back with “you should just stop watching.” I’m sorry, no, that’s not a good answer for using your brains and discretion to evaluate something.
Aramis Calcutt
2025-01-12 15:41:09 +0000 UTCYES!!! Love for the Motion Picture uniforms. I always hated the thick woollen red uniforms.
Aramis Calcutt
2025-01-12 15:36:52 +0000 UTCIt was in his interactions seeing pieces of his own feelings reflected and taken to their logical conclusion in Valeris “you said it yourself”, Cartwright and Chang. Kirk’s inherent goodness was repulsed when he saw those things so explicit in others and it helped him deal with his own feelings in a more noble kirk-like way. Just like in ST-II the journey begins with Kirk in a bad place and ends with the Kirk we love.
Paul Hess
2025-01-12 15:29:08 +0000 UTCWell said. I think that’s why I watch them too; to see how I haven’t looked at it.
JP RFL
2025-01-12 15:25:19 +0000 UTCHighly recommend the uncut or director’s edition. There are a couple scenes that I feel add a little to it. A couple scenes don’t work unless they’re both in there.
JP RFL
2025-01-12 15:24:03 +0000 UTCCan you explain to me how Kirk grows in the movie? I’m in the camp of not believing that Kirk would have bigoted views towards Klingons in the first place but even if I put that aside than I’m still not clear what happens to him in this movie that helps him overcome that.
Richard Stone
2025-01-12 15:23:49 +0000 UTC(And yeah, I’m not going to defend the Rurapente stuff …. You could literally take a bathroom break for that whole part and the only interesting thing you would miss is hearing Morgan Sheppard’s cool voice and cadence)
Paul Hess
2025-01-12 15:14:25 +0000 UTC(4 more minutes in 😂) Alex’s complaint about the obviously bigoted characters Valaris, Adminral Cartwright, and Chang. Those are literary tools and deliberately obvious, to show three flavors of bigotry around Kirk’s struggle with his own bigotry. Will he fall into one of those holes, will he reflexively be a warrior like Chang, a bigot like Cartwright, or a silent resistor like Valaris, or will he find a way to rise above those human instincts and put his own life on the line to fight for peace and forgiveness. Just like your other favorite movie ST-II, ST-VI was about Kirk’s emotional journey and growth.
Paul Hess
2025-01-12 15:11:10 +0000 UTCI took Colonel Worf as it being Worf’s grandfather or ancestor that settled on Khitomer, tying it in to his family being on Khitomer when the Romulans attacked. It would make sense for Worf to be named after his grandfather. But the Scooby Doo scene cut at the end showed Colonel Worf at the conference. My assumption was that he stayed or came back to Khitomer.
JP RFL
2025-01-12 15:09:48 +0000 UTCI’m only 5 minutes in so I haven’t watched the discussion yet. Your intro skit is worth the price of admission it was priceless, I’d be OK if you put the mic down till February and that’s all I got. I was disappointed during your reaction for a different reason than most of the comments I’ve read. There seemed to be only passing recognition of the movie in the context of Kirk’s emotional journey after a lifetime of fighting Klingons, losing his only son who he had just found out about, and his deep unreasoning hatred and bigotry against them as a race regardless of individuals. This was of course a deliberate context in the movie and they hit us over the head with it many times (“if there is to be a peace between our races, people like us will have the hardest time living in it”). As far as I’m concerned the entire movie rotates about Kirk’s emotional journey, quite explicitly, and all the scenes were built around that skeleton. I look forward to the discussion but wanted to write about this before getting clouded by hearing everyone else’s takes.
Paul Hess
2025-01-12 15:02:22 +0000 UTCHe WAS famous. That'ts why they don't recognize Christian Slater and you don't know his name
Sam Langanke
2025-01-12 14:55:28 +0000 UTCFurther proof that people don't always support channels that always agree with them. I found your reaction and discussion to Undiscovered Country to be eye-opening. This is why I watch your videos... for that perspective that I don't have. It's hard for me to separate not just nostalgia but generational zeitgeist when evaluating film and TV. You guys, not having lived through the Cold War and its (alleged) end, have a very different perspective and I think your perspective has value.
Darin Wagner
2025-01-12 14:54:08 +0000 UTCThey never had to watch 'Sex and the City' with their girlfriends. That's for sure. Ah, the advantages of youth. LOL
Sam Langanke
2025-01-12 14:52:42 +0000 UTCI didn’t contribute to the take s but here’s mine . I actually loved where I saw it and it’s one of the movies I like . It was just a good movie that’s all
Steve the greeeen hand
2025-01-12 14:50:42 +0000 UTCCould t agree more
Steve the greeeen hand
2025-01-12 14:47:01 +0000 UTCIt’s stated by the Klingon ambassador at the beginning of Star Trek IV that the Federation was negotiating a peace treaty with the Klingons when Kruge did what he did. Also, the young officer who awakens Sulu in the shadows is a famous actor. There’s a longer version of this movie, by the way, which has Kirk’s speech at the end being longer, expressing more of the theme. Also, Chang’s comment during the trial — “Don’t wait for the translation” — came from a real trial during the Cuban Missile Crisis.
Geoffrey Linehan
2025-01-12 14:46:05 +0000 UTCTo respond to your question about my comment, it breaks down like this: everything up to and including the guards speech before entering Rura Penthe: S. Everything until they get beamed back to the Enterprise: C. The final act: A. Final score: A.
John M.
2025-01-12 14:39:36 +0000 UTCI might have felt what you felt. This comes from the perspective of a 49 year old fan who began really with the fourth movie in 1986-87. This sixth film seemed polished visually. There’s a technology too reminiscent of TNG. The dialogue may have been too pat. Single lines. With exceptions, the scenes were not classic Trek moments. They didn’t stand out as memorable.
Geoffrey Linehan
2025-01-12 14:14:20 +0000 UTCI think that’s what happened real world especially with ST5
Darren Seal
2025-01-12 14:03:20 +0000 UTCGood chat. Listening while on the elliptical and when you got to, “Chang is the worst villain” I was so annoyed I tripled my speed. :)
John M.
2025-01-12 14:03:04 +0000 UTCHaha. You guys are a hoot.
Darin Wagner
2025-01-12 13:47:19 +0000 UTCHuh? The mystery was in both cuts.
ShazD
2025-01-12 13:26:41 +0000 UTCFirst off, Josh is crushing it with the nostalgia factor - seeing this as a teenager was mindblowing and rewatching it with you, did I change my mind? No. There are a few weird edits and clunky lines but I still love it with all my heart. I could go with the Rura Penthe sequence losing a good 5 minutes but I don't hate it. The Klingon racism I think also is 100% valid, on-brand for the time, and a good way to flesh out things that one could have assumed but hadn't been explicitly stated on screen before. I wonder if 4.5 years of TNG leading up to this and having Worf and a more "neutral" at least Klingon-Federation relationship have tainted some views. Clearly the Klingons were entirely reinvented for the film franchise and since then, we've seen them get ganked by Vger, kill everyone on a science station and Kirk's son, and then chase the Enterprise through the galactic barrier to try and kill Kirk. Why wouldn't he absolutely fucking hate them? "Let them die" all the way, I think it's the most believable line of the movie.
Darin Starr
2025-01-12 13:24:32 +0000 UTCI’m curious to know why Alex complains about the ‘Scooby-Doo’ mystery when that aspect was in the directors cut rather than the theatrical cut you’ve watched
Jordan Cooper
2025-01-12 13:16:34 +0000 UTCI was fully expecting the start if this to be along the lines of: Josh: “Alex?” Alex: “I prefer it dark.” Josh: “So why do you have a light shining on your face?” Seriously, watch the original scene again… 🤣
Brian Dunleavy
2025-01-12 13:03:06 +0000 UTCBrilliant skit at the beginning love it lol Also could I ask, is some of the loss of excitement over the movie due to moving on to and being more fully invested in tng? So by the time you’ve got to 6 it’s oh and here’s the og’s, ok
LonghillAndy
2025-01-12 13:02:53 +0000 UTC
