UNCUT REACTION - Star Trek V: The Final Frontier (1989) PLEASE SEE EDIT IN DESCRIPTION
Added 2024-03-17 14:00:10 +0000 UTC2ND EDIT: NEW fixed version has now been posted to Patreon. Go use that.
EDIT: There was an editing error at 1:25:54 of the timecode and our reaction jumps to what should be 1:27:00 of the movie, causing our reaction to be about a minute ahead for the remainder. It is being fixed now and will have to be reuploaded, but you will want to adjust your sync at that time to watch this version.
We wanted to say thank you to everyone who supported us recently after CBS blocked what should’ve been our biggest video of the month by signing up for our new $1 tier, so this full uncut reaction is available to ALL Patron tiers!
If you’re new to our uncut reactions, be aware you will need your own copy of the film to sync up with our video. A timecode is included as well as occasional movie visuals to assist with that.
If you enjoy watching along with us, you can do this for all of our reactions by upgrading to the $5 or $10 tier.
Not your thing? No worries, there will be a YouTube edit coming of this reaction as well as a discussion for Audience Cut in April!
Comments
Okay, but the frontier isn't Earth. Earth and its local group of colonies should have (and do have) patrol ships. Not to mention we see a couple ships in drydock. One Miranda, and the Excelsior. There are other ships. It's a plot contrivance that wasn't needed, and had already gotten old by this time. There was absolutely no need for the story to be written this way, at all. The only reason it's written that way is "HUR HUR THE SHIP IS BROKED. ... FUNNY!?" It really wants you to find the ship being broken HI-LAR-IOUS. Also, listen to us try to tell a serious story about finding God, family, loss, and a Biblically inspired journey across the galaxy to find the source of all creation. ... Also, veiled fart jokes, admiral Bob, go climb a rock, and "I could use a shower." "Yes." Because these things all tonally mesh and aren't taken from a couple different scripts mushed into one. Yes, in TOS the frontier is much bigger, and the ships are quite fewer. But, again, this isn't the frontier. This is Earth, at the height of a cold military-conflict with the Klingon Empire. There are going to be other ships around. Frigates, light cruisers, starships. Something. If you want to have the "Enterprise is the only ship in range" thing, easy. Set the shore-leave stuff on another M-class planet. Have the Enterprise on deep patrol. Everyone gets picked up, and they go to Nimbus 3. Doesn't change your budget, fixes the issue. Alternatively, don't ham up the issues with the Enterprise, send the ship without having to clarify that the Enterprise is "a disaster." And have issues arise on route to the mission, forcing some drama or tension to be built surrounding the mission.
Steven Johnson
2024-03-26 22:44:06 +0000 UTCcanon star trek*
Evan Guthrie
2024-03-26 17:55:14 +0000 UTCDon’t disagree. Only talking TOS films.
John M.
2024-03-26 16:21:32 +0000 UTCNah, check out Discovery and their helmets and silly spinning little attack craft.
Derek Orr
2024-03-26 15:34:44 +0000 UTCThe only ship/commander thing actually doesn’t bother me. TOS and TOS movies have a distinctly different feel about starfleet and the size of the fleet, Vs TNG era where things get silly with thousands of ships. It feels more like the frontier, when there are like a dozen or maybe 2 dozen front line capital ships. It makes them more special and less disposable feeling
Derek Orr
2024-03-26 15:33:02 +0000 UTCIts not like Picard/Stewart is any better with the silly action hero stuff
Derek Orr
2024-03-26 15:27:50 +0000 UTCNah
Jovet
2024-03-21 23:04:21 +0000 UTCI suppose. Not ILM, but OK. B-rate, but gets the point across. Shatner had a lot of production issues that weren’t his fault too.
Chris S.
2024-03-18 12:48:02 +0000 UTCThere are redeemable moments in this movie. I think the overall concept is flawed from the start, and I always thought that the humor was a little juvenile and overboard (for this crew) but still fun. The FX were B-rate, since ILM was not available. My favorite and most emotional scene is McCoy and Spock’s past Sybok shows them. My God, THAT was good. The moment McCoy says “Oh my God don’t do this to me!” And the way the camera moves in on him, and the desperation in his voice… Dude, I get goosebumps and tears every time. Imagine having to relive that type of moment again? And Spock seeing that Sarek rejected him when he was born. There are great moments, but overall a C- to me.
Chris S.
2024-03-18 12:45:41 +0000 UTCNot my favorite, but still more cohesive than Up the Long Ladder!
THE LORE!!!
2024-03-17 22:08:48 +0000 UTCThe effects got a bad rep at the time but viewed 35 years later it really doesn’t show as much. All special effects have aged.
Jon1701
2024-03-17 22:07:42 +0000 UTCI thought I was going crazy with the time jump on the Shaun Connery (Shakaree) planet. Love Trek V. Doesn’t deserve the hate. It ain’t perfect but it’s grown so much on me over the years
Jon1701
2024-03-17 22:05:33 +0000 UTC"What year was this?" If I hadn't already planned on giving my "1989" essay, this would have sealed it! STAR TREK V was not a good movie, but even if it had been, it would still have had to fight for its place in the most amazing movie Summer ever...from a quantity point of view...quality wise...maybe in the top 10 most amazing movie summers...so still pretty big. The whole year of 1989 was incredible...but that summer was just...damn! What if I told you there was a year you could see movies directed by John Hughes, Tim Burton, James Cameron, Steven Speilberg (in collaboration with George Lucas), Spike Lee, Ron Howard, Richard Donner, Ivan Reitman, Rob Reiner, John G. Avildsen, Brian De Palma, Arthur Hiller, Joe Johnston, Peter Weir, and um...William Shatner... ...and see movies starring actors the likes of John Candy, Steve Martin, Harrison Ford, Sean Connery, Richard Pryor, Gene Wilder, Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd, Sigourney Weaver, Rick Moranis, MIchael Keaton, Jack Nicholson, Mel Gibson, Danny Glover, Joe Pesci, Patrick Swayze, Samuel L. Jackson, Tom Hanks, Billy Crystal, Meg Ryan, Robin Williams, and um...Weird Al Yankovic... ...As well as see a brand new Roger Rabbit cartoon short in theaters? Wouldn't that be pretty amazing? How crazy would it be if I said it wasn't just over a year you could see all those movies but just over the Summer? It happened though! It was the legendary summer of 1989! Now I'm not ready to definitively say 1989 was THE year, but it's a contender. I will say that Summer '89 was the most amazing movie Summer to have movies to go to! I'm not necessarily talking quality here but the quantity and sheer glut of films to look forward to. When I mention these movies, a lot of the franchise films, they are going to be at or near bottom entries for the franchise, but I ask you to take into account these movies not for the specific film but for how iconic the franchise was as *a whole.* It was still something to get excited about before seeing no matter how we felt after seeing it. Plus, a few franchises arguably had *their best* entries that summer! Then the stand alone films we got, so many of them became instant classics! Others became cult hits, some pretty big in intervening years, others modest but still loyal. These are the movies we got just for the 1989 Summer season (May - August): Tim Burton's Batman (Batman was so *HUGE* that year!) Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade Ghostbusters II Lethal Weapon 2 License To Kill (James Bond XVI) Star Trek V: The Final Frontier The Karate Kid, Part III Honey, I Shrunk the Kids! (Which showed with the new Roger Rabbit cartoon short "Tummy Trouble") James Cameron's The Abyss Dead Poets Society Spike Lee's Do The Right Thing Roadhouse Lock Up Great Balls of Fire Casualties Of War Hear No Evil, See No Evil When Harry Met Sally Uncle Buck Parenthood Weekend At Bernies Earth Girls Are Easy UHF Turner & Hooch Little Monsters Millenium (One of those very obscure cult films, but if you like time travel movies that take their "time" telling the story, I recommend this movie!) The Return Of Swamp Thing Friday the 13th Part VIII: Jason Takes Manhattan A Nightmare On Elm Street 5: The Dream Child That was *just the summer!* If we take into account the rest of the year there was also: Back to the Future, Part II The Little Mermaid (the animated one, the birth of the Disney Renaissance!) Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure Major League The Dream Team (A couple months before Michael Keaton says "You wanna get nuts? Let's get nuts!" in Batman, he was in a movie where he was a mental patient.) Dream A Little Dream (Coming out about a month apart from each other, both this movie and The Dream Team had the song "Dream A Little Dream of Me" played in them.) Heathers Cyborg The Burbs Look Who's Talking Three Fugitives (A seriously funny and underrated Martin Short/Nick Nolte film!) National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation Field Of Dreams My Left Foot Born on the 4th of July Harlem Nights (Eddie Murphy's gangster extravaganza flick, along with Murphy you get the legends Richard Pryor, Redd Fox, and Della Reese. Sadly it was panned by critics and considered the beginning of Eddie Murphy's fall from mega stardom. The saddest thing is while I dont think its great, I think it's a pretty good movie!) Police Academy 6: City Under Siege (Since the release of the first Police Academy movie in 1984, we got a sequel each and every year for the rest of the 80's. For movie critics it was torture. For average movie goers it was something to see and, more or less, we were entertained. As the 80's closed out, so did the tradition of getting a new Police Academy movie every year. This was the last one to be released except for a few years later when Mission To Moscow came out and even the most forgiving of Police Academy fans had to accept that movie was crap.) K-9 (Now of course Tom Hanks can act circles around Jim Belushi, but when it comes to cop and dog partner movies, K-9 in my opinion is so far superior to Turner & Hooch!) Deep Star Six & Leviathan (1989 was the year for under the sea adventure/action/horror. Deep Star Six and Leviathan, considered inferior films, came out earlier in the year, then later we got The Abyss and The Little Mermaid.) Lean On Me Glory Driving Miss Daisy (3 Morgan Freeman movies in 1 year! If that's all I had for 1989 it would still need to be considered as a great year!) In October we got, Halloween 5: The Revenge of Michael Myers. So weak sauce as it was, still the BIG 3 in 80's slasher pics all represented in 1989! The Wizard (Nintendo was about to release one of its biggest games ever, Super Mario Bros. 3, and decided to celebrate it by making a movie that was a 90 minute Nintendo commercial. I'm convinced it happened like this... Someone in the board room said "It can't just all be a commercial for 90 minutes, doesn't it have to be somewhat a movie?" Then another executive who had just rented the Sylvester Stallone movie "Over the Top" and had the VHS tape in front of him just pointed to it and said: "Just copy this for the framework of the movie part..." Because change out video games for arm wrestling and you've got pretty much the same movie. And they are both awesome!) Tango and Cash (released at the end of December, the last big budget action movie of the decade, and it closes out the decade as one of the 80's-est action movies ever!) I mean, what a year! We had The Little Mermaid, an Indiana Jones movie, Michael Keaton as Batman, A movie featuring Super Mario Bros... how could a year like that miss?!! ... Wait...never mind! We also had some very geek-out worthy television going on this year too! Of course, Star Trek: The Next Generation was going on, BUT in Fall 1989 it entered its third season, you are about to see why that means something and I'm so excited for that! We had a live action Superboy TV series running in syndication, produced by Ilya Salkind, one of the producers of the first 3 Superman movies. The Superboy series, for being so restricted by its budget still, eventually, started putting out some great episodes. The cartoon series Ducktales was popular at the time and added a new character that year, Gizmo Duck. Premiering him on a network television special in a 2 hour movie (which became 5 episodes of the regular series) on NBC on Easter Sunday. Following the Ducktales movie NBC aired another made-for-TV-movie that turned out to be the pilot episode of a new series... *Quantum Leap!* The series debuted in 1989 and has since taken its place as one of the best time travel shows ever! We also got reacquainted with some old friends: The TV movie Bionic Showdown: The Six Million Dollar Man and Bionic Woman aired that year. With Lee Majors and Lindsey Wagner reprising their roles from their respective series. Also airing: The Trial of the Incredible Hulk. The second in a trilogy of made-for-TV-movies that had Billy Bixby and Lou Ferrigno reprise their roles as David Bruce Banner and The Incredible Hulk, this particular movie also introduced us to a new character, Matt Murdock, also known as Daredevil. It was the first live-action appearance of Daredevil! It also had the very first Stan Lee cameo in a Marvel movie! Also, in the Summer of 1989, you could have caught the airing of the pilot episode of a new sitcom, it was called "The Seinfeld Chronicles". The show returned with more episodes the following summer but had been renamed to simply "Seinfeld". (Synthesized base music here.) Then on December 17, 1989 there was this little Christmas special that aired... "Simpsons Roasting On an Open Fire" and it was the first aired episode of *The Simpsons* series proper! I believe this show has gone on to have some cultural relevance... Trying to just keep this in the realm of entertainment and not into things like politics or historical events or anything. But I mean it's not like something happened like *The Berlin Wall came down in 1989...* Oh wait...it did! To try and mic drop on how good a year this was...In video games... Both the Sega Genesis and the original Nintendo Gameboy were released in 1989 and in stores by Christmas!
Drawkcabi
2024-03-17 21:59:05 +0000 UTCPatron Takes? This is the first Star Trek film I've seen you watch since I signed up, so I'm not sure how it works
Ee'char
2024-03-17 21:35:31 +0000 UTCWell, I guess it's better than I remembered, but it's still not good. I saw this in the theater opening night with a packed house. Everyone was loving it for a while, then the odd pacing and weak story got the audience acting restless and bored. My friends knew someone who'd worked on the movie (in costuming or sound or something), and he was there that night; he walked up to us afterward and said, "Pretty weak, huh?" So there was general disappointment all around. The movie is entertaining enough, but when you start examining it and asking questions, it really falls apart.
Jeff
2024-03-17 21:25:23 +0000 UTCI always thought Sarek at around 1:13 said "sub human" when he holds the baby Spock. But I guess he actually says "so human"...which for a Vulcan, especially Sarek, is about the same thing.
Greg Quinn
2024-03-17 21:21:31 +0000 UTCwait did i hear the satellite screaming as the klingons destroyed it?
Narnman
2024-03-17 21:13:04 +0000 UTCGreat, considering Shatner had to heavily coax Harve Bennett in coming back to produce this film. Bennett didn't like the storyline, either.
Collin Freeman
2024-03-17 21:05:34 +0000 UTCWhoot a movie I own. This was the first time I put a DVD into the machine for about 3 years. Lets go.
Lt Dan I scream
2024-03-17 20:58:29 +0000 UTCWhich I heard him blame on Harve Bennet.
Mike Rogers
2024-03-17 20:43:55 +0000 UTCAs always I like watching the weaker entries with you guys because I always find something to like about them. This was no exception.
David Wayne Fox
2024-03-17 20:21:53 +0000 UTCUsually those copyright strikes are automatic/robots scanning media for verboten product.
Jovet
2024-03-17 20:16:06 +0000 UTCIn the spirit of the great Gwen DeMarco (Tawny Madison): Whomever wrote this movie [about a great barrier at the center of the galaxy] should be shot. For sheer incompetence.
Jovet
2024-03-17 20:15:02 +0000 UTCThe whole plot is too idiotic for me to believe this could even actually be canon.
Jovet
2024-03-17 20:11:23 +0000 UTCThe probe used as target practice was Pioneer 10. Just so you know.
Ee'char
2024-03-17 20:10:20 +0000 UTCYour comparison with going to a concert of an old band is spot on. You expect they won't move much and the voices will be out of tune. But it would still be the band. And not all of the show would be great but two, three songs will still give you goosebumps.
Sam Langanke
2024-03-17 20:05:36 +0000 UTCGood point
Collin Freeman
2024-03-17 19:48:41 +0000 UTCGood comment, Column Meanie. I should have made my comment with more clarity: at the moment in the story when they say they are going to find God at Sha-ka-Ri, as a viewer I know from that moment forward we are not going to find God in this or any other Star Trek film. I felt cheated and deflated at that point.
Collin Freeman
2024-03-17 19:48:08 +0000 UTCAgreed
Collin Freeman
2024-03-17 19:45:06 +0000 UTCLooking forward to years from now when we can debate our ranked lists. :D I have this one 11th of 13.
John M.
2024-03-17 19:44:12 +0000 UTCIts not good. But somehow not as bad as I remembered. I wonder if the Klingons were talked into helping off camera by the idea of A) Spock firing means he got revenge for Sybok... very Klingon. B) Killing Kirk is great but killing a god? Thats hard to pass up!
Julie Carter
2024-03-17 19:37:35 +0000 UTCAs you mentioned, even bad Star Trek can still be enjoyed. I don't think V is bad though, considering the fantastic character stuff we get
James Bottas
2024-03-17 19:07:44 +0000 UTCPersonally I thought Shatner's direction felt like theatre directing, which he had done several times before helming this film. That's not a criticism exactly, just that I was more aware of the camera placement and blocking than with the other films. Film directing is (in part) about making those 2 elements transparent.
Numinous2019
2024-03-17 18:44:23 +0000 UTCShatner’s idea wasn’t about finding God necessarily as his interests were more about how people like the Baker’s could influence a great mass of people. That was what fascinated Shatner more. Looking for “God” was just the end of the road. I think what would have helped the story is if Sybok had been able to have some sort of mysterious power that was somehow given to him by the creature, a power that even makes the viewer go “is this a supernatural thing?”, only for it all to have been a sham by the godlike creature for the purpose of escaping the planet. All of those pieces are suggested by the film, but the script is such trash it doesn’t really flesh any of those ideas out. (I still love the movie though)
Column Meanie
2024-03-17 18:42:47 +0000 UTCRe: the shoot him! scene. If you remember, Vulcan hearts are not in the same place as humans, so if Spock had shot Sybok in the chest, it likely would not have killed him.
tyranusfan
2024-03-17 18:35:03 +0000 UTCAs much as Bill Shatner was disliked by certain castmates, they all found his directing to be at least decent if not good. I've heard interviews from Walter Koenig and George Takei who have said he was very encouraging to the actors, even overly complimentary. James Doohan even thought Shatner was okay, although Doohan hated the scene where Scotty bumps his head on the celing and falls unconscious.
Collin Freeman
2024-03-17 18:33:02 +0000 UTCThe plot of this movie made it doomed from the start. Regardless of personal beliefs, you just know they are not going to find God. Shatner got the idea for the plot from watching news reports about Jim and Tammy-Faye Baker at the time. The character of Sybok was interesting, and having an emotional Vulcan from Spock's past made a nice antagonist, but the whole half-brother and cult leader-thing was over complicated and unnecessary. And I cringe every time that Romulan woman is on screen - her acting is so bad and the dubbed over voice doesn't help. And the humor was overdone - too many one-liners. I think they were trying to capture some of the humor aspects of Star Trek IV, but it doesn't work for me.
Collin Freeman
2024-03-17 18:28:39 +0000 UTCI'm glad you guys liked this one. I've always liked it, despite it's problems. little trivia: Sean Connery was first offered the role of Sybok, but refused because he had other commitments.
Monty Crawford
2024-03-17 18:20:41 +0000 UTCI've never really cared for this one, but watching it with you guys was excellent.
Crush
2024-03-17 18:15:28 +0000 UTCI love this movie for what it is: a Star Trek movie and a second to last chance to see all these beloved characters together on an adventure. Pros: cinematography is top notch in places, Jerry Goldsmith’s score soars, De Kelley’s acting in the McCoy’s father scene, the very underrated performance by Lawrence Luckinbill (Lucille Ball’s son-in-law), and of course the wonderful moments of the trio. The cons: the special effects which, due to unavailability of ILM, were god-awful at times, especially compared to the other films, and the climax suffers from behind the scenes drama of them running out of money to finish the way it was supposed to. Check out other fan made effects that show how great this film could have looked (and still could if given a proper director’s cut ala TMP). And the script doesn’t serve the story very well. Still, TFF is one of the most epic and ambitious of the films and doesn’t deserve the hate it gets.
Column Meanie
2024-03-17 18:09:26 +0000 UTCI'm surprised you didn't notice the opening score was not from the original TOS score or even the last few films: it was the TMP score, similar to what is used in the TNG opening and closing credits.
Collin Freeman
2024-03-17 18:08:32 +0000 UTCThanks for pointing that out.
Collin Freeman
2024-03-17 18:05:27 +0000 UTCLet me start by saying opening up the full V reaction to everyone is a really classy move. I'm also really glad you ended up liking V. That being said, in comparison VI is gonna knock you on your ass.
JD Nevesytrof
2024-03-17 18:04:04 +0000 UTCThis one isn’t as bad as many say imo. Not the best movie but a very trek ending that could have been out of TOS. It also has some fun bits. And some other strong bits, such as Mac Coys backstory. The ideas in here were good. The execution didn’t always hit but I liked it better than several upcoming trek films. It still felt like TOS.
Crankygrandma
2024-03-17 17:59:14 +0000 UTCFirst, a little trivia - The admiral that spoke to Kirk on the bridge was played by producer, Harve Bennett. If you let yourself have fun with this film it can be enjoyable - that's my positive! The scenes between The Trio are the best part of the film, and Luckinbill gives a good performance. They did not have ILM for the effects in this film, so opted for a smaller company that was ultimately out of their depth. My guilty pleasure scene: rocketing up the turbolift shaft and going past deck 52 twice!
David M
2024-03-17 17:55:51 +0000 UTCBetween season 5 episodes 9 and 10 I believe
Dion James Pitman
2024-03-17 17:50:56 +0000 UTCHere we go ... off to planet Sean Connery.
Collin Freeman
2024-03-17 17:49:07 +0000 UTCThey say success has many architects, failure only one. Shatner takes the blame for this one, but leaving aside the story idea (which was his), his direction is good. This marks a return to a more classic TOS feel than the first four films, which actually hurts it a little, since the cast and storytelling had grown since the 60s. But, this film gave us a look at the Big Three as a family, directly addressing it for once without it being a life/death scenario. The campfire scenes are charming. The idea of a religious zealot coming out of the desert and committing terrorists acts was about 12 years ahead of its time, if only it had been treated more seriously. (The film definitely suffers from a studio attitude of "the last one was funny and made money, make this one funny too!") Overall, not the best of the TOS films, but it only held its honor of "worst ST film" for while before, well...suffice to say, worse have been made since.
tyranusfan
2024-03-17 17:37:47 +0000 UTCStar Trek was originally approved by Lucille Ball and Desilu studios, so they open the film with her son-in-law and one of the actors from the original series episode "Spectre of the Gun". I don't remember having bad opinions about Shatner's direction as compared to it just being a terrible story that HE approved.
Chtphr Rrr
2024-03-17 17:19:38 +0000 UTCIf this film were just a slice of life of Kirk, Bones and Spock camping, it would be the best film or episode in the whole franchise, alas, what does God need with a starship indeed
Talon Karrde
2024-03-17 17:12:02 +0000 UTCAfter going through seasons 1 and 2 of TNG with you, perhaps I've judged ST5 too harshly 😅
SinocTheHodgeheg
2024-03-17 17:06:19 +0000 UTCYeah, when the TOS movies suck they still have the charm of the old cast to fall back on. As much as this isn't my favorite, there is no denying that watching the big three be friends is great stuff.
Steven Johnson
2024-03-17 17:06:11 +0000 UTCThe camping scenes I loved so much, built even more character. Some of the special effects I felt "odd", (not by ILM this time) Having this premise set up I think it would have always been hard for writers to come up with a satisfying conclusion in this physical reality we all find ourselves in. Having watched this again with you since the original viewing, and as we all grow up trying to work out what life is all about, its "ok". Unfortunately is does pale I think in comparison to the other films, especially the GREAT next one, the Undiscovered Country. . no love or hate of this film, it is what it is, and we all have deep secrets that need to come to the surface to resolve, especially now in 2024. Perhaps all the answers are all within us if we take a deeper look...
Andrew Bassey
2024-03-17 17:05:01 +0000 UTCAlso of note: World-famous actress Lucille Ball, as CEO, green-lit TOS at her studio, Desilu, in the mid-1960's. Lawrence Luckinbill (Sybok in ST V) was who married Lucie Arnez, DAUGHTER of Desi Arnez and Lucille Ball. And the Star Trek back-story link adventures continue......
Rhett Coates
2024-03-17 17:03:21 +0000 UTCSo that's what happened
Mike Rogers
2024-03-17 17:01:19 +0000 UTCLawrence Luckinbill as Sybok...... is a very interesting casting choice. As others noted here, Shatner wanted Sean Connery for the role but he was on another project. But Connery DID make it into ST V in a small way: the name of the planet they were going to was named after him, with an alteration: Sean Connery became Sha Ka Ree. That is actually true back-story with this film.
Rhett Coates
2024-03-17 17:01:05 +0000 UTCThat is a perplexing issue here - there is NOTHING we (I) have seen that might even approach a copyright issue, as I am watching a host of Patreon reviewers on various Star Trek series' and all of them appear to present far more content of the episodes and/or movies than Josh and Alex do. What's up with this mess? C'mon, Paramount: you are getting TREMENDOUS advertisement for one of your greatest assets. Let it be.
Rhett Coates
2024-03-17 16:54:41 +0000 UTCThere was an editing error. Thanks for letting us know. At 1:25:54:13 our reaction jumps to what should be 1:27:00:04. It is being fixed now and will have to be reuploaded, but that is how you would want to fix it for this version.
Josh (Target Audience)
2024-03-17 16:52:25 +0000 UTCThis movie’s shoddy execution aside (Shatner’s just horrendous), the main reason this one doesn’t work for me is that it’s the one TOS film that pretends they’re still in their 30s. Kirk free soloing in the 60s show? Would have been far-fetched but awesome. Here it’s absurd. On the bright side, of the four Star Trek movies I consider bad, this one is the most rewatchable, in a Sunday hangover, on in the background sort of way.
John M.
2024-03-17 16:46:15 +0000 UTCI believe Star Trek VI released mid-season 5 of TNG, so that would be early next year on current pace
Josh (Target Audience)
2024-03-17 16:44:42 +0000 UTCThis film was.... not very good. The plot was preposterous, the acting mostly uninspired, and the (plot) fallout forgotten about. Can't we just forget it exists at all?
Jovet
2024-03-17 16:40:31 +0000 UTCI'm not sure whether I have a slightly different cut of the movie, or whether y'all took a break and didn't get the edit timing right when you resumed, but right around the time they meet 'god', I suddenly found myself out of sync with you by about a solid minute.
Jeff Cornell
2024-03-17 16:32:38 +0000 UTCJerry Goldsmith's score in this is delightful. I love Laurence Luckinbill's performance as Sybok. This movie is like God mocking Shatner, though. - He wanted Sean Connery for Sybok, he couldn't get him. - He wanted ILM to do the effects, they were busy. - He wanted a huge fight at the end with rock monsters and a planet that looked like Hell. He got reused optical effects of "God" making Yosemite Sam noises. Shatner has admitted in his book that at the time he was afraid he may have actually killed the film franchise with this movie, and not to spoil anything, but the film's failure resulted in a dramatic cut back in cost on the production for the sixth film. It was only thanks to the fact that Star Trek Vi was marking Star Trek's 25th anniversary that it was made at all. Harve Bennet was looking to completely recast and do an origin story set primarily at Starfleet Academy on the lower budget, but the TOS cast, thankfully, rebelled against that idea. 32:19 I'm just going to say it, this is where my first major problem with this film comes in... "Other ships, yes, but no experienced commanders." Okay, so, uh... Put Kirk on another ship. And why the Hell don't we have other commanders? This is Earth, we should have dozens of captains and starships near the Sol system on patrol. This made sense in TMP, because the term they used was "interception range" because the Enterprise had the newest, fastest, engines at that time. She could get to V'ger faster than any other ship in the fleet. This is even hurt by the fact that they reused footage from Star Trek IV and we can literally see the Excelsior is parked in space dock next to the Enterprise... Put Kirk and co on the Excelsior! Leave the Edsel-prise in space dock until they can give it an oil change, for crying out loud! 34:50 Why is that thing broken? The SHIP is supposedly broken... Why is the logbook broken? That's not part of the ship! ... I never understood that. It makes Starfleet look like everything is garbage in this time period or something. 42:12 No offense to Nichelle, but this is like having grandma strip off her clothes, like... Come the Hell on. 10 or 15 years earlier? Sure. Grannie doing a fan dance... Ugh. 1:05:42 How did he get up there to get the boots? WTF movie!? 1:06:27 Just so we're clear, the Enterprise A has 23 decks according to the official specs. So uh... When we see the ship from the outside there should be a skyscraper stuck on the ship somewhere to account for this stupid goddamn gag.... I'm not bitter. 1:17:25 Edith, David, the original Enterprise. Shatner has it all flash across his face for that one moment. The one thing people are often so wrong about is that Shatner is a bad actor, he's not. He's a star, and he has some moments of absolute brilliance in his career. 1:20:32 So... Sha'Ka'Ree is our sun, as seen through a different light spectrum. So, uh... They're landing on the sun, in this movie. 1:29:37 It's Santee Clause! 1:34:54 Star Trek V is actually the origin story for Yosemite Sam. Ooooooooh, I hate that rabbit! 1:42:37 Ah, that emotional whiplash was worth it. I was waiting for that one. People will often say that Shatner got screwed on the budget, but the movie had a bigger budget than 2 and 3 combined, and was the most expensive movie in the TOS films after TMP. Shatner did not manage his money properly. There was a camera shot cut from the movie that cost some obscene amount like 250k to setup and shoot. Absolutely insane. Walter Koenig barely holds his contempt in for Shatner. If you watch the scene on the bridge near the beginning when Kirk is giving his briefing. Look closely as Kirk passes by Koenig. The look on Walter's face is one of pure disdain. They really make Sulu and Chekov out to be boobs in their first scene... The navigator and the helms officer get lost... HAR HAR HAR. Well. With all that said... One left with the TOS cast, guys. The end of an era comes in... What, six months, maybe? At the current rate of TNG's run that is.
Steven Johnson
2024-03-17 16:18:22 +0000 UTCThis is my favorite "Star Trek" movie! I say "Star Trek" because it is a return to TOS. The Motion Picture and Wrath of Khan were quite divergent from the "Formula" of TOS. Then TMP came out, I remember people saying "Well, that was different" and were disappointed. The same with Khan, but in that case the departure was great. Something different. The Search for Spock was not as popular, but as stated here, it was more Trek like. The Voyage Home came out and brought in a whole new audience that had never seen Trek. It was shown in schools and libraries because of the environmental message. When STV came out, millions were expecting a direct sequel to Voyage Home, but Shatner delivered a movie version of TOS. The movie was colorful, action packed, had points to ponder, focused on the Big Three instead of an ensemble, cheezy special effects. It was great!!! Had this been the first Trek movie, I think it would have had a very different reception and been praised as a movie version of Star Trek.
Jim Grant
2024-03-17 15:50:19 +0000 UTCSo a representative signed up and copyright reported your video or something? Don't they have anything better to do than mess with teachers?
Eric Wilson
2024-03-17 15:45:06 +0000 UTCParamount executives wanted a good deal of humour in this movie, after the success of T.V.H. Shatner had to include that in a story that didn't suit much humour. This doesn't excuse just how broad and half-baked most of the jokes are though.
Numinous2019
2024-03-17 15:32:54 +0000 UTCThose rocket boots are the most non-star trek tech in the entire franchise
Evan Guthrie
2024-03-17 15:29:49 +0000 UTCWill do : )
StonyD
2024-03-17 15:21:34 +0000 UTCThis was also my first ST movie in a theater. II through IV I saw at a drive in
tyranusfan
2024-03-17 15:21:01 +0000 UTCPlease comment this on the Patron takes so we can use it in the discussion video
Josh (Target Audience)
2024-03-17 15:18:09 +0000 UTCA great deal went wrong, not all of it Shatner's fault. The script writer (David Loughery) said one of the story problems was that Kirk & crew get dragged along on someone else's quest, so they themselves don't drive the story. Luckinbill is probably the film's biggest asset. It was also refreshing at the time that Sybock wasn't a villain, just a misguided, but ultimately well-meaning character. Good to have Jerry Goldsmith back.
Numinous2019
2024-03-17 15:15:19 +0000 UTCI have said it many times and will repeat it here: STAR TREK V The Final Frontier is William Shatner's love-letter to what he remembers TOS being. Crossing the Galactic Barrier, fist-fight down on the planet, fighting a God under an alien-hued sky, focus on The Big Three main characters, etc. This is an episode of STAR TREK The Original 1960's series with a movie budget. No more, no less.
StonyD
2024-03-17 15:13:24 +0000 UTCLFG! Happy Sunday everyone 🖖
Matthew
2024-03-17 15:03:55 +0000 UTCHmmm marshmelons
SinocTheHodgeheg
2024-03-17 14:40:01 +0000 UTCStar Trek V: William Shatner's ego. I still like the movie but its no Genesis trilogy or Star Trek VI.
SetsunaYuki
2024-03-17 14:38:26 +0000 UTCOh ok. Derp.
Michael Nemo
2024-03-17 14:36:24 +0000 UTCFirst one I saw in theaters and I didn't like it, even as a kid. It deserved to be "the worst Star Trek movie" for as long as it did, but it's gotten a redemption over the years. Did it age well, did they go back and edit it? No. Folks just made a bunch of wayyyy worse Star Trek movies.
Juan Tutrífor
2024-03-17 14:27:57 +0000 UTCMichael, you’re at the $5 tier you get access to everything
Josh (Target Audience)
2024-03-17 14:27:21 +0000 UTCI'm confused about the tier thing. I have access to this Final Frontier reaction but made no change to my tier. I'm interested in supporting and if you need a dollar more I'm down.
Michael Nemo
2024-03-17 14:23:30 +0000 UTCI was disappointed in this movie at the time of release but it was never a rotten movie it has poor execution in places and exaggerated humor elements that don’t land well, but the character development is cool and even feels as though it draws from the animated series. I will save my thought on the deck numbers for patron takes.
Thicketdweller
2024-03-17 14:20:24 +0000 UTC
