krm (09/20/82)
In several places in this weekends papers, I have read that both Nemoy and Shatner will be back in ST III. Reputable sources.. "Chekov" and Shatner himself were quoted. Rich Magill
peterr@utcsrgv.UUCP (Peter Rowley) (05/17/84)
Paramount is running a ST trivia contest in Canada (grand prize is a trip to Hollywood for the premiere of ST3) and the promotional literature has a plot teaser for ST3. Not too surprisingly, the movie has them searching the Genesis planet where they find surprising things. They also find a bumpy Klingon (played by Christopher Lloyd, who played the drug-scarred cabbie in "Taxi"). Given the nature of the planet, one wonders if ol' J. T. Kirk will regain some of his youthful vigour and we'll be treated to a "putting his boots back on" scene... p. rowley, U. Toronto
milan@psddevl.UUCP (Milan Strnad) (05/23/84)
God, how I hate it when the Enterprise can't get her shields up. I mean, all that technology, and still they've got problems. milan (..utzoo!psddevl!milan)
mff@wuphys.UUCP (Mark F. Flynn) (06/01/84)
I just saw a commercial for STIII that was about 2~3 minutes long (on MTV, of all places) which shows Kirk and the old gang stealing the Enterprise. They then run into a Klingon ship and, for some reason, can't get their sheilds up. They get the crap blasted out of them. The last scene shows the ship with about 1/3 of the top section blown away. Sounds like the old Enterprise is about to be retired. M. Flynn
brad@umcp-cs.UUCP (06/03/84)
Well, I've just come back from seeing ST III and I have to say that I LOVED
IT!!!!
[Actually, I saw it last night, opening night, but this *%&%#^#@ machine ]
[crashed in the middle of my postnews. So... ]
It leaves just the proper amount of cliff hangers for ST IV:
Which service will Kirk et. al. be in, the UFP or the Klingon?
Just how all right is Spock?
What ship (if any) will Kirk and crew have?
I loved the acting except for Christopher Lloyd. I just couldn't see him as
evil and the audience cracked up during a couple of his speeches. The new
Saavik does impress me though. Still, I think I liked the appearance by
Mark Lenard best of all. He still thrills me everytime I see him.
Did everyone catch the cameo by ex-Yoman Rand (Grace Lee Whitney) during the
docking scene? Now for another Majel Barrett Rodenberry cameo...
I also thought that I'd mention that Nichelle Nichols is looking better than
ever. Perhaps her turn will come in ST IV.
I think I'll sit back now and wait for the flames/reviews to roll in.
b**2
arpa: brad@maryland
csnet: brad@umcp-cs
uucp: ...{seismo,allegra}!umcp-cs!brad
p.s. some curious masochist out there mail me and ask me how much I paid for
this movie. It's a nice story and I don't regret it at all. This movie was
worth it!!!!!!!!!!!! (Moriarty or jayembee, that's an invitation, my mailbox
is feeling lonely)ccc@cwruecmp.UUCP (Case Computer Club) (06/08/84)
bleep. It seems pretty clear to me that Saavik and the 17 year old spock did in fact have sex. This was Saavik's sacrifice to keeping Spock from going crazy or dying from Pon Far. Later on, Spock becomes very sick and unconscious after he is not able to satisfy his needs every seven years of aging. You will notice at the end of the film that Spock gives a special look to Saavik indicating that he remembers the encounter. Remember that Spock's mind was transferred back from McCoy, but there is no reason that the few experiences and memories that the new body had should be erased. I kind of got the feeling that Spock was trying to integrate the two parts of himself together (both the old Spock and the boy) and that was the reason "only time would tell" if the procedure worked. That's all for now... David Kushner (DMK) ...decvax!cwruecmp!ncoast!dmk
sag@rayssd.UUCP (06/11/84)
I saw the movie, and enjoyed it very much. I think it was necessary for Spock to come back, even though the way it was done was a bit bogus. B U T They should NOT have blown up the Enterprise. Oh well, maybe they will rename the Excelsior in STIV!?
nosmo@pyuxqq.UUCP (P Valdata) (06/12/84)
Can't resist adding my two credits worth...It was an enjoyable movie, as far as leaving me with a warm fuzzy feeling at the end, but that doesn't make it as good a film as the second, which had a better plot, script, acting, and direction, but an unhappy ending. Leonard Nimoy has a way to go learning to be a director (still, it was a better job than any of us could do), but I would be very happy to see him practice on further ST films! My English major background helped me accept the resurrection idea--I thought it was very fitting in concept (not in execution--the "vestal virgins" and gong player were horrible). It is a long-standing tradition in literature to have a major character undergo some sort of death and resurrection. Remember the scientist in the Out of the Silent Planet trilogy? And Gandalf? Besides, it brought back my favorite character! I think it was not only necessary but fitting to destroy the Enterprise, although I agree that Scotty and Kirk were too composed throughout the ship's death throes (which I thought were well done). Regardless of whether it was 20 or 35 years old, it was old; now we can have future movies that aren't tied to old effects. Kirk did the logical thing at the time, and it helps illustrate how deep his commitment was to Spock. It also shows some growth in Kirk's character --now that he isn't "married" to that ship, maybe he can cope with a romance. And what's all this about Saavik's "sacrifice"--her liaison with Spocklet, whatever form it took. Since when is having sex a sacrifice?! Besides, she also did the logical thing at the time. She wanted to preserve the young Spock, and there was only one way to do that. I found her embarrassment at the end very un-Vulcan. Sure wish Kirstie Alley hadn't gotten greedy. As for David's death, it was obvious to me that Saavik was about to get knifed, and his death to save her was some sort of atonement for having been unethical, like Dr. Jekyll and Dr. Frankenstein and all who dare to tamper with creation. This, too, is traditional stuff. Besides, he really was a nerd. I thought the bar scene was a bit of a ripoff, especially the Yoda-like syntax used by the creature McCoy was negotiating with. And I like Christopher Lloyd, but wish he had changed his voice somehow. His Reverend Jim tones came through too often, like Fozzie Bear's did with Yoda. It made it hard for me to keep him in character. All in all, it was a perfectly nice, but not great, movie with some excellent lines, good characters, and a good story. I certainly hope the adventure continues; they tied up so many loose ends it could go anywhere.
butenhof@orac.DEC (Dave Butenhof, VAX-11 RSX AME) (06/14/84)
> 3. How can Spock remember his last words to Kirk, if he > memory-dumped to McCoy *before* then? (this is actually an excerpt from sf-lovers, not net.startrek, but the same objection has been raised here) Easy -- I was visiting my parents over the past weekend and watched STII on my father's RCA videodisk player. I noted with interest that the EXACT same conversation ("The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one; I have been and always will be, your friend") took place at the beginning of the movie! Therefore, Spock was not remembering the final conversation in the engine room, but rather, the EARLIER conversation. Oh, and in line with the now well-known "Remember" line before Spock killed himself (one wonders why they didn't just have him take the time to find a radiation suit before going inside, and save themselves the trouble of resurrecting him, by the way), I noticed after that, as Kirk, McCoy, and others watch the Genesis nebula from the bridge, McCoy comments "Spock will never be dead, as long as we remember him ..." or words closely to that effect. All in all, I liked the movie. I came out of the theatre feeling disappointed, but not quite certain of why. On reflection, and after reading all the messages over the net, I've decided that I liked it: I'd even like to see it again. I think it was a simpler plot line than STII. It was, after all, really only an epilogue to STII -- it simply tied up the remaining plot thread (Spock). There was less of the bold sense of adventure; they were rehashing old things, rather than doing new things. But the characterisations were good, particularly the primary ones, and more like the TV characters than in the other movies. In STII, after the horrendous STI, I felt that we could see our old friends again. With STIII, I feel that they once again walk among us. The old Saavik was indeed better (even though I think the difference is mostly attributable to writing and directing, rather than to the actress herself). I guess we all pay the price of Kirstie's greed. I think Chris Lloyd did well as a Klingon. Indeed, there were uncomfortable shades of Taxi drifting throught the theatre. The problem is not with the actor, but with the audience, however. We've let ourselves type-cast him; not his fault. I think it's too bad they killed him off. On the other hand, maybe he'll be replaced by a Klingon who's had his forehead cleaned and pressed recently ... As for the mess they all should be in at the end, it looks bad. STIV should be interesting. There are some good sides, however -- they prevented a war with the Klingons (had they succeeded in getting Genesis, they would surely have gone to war: that's quite a weapon). They saved the Federation the expense of dismantling (or whatever) an obsolete starship, etc. Someone's suggestion that Kirk would be demoted to Captain and sent out on a mission was pure brilliance ... slightly too "pat," but far better than most of the other likely resolutions. I have mixed emotions about the Excelsior class ship ... it looks funny, and certainly is not as sleek as the Enterprise; but I'll reserve judgement for now. We'll see, we'll see ... December 85 or bust! /dave orac::butenhof (enet) decwrl!rhea!orac!butenhof (the cold and cruel world outside) (no company name or address 'cause we've been tolded not to! so who really cares, anyway?)
cbspt002@abnjh.UUCP (Marc E. Kenig ) (06/24/84)
<> Why was it that as Kirk pushed the Klingon commander off the ledge, all I could think of was Wile E. Coyote's similar falls from the Road Runner cartoons. I wonder if it was intentional, the way the end of the cliff fell off and the puff of lava? I'll bet that ST:IV is a Federation v. Klingon war. After all, a ship has been lost on both sides (the Feds are down two!). There were all the side lines about (peace?) conferences. Bet that gets shot all to Vulcan! Pretty easy way to get Kirk et al back in the Federations good graces, too. (Not to mention a bigger special effects budget:-) M. Kenig ...abnjh!cbspt002
eric@whuxle.UUCP (Eric Holtman) (06/24/84)
I too would LOVE to see a Klingon --- Federation War in ST IV. Lord knows, after all the money Paramount is making, they could afford to borrow I.L.M. for a year just for the special effects. Can you imagine 50-100 ships all blasting away (just like Jedi!!). However, I can see one fault with this, in advance. All you SFB players out there would probably rip the battle scenes to shreds for non-believability, even though the makers of the game know no more about battles than I.L.M would... Anyhows, rambling on, I thought ST III was the best picture so far, by far. As has been pointed out before, it had flaws, but, personally, I couldn't give two craps. Nimoy should direct ST IV, he has proven himself worthy of the honor by his work on ST III. Now that Paramount has money and public reaction on their side, I hope they sack Robin Curtis and go begging to Kristie Alley. That's about all I can think of that ST IV needs. Ooops, i almost forgot.. the ENTERPRISE.... ah yes.... again, i say BIG DEAL. As long as Kirk doesn`t get stuck on the garbage scow called the Excelsior, things will be fine. I`m not gonna hack on the dead issue of whether the Enterprise had to die. It died, and no amount of bitching and crying is gonna bring it back. If Paramount resurrects the Enterprise, would you EVER thenafter believe ANYTHING could happen to anyone or anything important on the show?? We brought Spock back, but as far as I'm concerned, the Enterprise better damn well stay dead@!!!
merchant@dartvax.UUCP (Peter Merchant) (06/25/84)
{ }
I hope Star Trek IV does NOT feature a Federation/Klingon war.
Star Trek has always been about people. We've seen the war
story with Kahn. Now let's see some other stories.
In fact, one thing I rather credited Star Trek II with was the
reasonable space battle. They talked about corrosive fluids,
damaged this, wounded that, they dared actually show a little
gore (who can forget Scotty showing up with his nephew all
messy and dieing in his arms.) and I applaud them for that.
Star Wars and films like it were a little to neat and clean for
me. War is a messy business, gang, and something that should
be avoided.
Yes, the effects of a battle between hundreds of battle cruisers
and Klingon ships might be really neat to watch. However, when a
ship goes kaboom, you have to remember that you have just seen
HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE KILLED. If they decide to a battle between
the Federation and the Klingons, I hope they do it justice. Let's
see the dead burnt bodies. Let's hear the cries of agony from
people who are having corrosive acid pouring from damaged piping.
Bag the special effects entirely! Just show the insides of both
ships.
I was always happy with the fact that Star Trek rarely stooped
so low as to do stories about the Enterprise going off into
battle to save the day. When these stories were done, a peaceful
solution was usually arrived at (either by Kirk or by a batch of
aliens stepping in). The only war story that comes immediately
to mind was the one with the Romulans, and that was very well
done because of all the subplots running around in there.
Come come! Let's not turn Star Trek into another Star Wars with
bigger ships. Let's see some real stories.
--
"War is heck." Peter Merchantrjnoe@ihlts.UUCP (Roger Noe) (06/27/84)
Peter Merchant has hit it on the head exactly. Doing a Klingon-Federation war as an excuse for ST4 would drag Star Trek down to the level of Star Wars. This would be one of the few events that could possibly cause me to want nothing to do with Star Trek ever after. Star Trek has been about people and ideas, usually noble ones at that. I sincerely hope that Paramount does not decide to let some misguided producer get childish with Star Trek. That would be such a waste. -- "The more they overthink the plumbin', the easier 'tis to stop up the drain." Roger Noe ihnp4!ihlts!rjnoe