Something I think gets overlooked is that shouting "Khan" while cheesy and a bit overacted, is actually Kirk trying to sell Khan the idea that he's trapped. It's also the only time Khan doesn't take Kirk's bait and taunts.
Was it cheesy tho? I feel people give Billy a bad rap. It worked for me. I'd rather someone go all in and hold nothing back then not give enough or look like they aren't trying. I'm not exactly the world's most refined stage critic or whatever, but yeah... I'm with it. I thought he did good. Lol
Same. I'm 56. Nothing seems to choke me up in a movie other than seeing another man choked up or crying. Not to mention hearing Amazing Grace played on bagpipes. Instant tears. It destroys me. I think I just get too involved in movies.
I saw this when it came out in theaters (yes, I'm dating myself), and although I understand the spoilers about Spock's death etc, were out I was too young to know about any of that stuff. So I went in completely blind, other than having years of watching the TV show, and to say my mind was blown would be an understatement. No other Trek film comes close to embodying what these characters are all about, or what Star Trek is all about. And besides all of that, it's a just a damn good movie to boot.
to me, Kirk has faced situations where losing means his crew dies, or a planet is destroyed, or some third thing. "I dont like to lose" his his way of saying "im not ever going to give up if myself losing means death for others"
Heyup, I'll help with that! Apparently it also helps the algorithm if we get into a long argument in the comments too so... anything you wanna argue about? Haha
He piled upon youtube's algorithm the sum of all the general rage and hate felt by his whole race from Adam down; and then, as if his chest had been a mortar, he burst his hot heart’s shell upon it.
The one thing I could criticise about the film, though, is it's really bad science fiction. It's a great plot, but to give an example, the entire Genesis Planet subplot is laughable from a scientific perspective. In a couple hours, a bomb explodes which somehow manages to turn an entire nebula into a planet which forms into molten lava, cools, gets an ocean and grows plant life. That's just plain stupid.
@@Spike-Prime 1.) It IS bad Sci-Fi. 2.) Suspension of Disbelief - - USED TO - - be 'a thing'; back in the 1980's. Nobody would claim Back to the Future as "BRIMMING-OVER w/ Scientific ACCURACY." That's what makes these films 'Science-FICTION' - - as opposed to Science NON-Fiction. (^-^)
@@jimithingjames Different people have (and have always had) different levels of acceptance for their suspension of disbelief. I know a lot of folks who thought the same as I when they saw the film in the theatre in the 80s. The Genesis Bomb is something I could accept from, say, a superhero movie or a comedy. But, for a science fiction film taking itself dead-seriously, it felt really out of place. But then, I had just read the original Dune novel before watching the film, which also had a terraforming plot, but one which made sense.
@@Spike-Prime That's a fair enough point(s). And, perhaps, I was being a touch glib. To the extent of ST2's being "a SERIOUS film" . . . (?) * * * Hmm * * * It features ALIENS . . . and FTL Space Travel . . . "in The 23rd Century". Which - - on an elementary level - - I believe we all recognize is (more or less) ridiculous. Say, however, we jump ahead to the 33rd . . . or 42nd Century . . . do we 'honestly' expect said story elements to be MADE REAL by that time? I've my doubts. One thing we CAN (seriously) predict about The Near(er) Future - - (is) Cinema Aficionados will regard ST2 w/ the same campy bemusement . . . as are The (OLD) Buck Rogers Serials, today. BTW: Kirk is 'basically' an amalgamation of Buck Rogers & James Bond. \\// Live long and prosper.
Wrath of Khan is a real triumph of both paying respect to the franchise and moving it into interesting places. Both Harve Bennett and Nicholas Meyer were outsiders to Trek, yet both fundamentally understood its appeal and in their efforts to make a film never seemed like they were attempting to seriously reshape what it was to fit their specific story points or themes. While the heavier naval emphasis rankled fans and Roddenberry, it feels like an effort to pay respect to the nature of Starfleet and illustrate that these are disciplined officers that are dedicated to what they doing. The death of both Preston and Spock are events that acknowledge both the more optimistic view of the Star Trek future and the nature of duty among members of the crew. Its also interesting that after so many initial drafts/movie ideas to make the first ever Trek film with more out there narratives with philosophical implications (and TMP asking very high concept cosmic questions) that WoK succeeded and has endured with its very human and relatable explorations of age and regret.
The Wrath of Khan is one of my favorite pieces of space based science fiction. I have always been more of a fan of Kirk than of Picard and this movie is a big reason why. It has a feeling of epic drama to it that I am kind of missing in the TNG movies. The characters feel very human and relatable. Who of us has not struggled with the prospect of growing older? But always remember that life is about more than that.
@@Idazmi7 Hey, I'm going to be that guy and go to bat for Mon Capitaine. There have been quite a few episodes of TNG that showed there was more to the man than his stern exterior and stiff command style.
@@mainstreetsaint36 _"There have been quite a few episodes of TNG that showed there was more to the man than his stern exterior and stiff command style."_ Yes, TNG also showed that he is a rebellious old coot who is willing to break protocol for the dumbest goddamned reasons imaginable. In fact, here's a breakdown of what I saw, episode by episode: Picard is seriously willing to let non-Federation aliens murder one of his officers just because they were upset that he kicked over a potted plant. ("Justice", S1, E8) Picard lets his officers violate the Prime Directive by bringing a primitive life form aboard the Enterprise, unwittingly causing a religion to form around himself. When the situation predictably deteriorates, he ignores the counsel of the presiding anthropologist and violates the Prime Directive further by *_bringing another one aboard_* and openly demonstrating the Federation's technological superiority to bronze-age primitives. ("Who Watches The Watchers", S3, E4) Picard let Cardassia break it's treaty with the Federation and build illegal military bases in the Cuellar system, thus endangering millions by opening up the possibility of another Setlik III massacre. ("The Wounded", S4 E12) Picard _directly and intentionally violated the Prime Directive_ by willfully inserting one of his must trusted officers into a non-Federation court as a judge, and himself into the same court as a plaintiff, in an arbitration case that did not involve a Federation citizen or planet. ("Devil's Due" S4, E13) Picard turns a blind eye while his First Officer willfully violates the Prime Directive by attempting to interfere with a non-Federation planet's legal decision regarding one of their own citizens, and further attempts to stage a jailbreak for the accused. ("The Outcast", S5, E17) Picard encounters "Hugh" - a human who was kidnapped as a child by the Borg and 'assimilated' as one of their enslaved drones. After freeing him from the Borg, Picard _sends him back to his kidnappers_ and refuses to deploy a weapon that would destroy the Borg species - an action that later on cost thousands of Federation lives and caused several entire species to go extinct. ("I, Borg", S5, E23) Picard consistently runs his ship at far below battle readiness, and his First Officer is a disrespectful and impetuous fool with almost no discipline. ("Chain of Command" S6, E10 and 11) Picard is reprimanded by an Admiral for refusing to deploy the anti-Borg weapon before, and is given *direct order* to destroy the Borg the next time he encounters them. He just ignores the order entirely. ("Descent", S6, E26 and S7, E1) Picard disobeyed direct orders from a superior and compromised Federation security by _deliberately_ giving classified intelligence to active belligerents. ("The Pegasus", S7 E12) This is just what came to mind: I'm certain I could find more examples if I cared. In TOS, this man would have faced a Court Martial and Dishonorably Discharged. Instead, he gets a sequel show. It's enough to make a man want to jump into an active plasma conduit.
The first battle scene of the Reliant and Enterprise is pure genius. The way the music changes with each shot, reflecting the central character’s mood and purpose. Amazing.
Hands down this is my favorite Trek film, and probably my favorite SciFi film. Every part of this is perfection. Played to everyone's acting strengths.
Both the death of Spock, and Data, makes me cry whenever I see them. I don't have much more to say than that. Though this was the movie that gave Federation pulse phasers for a while.. Pew pew. Also, I absolutely love Wrath of Khan uniforms, Jackets and all.
This movie is amazing: The initial conflict between the Reliant and Enterprise is perfectly paced, a perfect build-up, gripping, and amazing music. And, Shatner, surprising, gives a great performance. We all know he’s a hammy actor, but director Nicholas Meyer had him take a “less in more” approach to his performance and it worked brilliantly. He proves he can act here. Who knew?
He went back and watched every episode of the original show. HE WENT BACK AND WATCHED EVERY EPISODE OF THE ORIGINAL SHOW. Take notes, Kurtzman. This is why you fail.
Kurtzman could watch every episode, but he still wouldn't do Star Trek right. Why? Because he is not interested in Star Trek as anything more than a propaganda tool for social engineering.
ST II: TWoK has a lot in common with Star Wars: A New Hope. It's a film that got really lucky to have the right balance of creativity & editing behind the scenes because cut together the wrong way it would've been a huge case of wasted potential. It was the film people hoped The Motion Picture would've been. TMP was alright, it just suffered from that sludgy 70's sci-fi pacing.
I just watched the extended cut for the first time, and I have to say I agree with every editing choice made for the theatrical release. The extended scenes actually detract from the story and pacing.
I am very glad that Spock's death was moved back to the finale of the film. It would have felt extremely weak to sacrifice Spock during a situation as small as their power being knocked out and another shipping threatening fire...something no more impossible than many others the crew have faced. I really think that having Spock die during the first battle would have left fans angry. It would have felt like a cheap way to dispose of a legendary character. The Genesis Device detonation is a much larger, inescapable death that warrants a sacrifice. Thank goodness this was changed.
The one thing I realized as a kid that no one mentions in this film: The Enterprise Bridge lighting was so much darker than in any movie. Meyer said in the DVD Director's Cut he did this to make it look like a submarine. It's been an ongoing inside joke with friends for years at weddings/events. "Enterprise ST II lighting".
Even just thinking about the death scene makes me emotional. The first time i watched this movie as a child i didn't know Spock would come back and i cried so much that my dad eventually drove to the video rental store that same night to get the third one so i would stop lol. I love these break downs, especially this one. Khan is really the best Star Trek film for me.
As someone who has for years now, enjoyed your content. I can only feel that you don't get the views you deserve. Like your videos this was excellent and gave me a greater appreciation of Wrath of Khan.
Harve Bennett doesn't get enough credit. Kudos to sfdebris in recognizing what he brought to the film. TWok was the culmination of great talent coming together and just trying to make a great movie on a limited budget. Harve, Nicholas Meyer, the original cast (inc Ricardo and Paul Winfield among others)...and a 28 year old relatively unknown composer named James Horner whose soundtrack is criminally underrated. He brought scenes that would normally be tepid to life and brimming with palpable drama and tension.
Didn't know til now that Horner was part of this work. Man oh man he is just a cornucopia of musical talent. I have loved all his film scores from the 90s on. I should see what he contributed to in the 80s, I'm sure this film wasn't his only work during that time. I'd like to think I'd love all the films I've grown to love just as much on story alone- but there's no denying the magic that a talented composer brings to anything they touch. Horner is deffo one of my favorite film composers.
They tried to copy this formula several times but never came close to the success. Trek is best when it treads new ground, boldly going where no one has gone before.
The few times that reusing the formula or themes of this film work later are when they reverse it, by making the hero (Picard in First Contact, for example) as the one who is obsessed with pursuing a foe who has hurt them in the past or a foe who has betrayed them (like Sisko pursuing Eddington in For The Uniform).
I think what a lot of the later attempts failed to recognize is that Khan is not Kirk's arch-nemesis. He's not Moriarty or The Joker, eternally vexing James T in caper after caper. He was a villain-of-the-week who was more charismatic and memorable than most, and who really had Kirk on the ropes for most of his episode, but then Kirk completely forgot he existed until he shows up in this film. Allegedly Nicholas Meyer said about this film "Khan spent every day of his exile thinking about Kirk, but Kirk didn't spare a single thought for Khan." (If he had, none of this would have happened.)
Someone did an analysis based on the scale of the Enterprise and the Reliant and determined that the Reliant actually has more internal volume than the Enterprise thus actually making it bigger.
Internally larger makes sense due to the compact design, but otherwise the exterior is not really larger as it has the same saucer, the same bridge, and the same nacelles as Enterprise.
I'm one of those rare guys who actually likes TMP, and I'll admit that I go back to that one more often than I do TWOK, if for no other reason than it was the first Trek installment I ever saw as a little kid and it's actually what got me into the franchise. But I'd be remiss if I didn't say that TWOK deserves every little bit of praise that it gets. Special props to the Mutara Nebula battle; while I'm not opposed to a Star Wars-style shoot 'em out, I love to see space battles that are based around unique tactical scenarios like that. There are comparatively few shots fired, and yet when they do they are absolutely devastating to both sides when they hit. But to this day the Ceti Eels always creep me out to no end, and I don't think anybody can really dispute that.
Saw it in the theaters, as an 11-year-old I didn't know anything about rumors about Spock dying, and even when I watch it now it still gets me. And yes I have pictures of me wearing one of those horrible Star Trek Spock helmets hahaha
Found out Nimoy was actually Heart Broken when he was told his character was going to die in this film, which was actually a small part in why Spock died at the end of the film instead of the beginning, Nimoy did wanna keep doing Trek and was super excited to be part of the franchise, true, the oversaturation was stressful for him and gave him a slight attitude but the truth is he absolutely Loved being a part of Star Trek. Makes the film even better knowing that fact now.
The Khannn line was Kirk himself being dramatic on purpose he had to give khan the pleasure of winning to put him off his guard, to guide khan into seeking out the enterprise instead of going over the communications. I saw this in the theater way back and if you ever get the chance at a festival or college theater don't hesitate to go see it.
My local movie theater showed this film as part of one of their retro nights. Having only seen Ricardo Montalbán in Spy Kids prior to this, I was surprised to see him walking without the aid of CGI..... and not talking about Corinthian leather......
This is a brilliant and really insightful analysis of this movie. I would love to see the film with Spocks death earlier on and see how it changes the feel of the movie.
I love Wrath of Kahn it is my favorite ST movie though I have fondness for ST3. I wish we had gotten some DS9 movies since most of the TNG movies suck.
The Reliant actually has more internal volume than the Enterprise. EC Henry did a video about this. This could be considered a reason why Starfleet used Miranda class vessels well into the Deep Space Nine era while the Constitution class ships went away decades before.
Very well done chuck, the theory that Spock might have died earlier in the movie was new to me and pretty interesting. I always found in pretty weird that Scotty dragged in death nephew on the bridge and I am now wondering how the scene might have played out otherwise.
I always wondered about that too. It was certainly tragic and made an emotional impact, but it made absolutely no sense. What was the point of it? What was he hoping to accomplish??? Shouldn't he be taking him to sickbay?? I mean what the heck can anyone do for him on the bridge?? It was a poignant visual but frustratingly pointless.
Probably the weirdest thing about this film is that the Kobayashi Maru test at the start has one cadet, and a bunch of highly experienced officers from the fleet's _flagship_ sitting there. It makes no sense at all.
I'm not a Star Trek fan, but even I admit this is a damn fine film and I'm glad it's in my library. Khan is a excellent foil for Kirk. Yes Kahn is defeated and the Enterprise escapes certain doom, but Kahn (even though he doesn't live to see it) still manages to hurt Kirk personally by taking Spock from him.
Watching all of star trek in 1982: three seasons with 79 episodes plus one movie. Watching all of star trek in 2017 (pre-discovery): 28 seasons with 703 episodes + 10 movies (ignoring the animated series and the lens-flare movies) I can kind of understand why nobody wants to do it these days anymore...at least not for job with a schedule when to be finished
He would not have to even do that. If your making a TNG era show than you only need to watch Key TNG and DS9 episodes. And have some nerd(s) help fill in The continuity or lack there of.
If I remember correctly, interviews recounted in Shatner's "Star Trek Movie Memories" revealed that Spock's death was originally meant to be a surprise in the middle of the story, very much like Marion getting stabbed to death in "Psycho". The problem was that the filmmakers realized that after Spock's death, the rest of the movie seemed anti-climatic. So, this, plus the script leak, led to the fake-out death in the opening and the (temporarily) real one at the end. Also, commentary on TVTropes brings up an interesting point: Kirk's shout of "KHAAAAAAAN!!" is purposely theatrical because Kirk knows it's a trick. He knows Khan tapped the communications, he's aware the ship will be repaired sooner, and he's arranged for it to pick him up earlier than Khan expects. Kirk is much wilier than Khan realizes.
Chuck’s original review of the film makes mention of that. He was absolutely convinced the scene where the engineer’s mate died during one of the skirmishes (who was actually scotty’s nephew) was where Spock was supposed to die in the original script. He based this on the fact that after that scene ( up to the actions that lead to his death), Spock barely does anything or says anything for the rest of the film. Sure he might have a moment of dialog like the regula/cave transmission, but that bit could’ve come from anyone over the coms
What were your thoughts of the comic showing Khan from the evil mirror universe? I rather liked how he came off like the Roddenberry ideal human whose "doomsday" weapon is a library.
1 could have been superlative (imo) if it was finished. I'm all in for a quieter more contemplative film, but it just needed more work. I don't know why they rushed it to production before the story was completed and fully developed.
I agree fully with Nicholas Meyer. The end of the movie suffered by Bennett immediately undercutting Spock's sacrifice. Even at seven years old, as I was when the film came out, I understood that this character, supposedly ruled solely by logic rather than passion, hadn't only taken the action he took because it made logical sense. He sacrificed himself to save the people he loved, and the innocent youth who accompanied them. Bennet's immediate mitigation cheated the audience out of a genuine emotional experience, a genuine connection to the film's ultimate message and its relevance to their own lives, and eventual deaths. I would have appreciated the subsequent films more had Spock remained dead, for exactly this reason.
Easily explained by idea that Kahn did a lot of socializing on the Enterprise, and Chekov was most likely a lower decks crewmate not yet promoted to the bridge.
Regarding the death of major character, written by people who were outsiders, but understood the appeal and meaning of the original show to the fans, I find myself comparing this film to another that Leonard Nimoy did 4 years later... "The Transformers: The Movie," which also featured the affecting death of a major character. But unlike here, where the death is this hinted at, thematic through-line for the the film, in The Transformers, Optimus Prime's death DID happen early in the film, much like Chuck speculates that Spock's was to here. And you can see the differences in both how the placements of those deaths affected the tone and pace of the movies, and the impact of the deaths themselves. What is most interesting is that, unlike with Star Trek, "The Transformers: The Movie" was written by those responsible for the original series, with the toy company dictating character deaths... but no one realizing the impact their show was having beyond toy sales. They were responsible for this series, yet were totally unaware of the emotional connection they were having with their audience. So Optimus dies probably not even halfway through the film, and the rest is a meandering tale that, while also containing themes of vengeance and facing off against superior power, is not nearly as powerful as the death that essentially headed the film. What does this say about either films? What does it say about their respective franchises? First, that while both are still successful products of media and are talked about to this day for one, the flaws have remained a small part of the discourse for a substantive time, while the other, while regarded well by fans of the franchise, is to an extent defined by it's flaws, which a large part of the films discourse revolves around. Second, while both could be argued never escaped their image as "just a Star Trek, sci-fi film" or 'Just a tramsformers, toy commercial movie" I would argue one experienced universal acclaim and at least among fans and critics, rose above where the franchise was and elevated it for a time at least. Perhaps not fully in the eyes of the general population writ large, but a mark was made. Transformers on the other hand was disliked by both critics and fans, and the film's negativity shadowed over the franchise for a time. Certainly over season three of that show. As for the franchises at large, after ST:II, the franchise continued, building upon itself and building an expansive lore and myth about itself for a very long time. Transformers however succumbed to the "franchise of independent interpretations" and reboots, though that is also something that the "Beast Machines" series played a large roll in besides the original film, likewise being written by those who didn't understand the series and appeal of the characters, and who didn't watch any of the prior series' episodes) So, while both can create lucrative, long-lasting merchandise behemoth franchises, the approach of taking the time to truly understand the full appeal of a franchise, it's characters, stories, potential and emotional connection and building off that, regardless of the intent of why a new entry is being made or the message and meaning of the story, is the way to create something that will be lauded both critically and by the fans, something that will truly connect, will remain a highlight for decades will elevate the franchise to new thematic heights and will create a cohesive universe wherein all parts or sections of it will remain profitable and tied together, rather than disparate and easily ignored. For fifty years every part of the Star Trek brand supported the others, and interwove to create something that no matter where you started, you always went back, were always driven to look back at what came before. In the Transformers, and its iterative franchise where failures can be dropped and forgotten, where there is no grand unified appeal, the only thing carrying the older series on into the future is nostalgia, unlike Star Trek and its older series canon of history that'll broaden your understanding of the franchise and the historical context of the franchise as it continued. I fear that aspect of Trek might be dead soon enough. Trek will continue, but it will be more like "The Transformers" moving forward, rather than the future mythology it was. How's that for the algorithm?
Search for Spock is under rated. As a stand alone film, it doesn't work the way WoK does, and it certainly suffers from it's weak antognist - act 1 they are pitted against a faceless space station security force, and act 2+3 they face off a rando klingon with motivations orthoganal to all the themes the film is attempting to resolve... But the end makes the film. What Kirk says to Spock ties the entire original series together. And the delivery is perfect. Shatner nails it. I may not enjoy most of it, but I do not skip it.
Star Trek 2,3 and 4 are one very long continuous story. 2 sets up the entire story and most of the grittiness comes from there and it's the best of the 3 movies and is great in isolation as well as being a Star Trek film. 3 viewed without the context of 2 will seem weak, but as part of the 3 part story it works very well. Watching it after seeing Wrath Of Khan is essential to appreciate it's place in the whole Kirk story arc, otherwise it's just kind of there.
My favorite Trek Movie of all time. My biggest (but still minor) criticism would be that Spocks death scene was very well done, but in my opinion they made it too obvious that he would be returning. I think the "Remember" scene provided a good balance of hope and uncertainty by itself, with the rest of the foreshadowing being too excessive. I'm thinking that at the time the movie was made, having a downer ending was taboo and after the test screening they really wanted to eliminate having one as much as possible while still technically killing off the character (since Nimoy returning wasn't yet a certainty.)
So Ceti Alapha VI goes KABLAMMO! yet Star Fleet never had (any) indications/reports/sensors that would have flagged it? Could never figure that one out - KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN.................
You have completely forgotten the real motivating factor for Kahn's revenge.. He self deludingly blames Kirk for the death of his wife, Macgyvers, who left Star Fleet to be with him. Kahn even wears her starfleet badge around his neck throughout the entire movie. I always had the idea that Macgyvers was pregnant when Seti Alpha 6 was destroyed and she died soon after when the planet changed orbit and the climate changed.
Is it funny or sad that pretty much every one of those awesome films mentioned in the intro (with a couple of glaring exceptions) were commercial failures and/or were critically panned/ignored?
as awesome as twk was. theres some glaring plot holes that have always really bothered me. theres no explanation as to how the improbable event that ceti alpha VI exploded and drug ceti alpha V into its orbit. how, given an event of such magnitude CA V remained even remotely habitable. and more important why the ceti alpha wasnt recognized by capt terrel and crew and how could they possibly not have noticed that an entire planet was now missing and mistake CA V for CA IV. it makes no sense. second is genesis itself. its essentially space magic mojo mcguffin. such technology is far beyond anything wed seen to date from star trek and has massive, universe changing ramifications that are never explored or even spoken of ever again. plus the manner of its function seems perfectly tailored to do what the story tellers need it to do. deux ex machina anyone? then theres the "spock murder room" as ive dubbed it. because it seems to serve no other purpose than to give spock a "heroic" death. its layout is improbable and improbably dangerous, and there seem to be no safeguards nor failsafes in case what happened ever happens. and where are an remotely operated equipment or drones as we have even in our time to render such tasks in dangerous environments to spare the needless sacrifice of valued human personnel. it all just strikes me as a writers dodge to make something happen that they need to happen. a gimmick. none of this, however makes TWK any less of a great story for me with some of my favorite characters that i grew up admiring and emulating.
So why is Roddenberry worshipped as a deity again given how much pushback was made against WoK & TNG, and even the oddities of TOS? Being a visionary, progressive and creator of a fantastic universe is one thing, but that certainly does not make him the perfect sci fi man that many love to make him out to be. I see far less criticism towards Gene Roddenberry compared to, say, George Lucas.
Roddenberry was perceived that way because in part he was a good at self-promotion, in part because his wife has pounded that drum relentlessly since his death largely so that she could auction off anything in his filing cabinet, but also because the man was relentlessly optimistic about the future. There were aspects to his life that I don't particularly care for but overall the man wanted to believe that the future could be a better place, would be a better place. That mankind would naturally come together as we became more advanced as a species. He also created Earth final Conflict, Andromeda, some TV movie about the future where the world is a matriarchal society, and a handful of comic book series. All postmortem and all because his wife auctioned off everything she could find but they all carry some measure of that optimism. Essentially to me he is a lot like George Lucas. He is a great idea and concept man, but very bad at the actual execution. His movies plot for the first film was that v'ger I was actually going to be Jesus and it was going to end with them blowing up Jesus, after revealing that God was just an alien that likes to be worshipped by lesser beings. His only other idea was that they would go back in time to save Kennedy. And his original vision for Star Trek was that it was almost an educational program, with no combat and none of the main characters being armed. Yet fragments of all those ideas became a very beautiful thing once he collaborated with other people
A subset of that is that Roddenberry happily and frequently collaborated with dozens of people. So he never hugged all of the blame or the credit though he does get the Lion's Share of both. From Return of the Jedi on Word, Lucas has always had full creative control. By the prequel trilogy he had full control over everything, filming in his own private Studio. And while he has people that work with him they are all effectively Yes Men. So where most people can give Roddenberry some slack, Lucas and Son saying it's all him so he takes all of it
Roddenberry's idea regarding a lack of drama in the 24th century always bothered me, as did his odd idea that humanity would literally be perfect. This annoyed me most of all because I always viewed Star Trek about exploring space, both outer and inner, as perfection wasn't an end goal but a journey that had no end.
Something I think gets overlooked is that shouting "Khan" while cheesy and a bit overacted, is actually Kirk trying to sell Khan the idea that he's trapped. It's also the only time Khan doesn't take Kirk's bait and taunts.
Agreed.
Was it cheesy tho? I feel people give Billy a bad rap. It worked for me. I'd rather someone go all in and hold nothing back then not give enough or look like they aren't trying. I'm not exactly the world's most refined stage critic or whatever, but yeah... I'm with it. I thought he did good. Lol
30 years later and Spock’s death scene still reduces me to a blubbering mess
Sad to say, closer to 40 years. It does this to Zod as well.
You'll enjoy this wonderful tribute then ruclips.net/video/KLcc26-Mzac/видео.html
Same. I'm 56. Nothing seems to choke me up in a movie other than seeing another man choked up or crying. Not to mention hearing Amazing Grace played on bagpipes. Instant tears. It destroys me. I think I just get too involved in movies.
The film is a masterpeice and this breakdown of it is really enjoyable
"His was the most....human." 😭🕯
I saw this when it came out in theaters (yes, I'm dating myself), and although I understand the spoilers about Spock's death etc, were out I was too young to know about any of that stuff. So I went in completely blind, other than having years of watching the TV show, and to say my mind was blown would be an understatement. No other Trek film comes close to embodying what these characters are all about, or what Star Trek is all about. And besides all of that, it's a just a damn good movie to boot.
"I don't like to lose": Single best line in Star Trek. Ever.
Personally, I prefer the other line from that same scene: "I don't believe in the no-win scenario."
@@Spike-Prime
Regulation 46-A: "If transmissions are being monitored during battle..."
@@Idazmi7 "No uncoded transmissions on an unencrypted channel. You lied!"
@@Spike-Prime
(raises eyebrow) "I exaggerated."
to me, Kirk has faced situations where losing means his crew dies, or a planet is destroyed, or some third thing. "I dont like to lose" his his way of saying "im not ever going to give up if myself losing means death for others"
From hell's heart, i stab at the youtube algorithm
Heyup, I'll help with that!
Apparently it also helps the algorithm if we get into a long argument in the comments too so... anything you wanna argue about? Haha
@@Spike-Prime I think bananas should be banned. Pass go
For hate sake, I spit my last breath at thee....youtube algorithm!
He piled upon youtube's algorithm the sum of all the general rage and hate felt by his whole race from Adam down; and then, as if his chest had been a mortar, he burst his hot heart’s shell upon it.
@@olliemonsters Bananas are the best vegetable ever, roar, I hate the anti-banana crowd like you!
X'D
This channel is one of the most underrated channels on RUclips.
Even after all these years, this remains the best of the Star Trek films. It's not flawless of course but for what is is....it's damned close.
The one thing I could criticise about the film, though, is it's really bad science fiction. It's a great plot, but to give an example, the entire Genesis Planet subplot is laughable from a scientific perspective. In a couple hours, a bomb explodes which somehow manages to turn an entire nebula into a planet which forms into molten lava, cools, gets an ocean and grows plant life. That's just plain stupid.
@@Spike-Prime Very true but it's not like the "science" in the original series was anything to write home about.
@@Spike-Prime 1.) It IS bad Sci-Fi. 2.) Suspension of Disbelief - - USED TO - - be 'a thing'; back in the 1980's.
Nobody would claim Back to the Future as "BRIMMING-OVER w/ Scientific ACCURACY." That's what makes these films 'Science-FICTION' - - as opposed to Science NON-Fiction. (^-^)
@@jimithingjames Different people have (and have always had) different levels of acceptance for their suspension of disbelief. I know a lot of folks who thought the same as I when they saw the film in the theatre in the 80s.
The Genesis Bomb is something I could accept from, say, a superhero movie or a comedy. But, for a science fiction film taking itself dead-seriously, it felt really out of place. But then, I had just read the original Dune novel before watching the film, which also had a terraforming plot, but one which made sense.
@@Spike-Prime That's a fair enough point(s). And, perhaps, I was being a touch glib.
To the extent of ST2's being "a SERIOUS film" . . . (?) * * * Hmm * * * It features ALIENS . . . and FTL Space Travel . . . "in The 23rd Century". Which - - on an elementary level - - I believe we all recognize is (more or less) ridiculous.
Say, however, we jump ahead to the 33rd . . . or 42nd Century . . . do we 'honestly' expect said story elements to be MADE REAL by that time? I've my doubts.
One thing we CAN (seriously) predict about The Near(er) Future - - (is) Cinema Aficionados will regard ST2 w/ the same campy bemusement . . . as are The (OLD) Buck Rogers Serials, today.
BTW: Kirk is 'basically' an amalgamation of Buck Rogers & James Bond.
\\// Live long and prosper.
Wrath of Khan is a real triumph of both paying respect to the franchise and moving it into interesting places. Both Harve Bennett and Nicholas Meyer were outsiders to Trek, yet both fundamentally understood its appeal and in their efforts to make a film never seemed like they were attempting to seriously reshape what it was to fit their specific story points or themes.
While the heavier naval emphasis rankled fans and Roddenberry, it feels like an effort to pay respect to the nature of Starfleet and illustrate that these are disciplined officers that are dedicated to what they doing. The death of both Preston and Spock are events that acknowledge both the more optimistic view of the Star Trek future and the nature of duty among members of the crew.
Its also interesting that after so many initial drafts/movie ideas to make the first ever Trek film with more out there narratives with philosophical implications (and TMP asking very high concept cosmic questions) that WoK succeeded and has endured with its very human and relatable explorations of age and regret.
The Wrath of Khan is one of my favorite pieces of space based science fiction. I have always been more of a fan of Kirk than of Picard and this movie is a big reason why. It has a feeling of epic drama to it that I am kind of missing in the TNG movies. The characters feel very human and relatable. Who of us has not struggled with the prospect of growing older? But always remember that life is about more than that.
Same. Kirk always resonated more with me than Picard. Picard is stuffy and pretentious.
@@Idazmi7 Hey, I'm going to be that guy and go to bat for Mon Capitaine. There have been quite a few episodes of TNG that showed there was more to the man than his stern exterior and stiff command style.
@@mainstreetsaint36
_"There have been quite a few episodes of TNG that showed there was more to the man than his stern exterior and stiff command style."_
Yes, TNG also showed that he is a rebellious old coot who is willing to break protocol for the dumbest goddamned reasons imaginable. In fact, here's a breakdown of what I saw, episode by episode:
Picard is seriously willing to let non-Federation aliens murder one of his officers just because they were upset that he kicked over a potted plant. ("Justice", S1, E8)
Picard lets his officers violate the Prime Directive by bringing a primitive life form aboard the Enterprise, unwittingly causing a religion to form around himself. When the situation predictably deteriorates, he ignores the counsel of the presiding anthropologist and violates the Prime Directive further by *_bringing another one aboard_* and openly demonstrating the Federation's technological superiority to bronze-age primitives. ("Who Watches The Watchers", S3, E4)
Picard let Cardassia break it's treaty with the Federation and build illegal military bases in the Cuellar system, thus endangering millions by opening up the possibility of another Setlik III massacre. ("The Wounded", S4 E12)
Picard _directly and intentionally violated the Prime Directive_ by willfully inserting one of his must trusted officers into a non-Federation court as a judge, and himself into the same court as a plaintiff, in an arbitration case that did not involve a Federation citizen or planet. ("Devil's Due" S4, E13)
Picard turns a blind eye while his First Officer willfully violates the Prime Directive by attempting to interfere with a non-Federation planet's legal decision regarding one of their own citizens, and further attempts to stage a jailbreak for the accused. ("The Outcast", S5, E17)
Picard encounters "Hugh" - a human who was kidnapped as a child by the Borg and 'assimilated' as one of their enslaved drones. After freeing him from the Borg, Picard _sends him back to his kidnappers_ and refuses to deploy a weapon that would destroy the Borg species - an action that later on cost thousands of Federation lives and caused several entire species to go extinct. ("I, Borg", S5, E23)
Picard consistently runs his ship at far below battle readiness, and his First Officer is a disrespectful and impetuous fool with almost no discipline. ("Chain of Command" S6, E10 and 11)
Picard is reprimanded by an Admiral for refusing to deploy the anti-Borg weapon before, and is given *direct order* to destroy the Borg the next time he encounters them. He just ignores the order entirely. ("Descent", S6, E26 and S7, E1)
Picard disobeyed direct orders from a superior and compromised Federation security by _deliberately_ giving classified intelligence to active belligerents. ("The Pegasus", S7 E12)
This is just what came to mind: I'm certain I could find more examples if I cared. In TOS, this man would have faced a Court Martial and Dishonorably Discharged. Instead, he gets a sequel show. It's enough to make a man want to jump into an active plasma conduit.
This was the greatest Star Trek movie
The first battle scene of the Reliant and Enterprise is pure genius. The way the music changes with each shot, reflecting the central character’s mood and purpose. Amazing.
I can never watch the death scene of Spock without crying.
Commenting because I really like Chuck's videos and wanna help this in the YT algorithm
Hands down this is my favorite Trek film, and probably my favorite SciFi film.
Every part of this is perfection. Played to everyone's acting strengths.
Both the death of Spock, and Data, makes me cry whenever I see them.
I don't have much more to say than that. Though this was the movie that gave Federation pulse phasers for a while.. Pew pew.
Also, I absolutely love Wrath of Khan uniforms, Jackets and all.
Star Trek 2 through 6 were peak Starfleet uniforms.
@@mainstreetsaint36 You speak the truth!
This movie is amazing: The initial conflict between the Reliant and Enterprise is perfectly paced, a perfect build-up, gripping, and amazing music. And, Shatner, surprising, gives a great performance. We all know he’s a hammy actor, but director Nicholas Meyer had him take a “less in more” approach to his performance and it worked brilliantly. He proves he can act here. Who knew?
This and Star Trek VI are my favourite.
An amazing Analysis of the film loved it
Kahn is the most inspiring intellect in all of sci-fi.
He went back and watched every episode of the original show. HE WENT BACK AND WATCHED EVERY EPISODE OF THE ORIGINAL SHOW.
Take notes, Kurtzman. This is why you fail.
I doubt that would help Kurtzman and his feminist friends.
@@Knightfall182 Weird flex to bring up feminism when every character is written poorly.
Kurtzman could watch every episode, but he still wouldn't do Star Trek right. Why? Because he is not interested in Star Trek as anything more than a propaganda tool for social engineering.
@@jamiebraswell5520 In that case he's still failing pretty hard.
This movie is so Shakespearean and I love it.
- Good night, good night! parting is such sweet sorrow, That I shall say good night till it be morrow.
ST II: TWoK has a lot in common with Star Wars: A New Hope. It's a film that got really lucky to have the right balance of creativity & editing behind the scenes because cut together the wrong way it would've been a huge case of wasted potential. It was the film people hoped The Motion Picture would've been. TMP was alright, it just suffered from that sludgy 70's sci-fi pacing.
I just watched the extended cut for the first time, and I have to say I agree with every editing choice made for the theatrical release. The extended scenes actually detract from the story and pacing.
I am very glad that Spock's death was moved back to the finale of the film. It would have felt extremely weak to sacrifice Spock during a situation as small as their power being knocked out and another shipping threatening fire...something no more impossible than many others the crew have faced. I really think that having Spock die during the first battle would have left fans angry. It would have felt like a cheap way to dispose of a legendary character. The Genesis Device detonation is a much larger, inescapable death that warrants a sacrifice. Thank goodness this was changed.
This video is a perfect retrospect to this movie... And now I'm looking forward to rewatching the movie tonight. 🖖🏾
The one thing I realized as a kid that no one mentions in this film: The Enterprise Bridge lighting was so much darker than in any movie. Meyer said in the DVD Director's Cut he did this to make it look like a submarine.
It's been an ongoing inside joke with friends for years at weddings/events. "Enterprise ST II lighting".
Even just thinking about the death scene makes me emotional. The first time i watched this movie as a child i didn't know Spock would come back and i cried so much that my dad eventually drove to the video rental store that same night to get the third one so i would stop lol.
I love these break downs, especially this one. Khan is really the best Star Trek film for me.
Bruh ur dad rocks 😂
As someone who has for years now, enjoyed your content. I can only feel that you don't get the views you deserve.
Like your videos this was excellent and gave me a greater appreciation of Wrath of Khan.
Best Trek story EVER made. Period. I will brook no debate on the matter.
Harve Bennett doesn't get enough credit. Kudos to sfdebris in recognizing what he brought to the film. TWok was the culmination of great talent coming together and just trying to make a great movie on a limited budget. Harve, Nicholas Meyer, the original cast (inc Ricardo and Paul Winfield among others)...and a 28 year old relatively unknown composer named James Horner whose soundtrack is criminally underrated. He brought scenes that would normally be tepid to life and brimming with palpable drama and tension.
Didn't know til now that Horner was part of this work. Man oh man he is just a cornucopia of musical talent. I have loved all his film scores from the 90s on. I should see what he contributed to in the 80s, I'm sure this film wasn't his only work during that time. I'd like to think I'd love all the films I've grown to love just as much on story alone- but there's no denying the magic that a talented composer brings to anything they touch. Horner is deffo one of my favorite film composers.
They tried to copy this formula several times but never came close to the success. Trek is best when it treads new ground, boldly going where no one has gone before.
The few times that reusing the formula or themes of this film work later are when they reverse it, by making the hero (Picard in First Contact, for example) as the one who is obsessed with pursuing a foe who has hurt them in the past or a foe who has betrayed them (like Sisko pursuing Eddington in For The Uniform).
I think what a lot of the later attempts failed to recognize is that Khan is not Kirk's arch-nemesis. He's not Moriarty or The Joker, eternally vexing James T in caper after caper. He was a villain-of-the-week who was more charismatic and memorable than most, and who really had Kirk on the ropes for most of his episode, but then Kirk completely forgot he existed until he shows up in this film. Allegedly Nicholas Meyer said about this film "Khan spent every day of his exile thinking about Kirk, but Kirk didn't spare a single thought for Khan." (If he had, none of this would have happened.)
@@digitaljanus yeah. I think Kruge is much more fitting as Kirk’s mortal enemy.
Someone did an analysis based on the scale of the Enterprise and the Reliant and determined that the Reliant actually has more internal volume than the Enterprise thus actually making it bigger.
Internally larger makes sense due to the compact design, but otherwise the exterior is not really larger as it has the same saucer, the same bridge, and the same nacelles as Enterprise.
I'm one of those rare guys who actually likes TMP, and I'll admit that I go back to that one more often than I do TWOK, if for no other reason than it was the first Trek installment I ever saw as a little kid and it's actually what got me into the franchise. But I'd be remiss if I didn't say that TWOK deserves every little bit of praise that it gets. Special props to the Mutara Nebula battle; while I'm not opposed to a Star Wars-style shoot 'em out, I love to see space battles that are based around unique tactical scenarios like that. There are comparatively few shots fired, and yet when they do they are absolutely devastating to both sides when they hit.
But to this day the Ceti Eels always creep me out to no end, and I don't think anybody can really dispute that.
Saw it in the theaters, as an 11-year-old I didn't know anything about rumors about Spock dying, and even when I watch it now it still gets me. And yes I have pictures of me wearing one of those horrible Star Trek Spock helmets hahaha
And yes I still think those are the best Star Trek uniforms ever.
Wrath of Khan is a profound and brilliant film, in its own right, irrespective of franchise, or genre.
One of the finest films ever made. 🖖😀
KHAAAAN !!!😂
One of your best reviews, the literary references and review itself made for easy listening while I finished my degree. Glad they're back up
Found out Nimoy was actually Heart Broken when he was told his character was going to die in this film, which was actually a small part in why Spock died at the end of the film instead of the beginning, Nimoy did wanna keep doing Trek and was super excited to be part of the franchise, true, the oversaturation was stressful for him and gave him a slight attitude but the truth is he absolutely Loved being a part of Star Trek.
Makes the film even better knowing that fact now.
Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.
The Khannn line was Kirk himself being dramatic on purpose he had to give khan the pleasure of winning to put him off his guard, to guide khan into seeking out the enterprise instead of going over the communications. I saw this in the theater way back and if you ever get the chance at a festival or college theater don't hesitate to go see it.
My local movie theater showed this film as part of one of their retro nights. Having only seen Ricardo Montalbán in Spy Kids prior to this, I was surprised to see him walking without the aid of CGI..... and not talking about Corinthian leather......
Absolutely love this movie.
This was what I was looking for: an existential interpretation of one of the best movies ever made. Thank you. LLAP!
wrath of kahn is such a great movie
Really enjoyed this retrospective. Kudos
Positive comment sacrifice for the Algorithm
All hail the mighty algorithm!
I concur; we must praise the Algorithm to exalt our preferred content creator.
I love the Algorithm. I have designed my whole life around it.
All hail the almighty algorithm!
This is a brilliant and really insightful analysis of this movie. I would love to see the film with Spocks death earlier on and see how it changes the feel of the movie.
I really love hearing your talk about Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan.
I love Wrath of Kahn it is my favorite ST movie though I have fondness for ST3. I wish we had gotten some DS9 movies since most of the TNG movies suck.
The Reliant actually has more internal volume than the Enterprise. EC Henry did a video about this. This could be considered a reason why Starfleet used Miranda class vessels well into the Deep Space Nine era while the Constitution class ships went away decades before.
Great breakdown as usual
Very well done chuck, the theory that Spock might have died earlier in the movie was new to me and pretty interesting. I always found in pretty weird that Scotty dragged in death nephew on the bridge and I am now wondering how the scene might have played out otherwise.
I always wondered about that too. It was certainly tragic and made an emotional impact, but it made absolutely no sense. What was the point of it? What was he hoping to accomplish??? Shouldn't he be taking him to sickbay?? I mean what the heck can anyone do for him on the bridge?? It was a poignant visual but frustratingly pointless.
One of the triumvirate of SF sequels that were better than the original movies. The other two of course being T2:Judgement Day and Aliens.
This was the last movie I saw with my Father in the movie theaters before his passing.
How you can have two enemies that never meet in person and tell an excellent story with character, soul, meaning.
Probably the weirdest thing about this film is that the Kobayashi Maru test at the start has one cadet, and a bunch of highly experienced officers from the fleet's _flagship_ sitting there. It makes no sense at all.
You've helped me see this film in new ways. Fantastic insight.
All hail the almighty algorithm.
I owe everything I think to big Al. I don't even WANT to think for myself at this point.
KHAAAAAAAN! KHAAAAAAAAN!!!!!
Your videos are always a treat. You should run a patreon.
He has one at patreon.com/sfdebris
+Joseph Elliott-Coleman
Chuck is close to predating RUclips if he isn't it flat out. He is been around the block.
@@moocow1452 Cheers pal.
sf debris back on youtube yeeey
I'm not a Star Trek fan, but even I admit this is a damn fine film and I'm glad it's in my library. Khan is a excellent foil for Kirk. Yes Kahn is defeated and the Enterprise escapes certain doom, but Kahn (even though he doesn't live to see it) still manages to hurt Kirk personally by taking Spock from him.
U r a great scholar, sir. Love yer Trek vids. 👍😁🖖
Reliant seems larger... because it has greater volume.
KHANNNNNNNNNN!!!!
Actually watching a show before making a movie out of it?
Aren't you glad the times where directors did that are over too?
JJ Abram: pshhh if you do that thn you have to follow the rules! a
"I'll just watch the old movies and make one of those."
Watching all of star trek in 1982: three seasons with 79 episodes plus one movie.
Watching all of star trek in 2017 (pre-discovery): 28 seasons with 703 episodes + 10 movies (ignoring the animated series and the lens-flare movies)
I can kind of understand why nobody wants to do it these days anymore...at least not for job with a schedule when to be finished
He would not have to even do that. If your making a TNG era show than you only need to watch Key TNG and DS9 episodes. And have some nerd(s) help fill in The continuity or lack there of.
If I remember correctly, interviews recounted in Shatner's "Star Trek Movie Memories" revealed that Spock's death was originally meant to be a surprise in the middle of the story, very much like Marion getting stabbed to death in "Psycho". The problem was that the filmmakers realized that after Spock's death, the rest of the movie seemed anti-climatic. So, this, plus the script leak, led to the fake-out death in the opening and the (temporarily) real one at the end. Also, commentary on TVTropes brings up an interesting point: Kirk's shout of "KHAAAAAAAN!!" is purposely theatrical because Kirk knows it's a trick. He knows Khan tapped the communications, he's aware the ship will be repaired sooner, and he's arranged for it to pick him up earlier than Khan expects. Kirk is much wilier than Khan realizes.
Chuck’s original review of the film makes mention of that. He was absolutely convinced the scene where the engineer’s mate died during one of the skirmishes (who was actually scotty’s nephew) was where Spock was supposed to die in the original script. He based this on the fact that after that scene ( up to the actions that lead to his death), Spock barely does anything or says anything for the rest of the film. Sure he might have a moment of dialog like the regula/cave transmission, but that bit could’ve come from anyone over the coms
@@Maniac536 And it's in this version, too.
What were your thoughts of the comic showing Khan from the evil mirror universe? I rather liked how he came off like the Roddenberry ideal human whose "doomsday" weapon is a library.
This Star Trek movie was by far the best of the TOS movies. But I thought that Star Trek VI - The Undiscovered Country was pretty well done also.
1 could have been superlative (imo) if it was finished. I'm all in for a quieter more contemplative film, but it just needed more work. I don't know why they rushed it to production before the story was completed and fully developed.
Who would of thought getting to know the material before making a movie would actually be a good idea.
SFDebris still out here f-ing things up? I'm here for it.
Been nice to get a precise year of twok.
I agree fully with Nicholas Meyer. The end of the movie suffered by Bennett immediately undercutting Spock's sacrifice. Even at seven years old, as I was when the film came out, I understood that this character, supposedly ruled solely by logic rather than passion, hadn't only taken the action he took because it made logical sense. He sacrificed himself to save the people he loved, and the innocent youth who accompanied them. Bennet's immediate mitigation cheated the audience out of a genuine emotional experience, a genuine connection to the film's ultimate message and its relevance to their own lives, and eventual deaths. I would have appreciated the subsequent films more had Spock remained dead, for exactly this reason.
This was an enjoyable watch. Definitely a new subscriber.
Great discussion.
Great movie and great analysis as always.
You think Khan ever finished Moby Dick? Cause like... he should've known it doesn't work out so well for Ahab.
Funny how Kahn recognizes Chekov, consider he didn't join the crew until the next season, after Kahn was already exiled.
Easily explained by idea that Kahn did a lot of socializing on the Enterprise, and Chekov was most likely a lower decks crewmate not yet promoted to the bridge.
Regarding the death of major character, written by people who were outsiders, but understood the appeal and meaning of the original show to the fans, I find myself comparing this film to another that Leonard Nimoy did 4 years later... "The Transformers: The Movie," which also featured the affecting death of a major character. But unlike here, where the death is this hinted at, thematic through-line for the the film, in The Transformers, Optimus Prime's death DID happen early in the film, much like Chuck speculates that Spock's was to here. And you can see the differences in both how the placements of those deaths affected the tone and pace of the movies, and the impact of the deaths themselves.
What is most interesting is that, unlike with Star Trek, "The Transformers: The Movie" was written by those responsible for the original series, with the toy company dictating character deaths... but no one realizing the impact their show was having beyond toy sales. They were responsible for this series, yet were totally unaware of the emotional connection they were having with their audience. So Optimus dies probably not even halfway through the film, and the rest is a meandering tale that, while also containing themes of vengeance and facing off against superior power, is not nearly as powerful as the death that essentially headed the film.
What does this say about either films? What does it say about their respective franchises? First, that while both are still successful products of media and are talked about to this day for one, the flaws have remained a small part of the discourse for a substantive time, while the other, while regarded well by fans of the franchise, is to an extent defined by it's flaws, which a large part of the films discourse revolves around. Second, while both could be argued never escaped their image as "just a Star Trek, sci-fi film" or 'Just a tramsformers, toy commercial movie" I would argue one experienced universal acclaim and at least among fans and critics, rose above where the franchise was and elevated it for a time at least. Perhaps not fully in the eyes of the general population writ large, but a mark was made. Transformers on the other hand was disliked by both critics and fans, and the film's negativity shadowed over the franchise for a time. Certainly over season three of that show.
As for the franchises at large, after ST:II, the franchise continued, building upon itself and building an expansive lore and myth about itself for a very long time. Transformers however succumbed to the "franchise of independent interpretations" and reboots, though that is also something that the "Beast Machines" series played a large roll in besides the original film, likewise being written by those who didn't understand the series and appeal of the characters, and who didn't watch any of the prior series' episodes)
So, while both can create lucrative, long-lasting merchandise behemoth franchises, the approach of taking the time to truly understand the full appeal of a franchise, it's characters, stories, potential and emotional connection and building off that, regardless of the intent of why a new entry is being made or the message and meaning of the story, is the way to create something that will be lauded both critically and by the fans, something that will truly connect, will remain a highlight for decades will elevate the franchise to new thematic heights and will create a cohesive universe wherein all parts or sections of it will remain profitable and tied together, rather than disparate and easily ignored. For fifty years every part of the Star Trek brand supported the others, and interwove to create something that no matter where you started, you always went back, were always driven to look back at what came before. In the Transformers, and its iterative franchise where failures can be dropped and forgotten, where there is no grand unified appeal, the only thing carrying the older series on into the future is nostalgia, unlike Star Trek and its older series canon of history that'll broaden your understanding of the franchise and the historical context of the franchise as it continued.
I fear that aspect of Trek might be dead soon enough. Trek will continue, but it will be more like "The Transformers" moving forward, rather than the future mythology it was.
How's that for the algorithm?
Bravo, man.
Search for Spock is under rated. As a stand alone film, it doesn't work the way WoK does, and it certainly suffers from it's weak antognist - act 1 they are pitted against a faceless space station security force, and act 2+3 they face off a rando klingon with motivations orthoganal to all the themes the film is attempting to resolve...
But the end makes the film. What Kirk says to Spock ties the entire original series together. And the delivery is perfect. Shatner nails it. I may not enjoy most of it, but I do not skip it.
Star Trek 2,3 and 4 are one very long continuous story. 2 sets up the entire story and most of the grittiness comes from there and it's the best of the 3 movies and is great in isolation as well as being a Star Trek film. 3 viewed without the context of 2 will seem weak, but as part of the 3 part story it works very well. Watching it after seeing Wrath Of Khan is essential to appreciate it's place in the whole Kirk story arc, otherwise it's just kind of there.
My favorite Trek Movie of all time. My biggest (but still minor) criticism would be that Spocks death scene was very well done, but in my opinion they made it too obvious that he would be returning. I think the "Remember" scene provided a good balance of hope and uncertainty by itself, with the rest of the foreshadowing being too excessive. I'm thinking that at the time the movie was made, having a downer ending was taboo and after the test screening they really wanted to eliminate having one as much as possible while still technically killing off the character (since Nimoy returning wasn't yet a certainty.)
So Ceti Alapha VI goes KABLAMMO! yet Star Fleet never had (any) indications/reports/sensors that would have flagged it? Could never figure that one out - KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN.................
Is there a "Discussing Star Trek I"?
Nice to have this video back again finally, even if it is truncated for the allmighty youtube bots.
You have completely forgotten the real motivating factor for Kahn's revenge.. He self deludingly blames Kirk for the death of his wife, Macgyvers, who left Star Fleet to be with him. Kahn even wears her starfleet badge around his neck throughout the entire movie. I always had the idea that Macgyvers was pregnant when Seti Alpha 6 was destroyed and she died soon after when the planet changed orbit and the climate changed.
You know. I never realized that the Starfleet medallion belonged to Marla. Wow, we truly do learn something new every day! :-)
Engagement comment for the algorithm god.
Good video!
I’ve heard Nimoy didn’t include the requirement of Spock dying.
And Picard did some quoting "Moby Dick", in "Star Trek:First Contact"
Is it funny or sad that pretty much every one of those awesome films mentioned in the intro (with a couple of glaring exceptions) were commercial failures and/or were critically panned/ignored?
So is it a coincidence that they reference Moby Dick in first contact or, is this a call back to wrath of khan?
It works for Picard's character as well as a callback to ST2.
as awesome as twk was. theres some glaring plot holes that have always really bothered me. theres no explanation as to how the improbable event that ceti alpha VI exploded and drug ceti alpha V into its orbit. how, given an event of such magnitude CA V remained even remotely habitable. and more important why the ceti alpha wasnt recognized by capt terrel and crew and how could they possibly not have noticed that an entire planet was now missing and mistake CA V for CA IV. it makes no sense.
second is genesis itself. its essentially space magic mojo mcguffin. such technology is far beyond anything wed seen to date from star trek and has massive, universe changing ramifications that are never explored or even spoken of ever again. plus the manner of its function seems perfectly tailored to do what the story tellers need it to do. deux ex machina anyone?
then theres the "spock murder room" as ive dubbed it. because it seems to serve no other purpose than to give spock a "heroic" death. its layout is improbable and improbably dangerous, and there seem to be no safeguards nor failsafes in case what happened ever happens. and where are an remotely operated equipment or drones as we have even in our time to render such tasks in dangerous environments to spare the needless sacrifice of valued human personnel. it all just strikes me as a writers dodge to make something happen that they need to happen. a gimmick.
none of this, however makes TWK any less of a great story for me with some of my favorite characters that i grew up admiring and emulating.
You know I subbed.
Earth is flat (I typically comment this for the algorithm)
Try "Qo'noS is flat" around here
@@HebaruSan The Dyson "Sphere" is flat.
Funny Terrell was a name used again for Duras’s illegitimate son.
Commenting a second time for same reason as the first, haha
Bravo! *applause*
What about Kirk's mistake of giving Khan a chance to surrender instead of just destroying the ship?
So why is Roddenberry worshipped as a deity again given how much pushback was made against WoK & TNG, and even the oddities of TOS?
Being a visionary, progressive and creator of a fantastic universe is one thing, but that certainly does not make him the perfect sci fi man that many love to make him out to be. I see far less criticism towards Gene Roddenberry compared to, say, George Lucas.
Roddenberry was perceived that way because in part he was a good at self-promotion, in part because his wife has pounded that drum relentlessly since his death largely so that she could auction off anything in his filing cabinet, but also because the man was relentlessly optimistic about the future.
There were aspects to his life that I don't particularly care for but overall the man wanted to believe that the future could be a better place, would be a better place. That mankind would naturally come together as we became more advanced as a species.
He also created Earth final Conflict, Andromeda, some TV movie about the future where the world is a matriarchal society, and a handful of comic book series. All postmortem and all because his wife auctioned off everything she could find but they all carry some measure of that optimism.
Essentially to me he is a lot like George Lucas. He is a great idea and concept man, but very bad at the actual execution. His movies plot for the first film was that v'ger I was actually going to be Jesus and it was going to end with them blowing up Jesus, after revealing that God was just an alien that likes to be worshipped by lesser beings. His only other idea was that they would go back in time to save Kennedy. And his original vision for Star Trek was that it was almost an educational program, with no combat and none of the main characters being armed. Yet fragments of all those ideas became a very beautiful thing once he collaborated with other people
A subset of that is that Roddenberry happily and frequently collaborated with dozens of people. So he never hugged all of the blame or the credit though he does get the Lion's Share of both.
From Return of the Jedi on Word, Lucas has always had full creative control. By the prequel trilogy he had full control over everything, filming in his own private Studio. And while he has people that work with him they are all effectively Yes Men. So where most people can give Roddenberry some slack, Lucas and Son saying it's all him so he takes all of it
Roddenberry's idea regarding a lack of drama in the 24th century always bothered me, as did his odd idea that humanity would literally be perfect. This annoyed me most of all because I always viewed Star Trek about exploring space, both outer and inner, as perfection wasn't an end goal but a journey that had no end.
According to the credits of STTMP, the uniforms were designed by Isaac Asimov.
I can see that