brad@umcp-cs.UUCP (08/23/83)
From the Washington Post Sun Aug. 21, 1983. By Dale Pollock of the Los
Angeles Times. Reprinted without permission
******************************************************************************
Hollywood - [...]
Don't assume that just because a new "Star Trek" movie begins filming
Aug. 15 that Spock will survive the third installment of the popular
TV-turned-movie series. This time Nimoy will be behind the cameras,
directing his first feature film. "Star Trek III: The Search for Spock,"
to be released next summer.
Harve Bennett, executive producer of "Star Trek II," will also
return, this time producing and writing the screenplay for "Star Trek III."
Also reuniting in the familiar confines of the USS Enterprise will be
William Shatner as Adm. James T. Kirk, DeForest Kelly as "Bones" McCoy,
James Doohan as chief engineer "Scotty" Scott, Walter Koenig as Cmdr.
Chekov, George Takei as Cmdr. Sulu and Nichelle Nichols as Lt. Uhura. Mark
Lenard, who played Spock's Vulcan father, Sarek, in the TV series will also
appear in "Search for Spock"
Dame Judith Anderson, 85, will join the cast in what Bennett ad
Nimoy will only describe as a special guest appearance that is crucial to
the film. [...]
Nimoy, too, mentioned that "Star Trek - The Motion Picture" failed
to exploit the TV series' greatest asset: its cast. "On TV we actors had to
carry the load because of monetary reasons. But in the first 'Star Trek'
the family of characters was not explored. Now we're returning to what we
do best."
But will Nimoy be returning as Spock? Both producer and director are
understandably coy. "What form he's in, what condition he's in, whether
he's energy or matter, will hopefully be something audiences will enjoy,"
Bennett said. "We hope to pull off a few surprises."
[...]
Nimoy an Bennett said they are determined to do a more visually
elaborate film that "The Wrath of Khan," spending about $15 million, as
opposed to $12 million for "Khan" and $45 million for the first film, which
went drastically over budget.
Bennett revealed that 65 percent of "Star Trek II" was filmed using a
single set, the bridge of the starship Enterprise, which also doubled as
several other spaceships. For "Search for Spock," five of Paramount's
biggest sound stages will be used, including the "De Mille" stage, where
the Red Sea was parted in "The Ten Commandments." George Lucas' Industrial
Light & Magic will again do the special effects for the movie.
One of the hardest tasks Bennett faced was in reassembling the
original cast. "It's not a matter of dollars," Bennett said. "When you do
78 episodes on TV with a family of people, you find a way to balance the
solo turns; it's much more difficult to do that in a film. Everybody would
love to be deeply involved, and sometimes it's impossible to satisfy
everyone. Ultimately, all the cast members have been very gracious."
[...]
The biggest challenge facing Nimoy and Bennett, they both
acknowledged, will come in topping the last movie, which was directed by
Nicholas Meyer. Bennett observed, "We know the film will open [big] because
they [audienced] loved 'The Wrath of Kahn.' But it will last only if we give
them something new."
Bennett said he perceives "Star Trek II" and "III" as inextricably
linked - "a two-volume set," as he called it. "We're trying very hard to
make sure that people who didn't see the last one are comfortable and will
know what we're doing."
Will there be a "Star Trek IV"? Paramount's Eisner said, "It's
inevitable. Hopefully, we'll be talking about 'Star Trek 28' while I'm in
my wheelchair."
******************************************************************************
Just thought you might want to know.
b**2
(Brad Balfour)
{seismo, allegra}!umcp-cs!brad :UUCPms@hpda.UUCP (Michael Sorens) (11/07/83)
Flash! For those of you who have not seen Starlog, the latest issue announced that "In Search of Spock" will, after numerous changes, be released on June 8, 1984. Also, Kirstie Alley will not be with us any longer as Saavik; Saavik WILL appear, played by a different woman who looks very similar but whose name I can't recall at the moment. Mike Sorens
rjnoe@ihlts.UUCP (11/08/83)
I feel compelled to caution readers of Starlog (and this newsgroup) not to readily believe every little detail about ST3 they read or hear. You can be pretty sure about the cast announcements and the release date (at least as much as they can control it), but certain other details are very probably red herrings. They've been "leaking" tiny details here and there about Spock's parents, the pivotal roles of Saavik and McCoy (and of course, Kirk), and endings for several weeks now. Starlog is generally a very reputable publication but they also would like to scoop everyone else. Paramount's PR task force is quite adept at making their false hints appear genuine. How do I know all this? I got burned before Star Trek-The Motion Picture and (to a much lesser extent) Star Trek-The Wrath of Khan when I succumbed to the temptation of divulging all the tidbits thrown my way. I dug really hard for some of them and was convinced of the authenticity of the information, but turned out to be dead wrong. Now that I've been on Usenet since just after the release of ST2 I realize the damage I could do here is much greater than what happened with newsletters mailed out to the midwestern theater of Starfleet. Be careful about what you believe and if you can help it be careful about what you say or write. I'd like to keep others from making the same mistakes I did out of naivete and excessive fanaticism. -- Roger Noe ...ihnp4!ihlts!rjnoe
starner@psuvax.UUCP (11/09/83)
Saavik will be played in Star Trek III by Robin Curtis.
Kirstie Alley will not be in due to contract disputes.
(she wanted 10x more money than she got in ST II)
--
Mark L. Starner
Pennsylvania State University
{allegra, burdvax, akgua, ihnp4}!psuvax!starnerrene@umcp-cs.UUCP (11/10/83)
W.r.t. giving away details that turn out not to be true anyway:
At a con the spring before Star Trek II (Balticon? Disclave?) the
people involved with the movie showed a five minute clip. There were
good teasers (Spock says "You must understand. Saavik is a bit more...
volatile than me" or something to that effect, etc.) but I didn't see
ANYTHING from the clip in the movie. I guess it all ended up on the
cutting room floor (is that a saying?). I'd like to see the movie
with the clips in (I think they would have had some effect on the plot
and characters), but with my luck they were shot sheerly for
distraction value.
- rene
--
Arpa: rene.umcp-cs@CSNet-relay
Uucp:...{allegra,seismo}!umcp-cs!renetwt@uicsl.UUCP (11/11/83)
#R:hpda:-47200:uicsl:11600009:000:208 uicsl!twt Nov 10 20:16:00 1983 In reference to what Roger had to say about 'being careful about what you believe'. Maybe you should do what I did between the time ROtJ was released and the time I saw it ... hide under a rock. Mary
dave@rlgvax.UUCP (Dave Maxey) (11/14/83)
The references to Savik being more volatile than Spock in that clip you saw
sound very much like some of the text in the STII book that I did not see
in the movie. Perhaps you should check out the book?
- Dave Maxey (alias tbm)
{seismo,mcnc,brl-bmd,allegra}!rlgvax!daverene@umcp-cs.UUCP (11/14/83)
I read the book (The Wrath of Khan by Vonda McIntyre) and I really
liked it. She did indeed go into detail on Saavik's 'volatility'
(mentioned in a film clip but not in the movie), but you must remember
that the book is almost unrelated (except for plot) to the movie.
McIntyre made up a lot of stuff that was never intended to be part of
the movie - she did not (as many novelizations do) just write up the
screenplay with a few details. As a matter of fact, her world is in
some ways inconsistant with whatever consistancy had been developed in
Startrek. For instance, she portrays the Romulans as being really,
really nasty - worse than klingons. They (Romulans) get enjoyment and
prestige from raping captives (with vulcans, this involves using
various drugs, hormones, etc.) and having their children to REALLY
humiliate them (the illegitimate children are status symbols to have,
but then you throw them in the jungle and let them "live" as animals).
The more a romulan humiliates, embarresses, and demoralizes his or her
victim, the better. Saavik is the result of such a rape, and was an
basically an animal until Spock found her (she was his protege for the
past 10 years or so).
Also, when the outpost Saavik was born at was abandoned, the
Romulans took everyone but the children and the elderly and sick. So
much for the rather noble (if violent) picture we got of them from
the show. However, it is a fascinating book, and Saavik is a VERY
interesting person (unlike the rather cardboardish character in the
movie). There are details about how Scotty's nephew has a crush on
her, and how she tears up a briefing room (tears up bolted chairs,
breaks tables, etc.) when he dies, a budding romance between her and
David, etc. Read the book.
- rene
--
Arpa: rene.umcp-cs@CSNet-relay
Uucp:...{allegra,seismo}!umcp-cs!renerjnoe@ihlts.UUCP (Roger Noe @ N41:48:31, W88:07:13) (02/10/84)
No, Gene's trip up North has nothing to do with the filming of Star Trek III: The Search for Spock. They finished principal photography months ago (ahead of schedule, in fact). The Genesis planet appears to have been built as an outside set on Paramount's studios, but I'm not absolutely certain of that. That's what the production stills look like to me. This looks like it's going to be a good movie. There are a lot of sets not part of the Enterprise which we'll be seeing. They also reconstructed sets for a Klingon cruiser (a bit of which was seen in ST:TMP). I've been hearing that post-production work has been going very smoothly, too, so it should come off on schedule June 1. I'm also very optimistic about Nimoy's direction. Someone with his familiarity of the subject and the characters which are so important can only make a better movie. I can't wait to see Spock's funeral (or whatever) on Vulcan with his father and mother (and ...). We're going to have a better Saavik, too. She LOOKS the part more, and I've been told she's more of an actress. Naturally David Marcus will be back, but not his mother. There are also some surprise characters. Only 16 more weeks to go!! Roger Noe ihnp4!ihlts!rjnoe
rjnoe@ihlts.UUCP (Roger Noe) (05/14/84)
For those of you reading net.movies, you may wish to restrict your postings of Star Trek-related articles to net.startrek. We can expect another flood of news around the release date of ST3 so let's not clutter up another newsgroup with our specialized traffic. Thanks. > I saw some advanced stills. The Crew of the enterprise will be wearing > yet another set of uniforms. > -Ron That's not correct. The uniforms are unchanged from ST2, but the principal characters all spend a bit of time off-duty and off-ship, so you probably saw "civvies". Roger Noe ihnp4!ihlts!rjnoe
rlr@pyuxn.UUCP (Rich Rosen) (06/11/84)
First, I loved this movie. It *felt* like an episode. It *felt* like I was watching a new episode of the ST series and not a movie based on that series, and for me, that was good. Now on with the pixie hats, and the asking of silly questions and the making of silly comments: 1. I was kind of disappointed that T'Pao didn't call Spock "Tspoke" the way she did in "Amok Time". The Vulcan Vestal Virgins were definitely what I would call visually disjunctive. 2. Will the Enterprise be regenerated by the Genesis effect? Since protomatter was used in Genesis, isn't the following scenario possible? David and Kruge are regenerated, but due to a time warp caused by the protomatter they go back in time to a Los Angeles high school and the streets of New York City. David becomes a nerdy/neo-punk student, and Kruge, due to brain damage from the regeneration, becomes a derelict who later becomes a cab driver (on Square Pegs and Taxi, respectively). Don't you remember Reverend Jim saying "I used to command a spaceship" from time to time... 3. Was it EXACTLY the same destruct sequence used in "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield"????? 4. WHAT ABOUT THE ORGANIAN SPACE TREATY??? Didn't that "treaty", imposed by the Organians, mean that ANY violence between the Klingons and the Federation would cause the same interference by the Organians as in the original episode, or am I misinterpreting the essence of the treaty? 5. Was the opening inset scene (shown in black and white) with Spock dying in the chamber talking to Kirk *re-shot*? His \\// hand didn't slide down the glass as I remember it? 6. To add a few of my favorite quotes to Roger's: "That's what happens when you miss staff meetings." "Because the needs of the one outweighed the needs of the many." That last one really got to me. In a way, as long as we're busy drawing analogies to the SW trilogy, "the needs of ..." quotes from both movies are slightly analogous to the trading of "I love you"--"I know"s in TESB/ROTJ. 7. In "Menagerie", when Spock showed the footage of the Enterprise under Pike, the "film" was stopped with someone exclaiming "No starship keeps (kept?) such records!" Do they do so "now" (in ST3 time)? (Apparently) I'm referring to Kirk's playback of the scene from ST2 in engineering. -- AT THE TONE PLEASE LEAVE YOUR NAME AND NET ADDRESS. THANK YOU. Rich Rosen pyuxn!rlr
rjnoe@ihlts.UUCP (Roger Noe) (06/13/84)
> I was kind of disappointed that T'Pao [sic] didn't call Spock > ... the way she did in "Amok Time". The Vulcan Vestal Virgins > were definitely what I would call visually disjunctive. That was T'Lar, not T'Pau. I break up laughing now when I see the VVV's in what should be a very serious scene. > Was it EXACTLY the same destruct sequence used in "Let That Be > Your Last Battlefield"? Yes, precisely, with Scott doing Spock's lines and Chekov doing Scott's. > Was the opening inset scene (shown in black and white) with Spock > dying in the chamber talking to Kirk *re-shot*? Not a frame, although I wouldn't discount the possibility that Nimoy decided to use some angles which were saved but not edited into ST2. > In "Menagerie", when Spock showed the footage of the Enterprise under > Pike, the "film" was stopped with someone exclaiming "No starship keeps > (kept?) such records!" Do they do so "now" (in ST3 time)? (Apparently) > I'm referring to Kirk's playback of the scene from ST2 in engineering. What was said in that episode was that no starship kept such DETAILED records. I think we can assume starships have continuously running recorders which normally record only the most abstract, high-level data about the starship's functions but kicks in much more detailed recordings when on alert. This would be what would go in the recorder-markers dispatched from time to time. -- "The more they overthink the plumbin', the easier 'tis to stop up the drain." Roger Noe ihnp4!ihlts!rjnoe
starner@psuvax1.UUCP (Mark L. Starner) (06/13/84)
{}
I just saw ST3 for the second time last evening, and I believe that
I made an observation that no one else has seen yet.
At the end when Spock turns to talk to Kirk, Kirk says the line "Spock,
Don't you REMEMBER?". At that point it cuts to Spock, he raises his eyebrow
and says "Jim", he smiles and it looks like he remembers more. As the movie
closes and everybody crowds around him, careful observation shows him to be
smiling.
Could it be that when Kirk said "Spock, .... REMEMBER?", that "Remember" was
a key word that would trigger spocks memory recall, since it was the last
thing he said as he transfered his katra to McCoy?
Comments welcome, I think this might be a possibility, although the producers
may not have realized it.
----
Unit two, this is one. The Kobayashi Maru has set sail for the promised land.
----
Mark Starner
Computer Science Department (814) 863-0392
301b Whitmore Lab {allegra,ihnp4}!psuvax1!starner
The Pennsylvania State University starner@penn-state (csnet)
University Park, PA 16802 starner@psuvax1 (bitnet)gam@proper.UUCP (Gordon Moffett) (06/13/84)
# I took it as: "The needs of the One outweigh the needs of the many." ... but I'm a pretty mystical guy. I agree with Rich, this was a fine TV episode that happens to be a feature length film. That's all I ever expect, and I'm never disappointed. (Well, the first one WAS boring). And yes, there were lots of inconsistencies and illogical things and historical inaccuracies. Who cares?
barmar@mit-eddie.UUCP (Barry Margolin) (06/13/84)
In article <736@pyuxn.UUCP> rlr@pyuxn.UUCP writes: >1. I was kind of disappointed that T'Pao didn't call Spock "Tspoke" the way she > did in "Amok Time". -------------------- That's because it wasn't T'Pau. The name of the priestess in STIII was T'Lon. -- Barry Margolin ARPA: barmar@MIT-Multics UUCP: ..!genrad!mit-eddie!barmar
rjnoe@ihlts.UUCP (Roger Noe) (06/28/84)
> From: Anne Marie Quint [/amqueue] <quint@RU-BLUE.ARPA> > The flight recorder that was tampered with was a shuttle flight recorder > in the episode "Courtmartial". I dont remember any tampering with the > recorders of the Enterprise itself. Shuttle flight recorder? No, it was the bridge recorder of the Enterprise. > I think the major weakness of the movie was all the bits of the plot/story > that were elft on the cutting room floor. I can see the gaping holes designed > to make you buy the book so you can know what is *really* going on. Many of these scenes which would have helped ST3 were never shot in the first place. I hardly think the gaping holes were designed to get people to buy the book. Most people don't see these holes until they have read the book (Trek fans excluded, of course). > it is very questionable why Saavik would have taken a relative downgrade from > Command Captain Trainee to Scientific Researcher. She was a cadet in ST2, science officer of Grissom in ST3. Not what I would call a demotion. > The Vulcan Temple Maidens were for more than show...didn't anyone else > notice that thye seemed to be lending power to T'Whatsername as she was > re-recording Spock into his own head? They were doing the same thing that Saavik, Sarek and other Vulcans were doing: they were telepathic spectators. The women still LOOKED SILLY. -- "The more they overthink the plumbin', the easier 'tis to stop up the drain." Roger Noe ihnp4!ihlts!rjnoe