Undiscovered Country

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2003-12-30 11:49am

I just caught the trial of Kirk in TUC while flipping through the channels. Hot damn this movie fucking rocks. They spent a LOT of time making this movie into something that has never been seen in Trek before. It has a very well thought out plot. The movie is best described as a political murder mystery. For much of the movie you know what happened but not who did it and why.

TWOK was a very cool and fun movie to watch, but I must say that TUC was put together much better.

Tribun · Post by **Tribun** » 2003-12-30 11:57am

TUC is also important, because it shows a last time the Klingon society, before the butchering of TNG takes effect....

Ted C · Post by **Ted C** » 2003-12-30 12:02pm

The butchering was already in progress (Michael Dorn played Kirk's "public defender" if you'll recall), but the writers of TUC ignored what was happening to the Klingons in TNG.

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2003-12-30 12:03pm

It's hard for me because TUC is also possibly the best portrayal of the Klingons.

The discussion at the dinner table was an excellent point/counter point. Kang during the battle was great, and the fact that Klingons extremists collaberated with Starfleet extremists to insure the status quo was a great touch to show neither was in the complete right.

TWOK only beats it out because I liked Khan and Kirk's snips much better and that it was very serious but had hints of humor, while TUC had humor at some points I could've seen less of. The humor doesn't detract from TUC, but doesn't put it within the same level as TWOK does.

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2003-12-30 12:10pm

Ted C wrote:The butchering was already in progress (Michael Dorn played Kirk's "public defender" if you'll recall), but the writers of TUC ignored what was happening to the Klingons in TNG.

Butchering? TNG came out before TUC. The butchering is not chronological in order.

I also guess you didn't bother to look at the fact that Colonel Worf was likely an ancestor of the Worf we know in TNG and DS9. Its not unknown in many different series to use the same actor to portray a distant relative.

FYI, read the credits, it does indeed say Colonel Worf. This means he's a relative and it blows your argument out of the water.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-12-30 12:12pm

TUC is Rebecca's favourite Trek movie. I think it noteworthy that TWOK and TUC are widely considered the best Trek movies, and that Nick Meyer did both of them. Nick Meyer is clearly a Trek genius.

Sadly, he has never had any influence outside of those two movies AFAIK. Rick Berman has that position.

Montcalm · Post by **Montcalm** » 2003-12-30 12:13pm

Alyeska wrote:
Ted C wrote:The butchering was already in progress (Michael Dorn played Kirk's "public defender" if you'll recall), but the writers of TUC ignored what was happening to the Klingons in TNG.
Butchering? TNG came out before TUC. The butchering is not chronological in order.

I also guess you didn't bother to look at the fact that Colonel Worf was likely an ancestor of the Worf we know in TNG and DS9. Its not unknown in many different series to use the same actor to portray a distant relative.

FYI, read the credits, it does indeed say Colonel Worf. This means he's a relative and it blows your argument out of the water.

What proof do you have that this worf is related to the TNGs Worf?

Stravo · Post by **Stravo** » 2003-12-30 12:19pm

Montcalm wrote:
Alyeska wrote:
Ted C wrote:The butchering was already in progress (Michael Dorn played Kirk's "public defender" if you'll recall), but the writers of TUC ignored what was happening to the Klingons in TNG.
Butchering? TNG came out before TUC. The butchering is not chronological in order.

I also guess you didn't bother to look at the fact that Colonel Worf was likely an ancestor of the Worf we know in TNG and DS9. Its not unknown in many different series to use the same actor to portray a distant relative.

FYI, read the credits, it does indeed say Colonel Worf. This means he's a relative and it blows your argument out of the water.
What proof do you have that this worf is related to the TNGs Worf?

It was mentioned many times by the writers and Dorn himself that the intention was that Colonel Worf was a grandfather or some distant relative of TNG Worf.

TWOK was a better movie than TUC but TUC was a very proper sendoff to the TOS. They couldn't have asked for a better movie to say goodbye with, in particular the main villains being the oldest original villains (Klingons) and the TOS secures the future of the TNG. It was great in that sense.

Lord Pounder · Post by **Lord Pounder** » 2003-12-30 12:20pm

Not meaning to be a smart arse. But thet have the same name and look kinda like each other. Personally i'd always taken it forgranted that Worf and Col Worf where related.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-12-30 12:21pm

Stravo wrote:TWOK was a better movie than TUC but TUC was a very proper sendoff to the TOS. They couldn't have asked for a better movie to say goodbye with, in particular the main villains being the oldest original villains (Klingons) and the TOS secures the future of the TNG. It was great in that sense.

And then they brought back Kirk for that fucking useless abortion of a movie, Star Trek: Generations, where he died a ridiculously pathetic death at the hands at the hands of Malcolm McDowell on some hard-scrabble planet in the middle of nowhere.

Lancer · Post by **Lancer** » 2003-12-30 12:23pm

Darth Wong wrote:
Stravo wrote:TWOK was a better movie than TUC but TUC was a very proper sendoff to the TOS. They couldn't have asked for a better movie to say goodbye with, in particular the main villains being the oldest original villains (Klingons) and the TOS secures the future of the TNG. It was great in that sense.
And then they brought back Kirk for that fucking useless abortion of a movie, Star Trek: Generations, where he died a ridiculously pathetic death at the hands at the hands of Malcolm McDowell on some hard-scrabble planet in the middle of nowhere.

That's pretty much the general Trekkie attitude towards "Generations", that and the fact that an outdated BoP was able to kill off a Federation flagship.

Stravo · Post by **Stravo** » 2003-12-30 12:23pm

Darth Wong wrote:
Stravo wrote:TWOK was a better movie than TUC but TUC was a very proper sendoff to the TOS. They couldn't have asked for a better movie to say goodbye with, in particular the main villains being the oldest original villains (Klingons) and the TOS secures the future of the TNG. It was great in that sense.
And then they brought back Kirk for that fucking useless abortion of a movie, Star Trek: Generations, where he died a ridiculously pathetic death at the hands at the hands of Malcolm McDowell on some hard-scrabble planet in the middle of nowhere.

I'm sorry, but I've never heard of this Generations movie you speak of.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-12-30 12:25pm

Stravo wrote:I'm sorry, but I've never heard of this Generations movie you speak of.

*Pictures Stravo huddled in a corner, rocking back and forth, saying "there is no Generations, there is no Generations, there is no Generations ..."*

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2003-12-30 12:28pm

Darth Wong wrote:
Stravo wrote:TWOK was a better movie than TUC but TUC was a very proper sendoff to the TOS. They couldn't have asked for a better movie to say goodbye with, in particular the main villains being the oldest original villains (Klingons) and the TOS secures the future of the TNG. It was great in that sense.
And then they brought back Kirk for that fucking useless abortion of a movie, Star Trek: Generations, where he died a ridiculously pathetic death at the hands at the hands of Malcolm McDowell on some hard-scrabble planet in the middle of nowhere.

Now that's just cruel, dredging up that memory...

What's next remind us that their send off was Nemesis and give comparisons between the two?

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2003-12-30 12:31pm

The sad thing about Generations is that it could have been so much more. I still think having Kirk die on the bridge of the Enterprise-D battle bridge would have been the perfect send off.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2003-12-30 12:31pm

I agree, Star Trek VI was the best Trek movie by far. Not only did it do a great amount of justice to the characters and their relationships, but it tied them together with a gripping plot set in some truly unique environments. I can't believe that Enterprise cheapened TUC by recreating not only the Judgement Hall, but also Rurapenthe all for no reason other then to try to bring back the Trekkie die hards.

TUC is also the source of the single greatest line in all of Star Trek.

Chang: To be, or not to be, that is the question that preoccupies us. We need breathing room!

Kirk: Earth, Hitler, 1938.

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2003-12-30 12:32pm

Montcalm wrote:What proof do you have that this worf is related to the TNGs Worf?

Lets see... Same last name. Same face. Back stage information all state they were related...

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2003-12-30 12:33pm

Alyeska wrote:The sad thing about Generations is that it could have been so much more. I still think having Kirk die on the bridge of the Enterprise-D battle bridge would have been the perfect send off.

Fuck, I think the whole idea of uniting the two generations was questionable. They would have been better off doing a story set in both time periods with an interweaving thread that dealt with Kirk's death and Picard finishing the story that Kirk began. Why did they have to throw together a contrived story where they actually meet?

Montcalm · Post by **Montcalm** » 2003-12-30 12:37pm

The Kernel wrote:
Alyeska wrote:The sad thing about Generations is that it could have been so much more. I still think having Kirk die on the bridge of the Enterprise-D battle bridge would have been the perfect send off.
Fuck, I think the whole idea of uniting the two generations was questionable. They would have been better off doing a story set in both time periods with an interweaving thread that dealt with Kirk's death and Picard finishing the story that Kirk began. Why did they have to throw together a contrived story where they actually meet?

Just wait until they find a stupid way to connect TOS,TNG and Enterprise.

Jason von Evil · Post by **Jason von Evil** » 2003-12-30 12:37pm

TUC by far, blows all the TNG movies out of the water. I'd say it ties with TWOK. The main battle of the movie was on par with the TWOK. The tension of not knowing where the BoP was worked well.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2003-12-30 12:38pm

Montcalm wrote: Just wait until they find a stupid way to connect TOS,TNG and Enterprise.

I take it you didn't catch the utterly stupid Regeneration? That was the episode that put me off Star Trek for good.

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2003-12-30 12:39pm

The Kernel wrote:
Alyeska wrote:The sad thing about Generations is that it could have been so much more. I still think having Kirk die on the bridge of the Enterprise-D battle bridge would have been the perfect send off.
Fuck, I think the whole idea of uniting the two generations was questionable. They would have been better off doing a story set in both time periods with an interweaving thread that dealt with Kirk's death and Picard finishing the story that Kirk began. Why did they have to throw together a contrived story where they actually meet?

B&B had three primary goals.

1: Bring the two captains together to entice people to watch the movie
2: Shock them by killing Kirk
3: Shock them by destroying the Enterprise

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-12-30 12:40pm

Alyeska wrote:B&B had three primary goals.

1: Bring the two captains together to entice people to watch the movie
2: Shock them by killing Kirk
3: Shock them by destroying the Enterprise

From Nick Meyer to B&B in one movie; what a precipitous drop.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2003-12-30 12:49pm

Alyeska wrote: B&B had three primary goals.

1: Bring the two captains together to entice people to watch the movie
2: Shock them by killing Kirk
3: Shock them by destroying the Enterprise

It's a fucking shame that telling a good story isn't among those goals.

Patrick Degan · Post by **Patrick Degan** » 2003-12-30 12:49pm

There are actually several great gaping plot-holes in this film:

•the very convenient placement of the veridian tracking patch on Kirk's shoulder by Spock

•the even more convenient non-removal of that patch (or simply Kirk's whole uniform) by the Klingons while he and McCoy were in their custody, the failure to resolve the issue of whether this was mere improvisation on Spock's part or a deliberate plan preconceived by Kirk and Spock beforehand (the first part of the movie implies not, the second half suggests otherwise)

•the reliance by the Klingons on one renegade shapeshifter to kill Kirk and McCoy "while escaping" instead of simply arranging "an accident" for them immediately upon their incarceration at Rura Penthe (which is how any efficent conspiracy would have handled those two loose ends)

•the allowance of enough time for Kirk and McCoy to plan their escape attempt which conveniently allows Spock and the Enterprise to sit on their dead asses conducting an evidence search (you'd think Valeris would have had a secondary mission to sabotage or even destroy the Enterprise if necessary to prevent her from intervening —which is also how any efficent conspiracy would've tied up loose ends)

•the very convenient happenstance that the monitor station tracking the Enterprise's crossing past the Neutral Zone boundary is manned by the two dumbest Klingons in the whole Empire

•the very nick-of-time arrival of the Enterprise at R-P to beam up Kirk and McCoy just as they're about to be shot

•the Enterprise managing to spend an indeterminate amount of time in orbit over R-P totally unmolested by Klingon forces and with no effort on Valeris' part to sabotage or destroy the ship to prevent any possible interference with the assasination attempt at Khitomer

•the total lack of either Federation or Klingon ships at Khitomer to provide any orbital safeguard for the peace conference (and don't try fobbing off secrecy of the conference as an excuse —NO government would allow its leadership to attend even a top-secret summit in an undisclosed location without providing sufficent forces to guarantee the conferees' safety)

•Chang stupidly picking away at the Enterprise while maniacally quoting Shakespeare instead of simply doing the fucking job and opening up at close range with a heavy enough barrage to destroy the Federation ship as quickly as possible

•the fact that Col. West was not already in his sniper's nest ahead of time, or that the conspirators didn't simply plant a bomb, and thus the conspirators allowing more than enough time for Kirk and co. to beam down and stop the assasination attempt.

Beyond that, we notice Chang's helmsman clearly turning a ship's rudder-wheel to manoeuver the BOP, and Kirk in an earlier portion of the movie orders a course-change of "fifteen degrees left-rudder" (in a spaceship?!). There were script errors which were very obvious, very basic, and which totally slipped past the editing stage of the creative process. It is very possible that the making of this film was rushed to have a completed cut ready for Gene Roddenberry to view before he died.

The Undiscovered Country is saved by its overall style, its taut direction by Nicholas Meyer, its grand themes, and the very real value of seeing our familiar TOS heroes go out in one final blaze of glory (and living to tell of it). The retirement and "passing the baton" themes were well played upon, and that's what gives this movie its special significance in the Trek canon and in the hearts of the fans. Additionally, it has some of the best character moments in TOS' cinematic run. But it is also a visibly flawed movie, turning on plot-convenience theatre and dependence upon extreme stupidity and incompetence on the villains' parts at the very moments such are necessary, and certainly not the equal to The Wrath Of Khan by any stretch of the imagination.