What's new

DVD Review HTF REVIEW: Star Trek V: The Final Frontier (1 Viewer)

MattGentry

Second Unit
Joined
Apr 22, 2003
Messages
257
You people and your 'directors cuts'... "Directors Cuts. What does God need with a directors cut?"

Well, someone had to do it...
 

Osato

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2001
Messages
8,182
Real Name
Tim
Question on the new disc: Is this the same transfer used on the previous release of the DVD?
There is some conflicting information regarding this in the reviews I have read.

3300 signatures huh? That's a few sales? I know a lot of people would have bought this disc if it was a new version, and are passing on it because it's not.
I understand the business side of things, but I would think a new version of the film would market very well as it is Star Trek and is the original crew.
Oh well. I am picking up the disc and look forward to 6 even though it will not be a Director's Cut either.
Thanks!
 

Bill Williams

Screenwriter
Joined
May 28, 2003
Messages
1,697
Ronald,

I wouldn't be surprised if Paramount decides to triple-dip this title. Paramount is notorious for multi-dipping their Star Trek property on video - all of the various VHS, laserdisc, and DVD releases included.

Then again, something struck me a little while ago. What if Shatner got the money from Paramount to finish restoring Star Trek V? Would Nimoy call in his reciprocity contract clause and ask for money to spruce up III and IV for future releases? Interesting thought to consider.

I hope that Paramount really takes a long, hard look at not only this thread but also the petition and see that the demand is there for a properly completed version of this film.

BTW, to borrow from Toy Story, you've got a fan in me! :)
 

Nelson Au

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 16, 1999
Messages
19,042
Bill-

I was thinking the same, the reciprocity clause could have been in the minds of the people Mr. Shatner spoke to at Paramount. Maybe they already discussed it with Mr. Nimoy.

But I was thinking, would Mr. Shatner after all this really want to do a revised version for a third DVD if he had the money. Maybe he's lost the enthusiasm for it. From the traffic on his site that I can see, I bet he could raise the money from the fans there and here and on the Trek sites. But then would a fan want to donate, say $20 a piece to fund this redux, would they then want to spend another $20 to 30 to buy the DVD?

Just fun thinking...
 

Peter Apruzzese

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 20, 1999
Messages
4,894
Real Name
Peter Apruzzese
Looking forward to getting this. It's certainly better than III, IV (the "oh-aren't-we-funny" film of the series), and all the Next Generation films.
 

ChrisBEA

Screenwriter
Joined
Jul 19, 2003
Messages
1,657
And, I never understood the humor in the expert engineer, intimately familiar with his starship, knocking himself out by walking into a beam.
I actually liked this, you see this was a new Enterprise (NCC-1701A) The original (NCC-1701) was lost in part III. The design was different, Scotty was thinking he was on the old Enterprise.

Anyway, This movie was pretty weak, I used to consider TMP to be the weakest, but I rewatched the DC recently and actually liked it, although it was still a bit slow.
 

Seth--L

Screenwriter
Joined
Jun 22, 2003
Messages
1,344


I disagree.

One of the reason die hard trekkers hate Trek V is because it breaks all of Star Trek's own rules, such as the center of the galaxy being a ten minute journey away, there suddenly being a hundred decks on the enterprise, Scotty becoming a klutz, and [EDIT]Spock killing his half brother which would have been logical. Poor FX was just one of many problems, along with a script that has a massive first act and tiny second and third acts, and some horrific singing.

Seeing that the last Trek film bombed at the box office, I doubt that Trekkers would come out of the wood work to buy Trek V just because it contained some new fx and additional scenes. At the most a director's cut would have boosted rentals.
 

Jack Shappa

Second Unit
Joined
Jan 24, 2003
Messages
411
Spock not killing his half brother which would have been logical.
After Spock was "resurrected" in Star Trek III, I believe they tried to make the character more emotional. Notice how he's kind of a blank slate in ST4, and they start teaching him to "use his best guess", and in ST5 he's swearing "Damn you sir, you WILL try". I think it was intentional that the character is more open to his emotions and no longer embraces only pure logic. Star Trek 6 continues the trend.

- Cry
 

Seth--L

Screenwriter
Joined
Jun 22, 2003
Messages
1,344


Being more emotional is a big jump to endangering the lives of everyone aboard the Enterprise and letting the ship fall into enemy hands. The whole point of the Spock character is that he is type of person that could make the right decision in those situations.
 

Edwin-S

Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2000
Messages
10,000


Nothing but a lit match could ever improve STAR TREK V but, even burning, it is still a better movie than BATTLEFIELD EARTH. There is only one reason to watch BATTLEFIELD EARTH and that is to watch the hysterical overacting of John Travolta. His acting in that film was some of the best unintentional comedy I have ever seen. Even Shatner, with his exaggerated style, never acted as badly as John Travolta did in BE.
 

Geoff_D

Supporting Actor
Joined
Jul 18, 2002
Messages
933
I don't know if I'd buy a DC, as this 2-disc release will do me just fine. I really like V for the reasons others hate it: Campfire singalongs; Scotty vs. overhead beam etc. And the scene where Sybok helps Spock and McCoy to confront their respective demons is especially touching. It's one of my favourite Trek moments. But Uhura dancing IS an ungodly sight. Maybe I'll shut my eyes when that bit comes up.
 

Randy Tennison

Screenwriter
Joined
Jan 5, 1999
Messages
1,099
Real Name
Randy
My complaint on this film has always been when Kirk, Sybok, and Sulu are in the shuttlecraft. Kirk, knowing he has been captured by Sybok, takes him back to the Enterprize. "Real Kirk" would have killed himself to avoid the ship being taken over by a hostile enemy. He would have never returned to the ship.

I'll buy it, for completeness, but probably won't watch it.
 

Tony Whalen

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2002
Messages
3,150
Real Name
Tony Whalen
Well, I'm most certainly a completist, and I do have a spot in my heart for this flick...even if it IS the worst of the bunch. ;) So I'll be picking this up. :D

However, I would gladly pick up a DC done by Shatner down the road. If any ST film needs a DC, it's this one.

Heck, even BATTLEFIELD: EARTH was better than STV!
I wouldn't go THAT far.... ;)
 

Dave Scarpa

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 8, 1999
Messages
5,765
Real Name
David Scarpa
Well Kirk's "Plan" was to use that rocky landing to perhaps get a foothold on Sybok and his renegades. But Sybok beat him to the Weapon. I thought that very TOS Like
 

Jack Shappa

Second Unit
Joined
Jan 24, 2003
Messages
411
Being more emotional is a big jump to endangering the lives of everyone aboard the Enterprise and letting the ship fall into enemy hands. The whole point of the Spock character is that he is type of person that could make the right decision in those situations.
But that's the whole point. Perhaps "old" Spock would have fired, but "new" Spock is more emotional and doesn't want to shoot his own brother, even if it goes against pure logic or his mantra from star trek 2 (needs of the many...)

Also, if it were Kirk who were endangering the ship, would Spock (even old Spock) shoot him? Doubt it.

- Cryo

Can't remember what weapon Spock ends up with in that scene, no stun setting?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
356,815
Messages
5,123,808
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top