Shatner? Ego? Never...
Aug. 14th, 2006 09:34 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
acroyearthe thought running through my head every 5 minutes through the "Captain's Log" making of Star Trek III.
acroyearacroyear
Page Summary
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Style Credit
- Style: Neutral Good for Practicality by timeasmymeasure
Expand Cut Tags
No cut tags
no subject
Date: 2006-08-15 01:42 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-08-15 02:34 am (UTC)That was delightful.
no subject
Date: 2006-08-15 03:51 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-08-15 03:48 am (UTC)R.
Illiant.
no subject
Date: 2006-08-15 03:51 am (UTC)He does Shatner bits like that on occasion. There have been several in the past....
no subject
Date: 2006-08-15 02:31 am (UTC)Although I would imagine his ego is much more on display on the goodies of ST:V, the one he directed.
no subject
Date: 2006-08-15 02:36 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-08-15 02:43 am (UTC)My collection of ST films wouldn't have 1, 5, 9 or 10 in it.
Especially not 5, for love or money.
He lost me at the lengthy upshot of his rock-climbing butt.
no subject
Date: 2006-08-15 03:11 am (UTC)on the other hand, I love Insurrection (9) more than First Contact (8), so there you go. yes, its more an episode of the series rather than a great movie (where ST2 is the ultimate great movie), but its a GREAT episode of the series compared to the series itself that had quite a few losers in hindsight.
10 was unsalvageable. i'm really not sure why nothing they tried worked, but it just didn't work.
#5 was limited by both the story, by "rote" directing, by crappy writing for the secondary crew (Shatner/Nimoy/Kelley got all the good lines) and by the sets and locations - 2 desert planets is merely the same planet from an artistic p.o.v., you gain nothing from an alien planet if you don't make it DIFFERENT.
take Star Wars - every planet is unique; even the forest of Endor is not the forest-swamp of the Wookie planet.
#6? the only really bad thing about it is the HUGE continuity bug that my then-girlfriend spotted in seconds when we saw it back then: at the beginning, Excelsior was the ship with the gas-detection equipment, so why did Uhura have the idea to use that equipment on the Enterprise that never established that it actually HAD that equipment? sheesh...
#1? the new remaster helps a lot, as it really gets the pacing to where it should be. my only gripe is they cut a line I think was necessary. early in the film, Kirk asks Decker "How do you define unwarrented?". much later, when Ilia is captured, Decker angrilly replies: "THAT is how I define unwarrented.". they cut the latter, and i think the former, and i felt that cut a little too much character development, particularly because it was only a total of 3 seconds to have kept the lines in...
oddly, in hindsight, its #4 that I like the least. its a good film, but its the least "Star Trek" of any of them. it was written by the same guy who did "Time after Time" in 1979 that had a utopian H.G. Wells looking at modern San Francisco as a means to make us laugh at our own society's limitations. as such, he effectively wrote that film twice and got it right the first time. yes, TOS had its "20th century" moments, but 20th century culture was not the target the writer wanted to present (except early 20th century in Piece of the Action).
no subject
Date: 2006-08-15 01:22 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-08-15 05:52 pm (UTC)