I was just shocked The Little Mermaid made less than Star Trek V (Domestically) and was so far down the list. I just assumed TLM was in the top ten highest grossing films of the year.
And this is why I bring more details outside of just box office numbers to reflect how Star Trek V has done over the past three decades. It's one thing to say that a film did better than another film both critically and financially, but how did the film do after that? Take these two films for example.
Stop! Or My Mom Will Shoot!: $70.6 million Army of Darkness: $21.6 million
Like Father Like Son: $14.8 million The Princess Bride: $5.1 million
'Stop!' grossed more than three times what Army of Darkness did at the Box Office, but which film do you think has really done better in the long haul? Sometimes films don't reach their audiences when released in theaters while others that do are quickly brushed off and forgotten.
Star Trek V hasn't really achieved any kind of come back, re-evaluation or finding an audience that that would have allowed it to endure on it's own. And unlike 'Stop!' which was promptly forgotten, Star Trek V did worse for itself because it would be remembered by the general audience for simply being the bad Star Trek film that helped solidify the 'Odd numbers suck, even numbers good' reputation of the film franchise.
But where those disservices can all stem from the lack of moments the story could allow for them, Star Trek V goes the extra mile by actually bringing these characters down. Sulu, Chekov and Uhura all willingly turn on Kirk. Even though McCoy and Spock were charmed, they still refuse to follow Sybok unlike everyone else. And the only character who flat out resists Sybok's pain relieving charms... is Kirk. The only reason Scotty gets a pass is because he never got charmed, though I suppose 'walking' into things and getting knocked out isn't a high for his character either.
That's why despite the chemistry and good acting from Shatner, Nimoy and Kelly, I did not like the Trio aspect of this film because Shatner believed that was all that was necessary and everyone else should be the butt of the jokes. Not because they were funny, but because there make the trio look better by comparison.
I wish I could say Star Trek learned it's lesson from this, but Star Trek: Nemesis proved they could do it way worse.
Oh, we agree, apparently Shatner wanted McCoy and Spock to betray Kirk, as well as all the other characters. That is detailed in the book that Shatners daughter wrote, the Making of book, which was surprisingly honest about the failings. In any case Kelley and Nimoy put the brakes on that. It is a very flawed film for certain, but there are some things to like about it, the utter wackiness and something less than professional quality of some of it hearkens back to TOS
The idea that The Voyage Home is the worst Trek film is just ludicrous and baseless, I mean, gods sake, just say you do not like it. It is one of the best reviewed and the most financially successful of all the TOS films. Lets get a grip.
Just because I didn't take the time (which I don't have at the moment) to write out some reasons, doesn't mean it's not the worst TOS cast lead film (you left out that last part, by the way). It's ludicrous to think the film doesn't have any. And yes, every Trek film does, but this is by far the worst and most egregious, down to even the writers' idea for the film.
"Best viewed and financially successful" was nothing I brought up. I don't care about those when forming my opinions.
https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/star-trek-iv-the-voyage-home-1986 When they finished writing the script for "Star Trek IV," they must have had a lot of silly grins on their faces. This is easily the most absurd of the "Star Trek" stories - and yet, oddly enough, it is also the best, the funniest and the most enjoyable in simple human terms. I'm relieved that nothing like restraint or common sense stood in their way.
-- There are some major action sequences in the movie, but they aren't the high points; the "Star Trek" saga has always depended more on human interaction and thoughtful, cause-oriented plots. What happens in San Francisco is much more interesting than what happens in outer space, and this movie, which might seem to have an unlikely and ungainly plot, is actually the most elegant and satisfying "Star Trek" film so far
The idea that The Voyage Home is the worst Trek film is just ludicrous and baseless, I mean, gods sake, just say you do not like it. It is one of the best reviewed and the most financially successful of all the TOS films. Lets get a grip.
Agreed. It is the rare Star Trek movie that brought in a sizable audience of people who aren't really Star Trek fans. It isn't my favorite of the original 6, but it does have a lot going for it. I joke with friends that it is the Star Trek film for people who don't like Star Trek.
There is literally a ton of things to like about ST-IV. It's a really well-crafted film, for one thing. I find some of the humor really forced, and some of it flowing organically from who the characters are. I find the score generic and "un-Trekish", but it served its function.
What gets on my tit is that the studio saw what worked in it and then mandated Shatner to shoehorn in more of that kind of slapstick into ST-V. But despite that studio interference, Shatner made sure that everyone got face time in the film. That was cool. Some of us fans disliked the idea that some of the crew would turn on Kirk. Where was that discomfort when similar plots devices already happened in the original episodes? Among other things, it has some of the best lines ever scripted for ST. (Some of the worst, too, but the same could be said for every incarnation of ST.)
So, there is literally a ton of things to like about ST-V, as well.
The idea that The Voyage Home is the worst Trek film is just ludicrous and baseless, I mean, gods sake, just say you do not like it. It is one of the best reviewed and the most financially successful of all the TOS films. Lets get a grip.
Agreed. It is the rare Star Trek movie that brought in a sizable audience of people who aren't really Star Trek fans. It isn't my favorite of the original 6, but it does have a lot going for it. I joke with friends that it is the Star Trek film for people who don't like Star Trek.
There is literally a ton of things to like about ST-IV. It's a really well-crafted film, for one thing. I find some of the humor really forced, and some of it flowing organically from who the characters are. I find the score generic and "un-Trekish", but it served its function.
What gets on my tit is that the studio saw what worked in it and then mandated Shatner to shoehorn in more of that kind of slapstick into ST-V. But despite that studio interference, Shatner made sure that everyone got face time in the film. That was cool. Some of us fans disliked the idea that some of the crew would turn on Kirk. Where was that discomfort when similar plots devices already happened in the original episodes? Among other things, it has some of the best lines ever scripted for ST. (Some of the worst, too, but the same could be said for every incarnation of ST.)
So, there is literally a ton of things to like about ST-V, as well.
Just think if they had indeed gone ahead with Eddie Murphy as the guest star. It was actually in the plans for Voyage Home. Thanks goodness Harve and Nick and Nimoy shot down Paramount on that
Tenet ranks down there with the epic worst movies ever made, pound for point, dollar for dollar, minute for minute, it is a smoking worthless trash heap of pretentiousness, it is astonishing how bad it is.
I'd chime in, but all I can say is I could not tell... 60% of the most important dialogue was obliterated by the sound mix.
Ditto on this...I may have to watch it again with subtitles...I love Nolan and all his films but this one and I was so goddamn mad after watching this I almost swore off watching any more of his films if he did the deliberate sound muffling again.
There is literally a ton of things to like about ST-IV. It's a really well-crafted film, for one thing. I find some of the humor really forced, and some of it flowing organically from who the characters are. I find the score generic and "un-Trekish", but it served its function.
What gets on my tit is that the studio saw what worked in it and then mandated Shatner to shoehorn in more of that kind of slapstick into ST-V. But despite that studio interference, Shatner made sure that everyone got face time in the film. That was cool. Some of us fans disliked the idea that some of the crew would turn on Kirk. Where was that discomfort when similar plots devices already happened in the original episodes? Among other things, it has some of the best lines ever scripted for ST. (Some of the worst, too, but the same could be said for every incarnation of ST.)
So, there is literally a ton of things to like about ST-V, as well.
So in other words, it was the best of times, it was the worst of times.
There is literally a ton of things to like about ST-IV. It's a really well-crafted film, for one thing. I find some of the humor really forced, and some of it flowing organically from who the characters are. I find the score generic and "un-Trekish", but it served its function.
What gets on my tit is that the studio saw what worked in it and then mandated Shatner to shoehorn in more of that kind of slapstick into ST-V. But despite that studio interference, Shatner made sure that everyone got face time in the film. That was cool. Some of us fans disliked the idea that some of the crew would turn on Kirk. Where was that discomfort when similar plots devices already happened in the original episodes? Among other things, it has some of the best lines ever scripted for ST. (Some of the worst, too, but the same could be said for every incarnation of ST.)
So, there is literally a ton of things to like about ST-V, as well.
Just think if they had indeed gone ahead with Eddie Murphy as the guest star. It was actually in the plans for Voyage Home. Thanks goodness Harve and Nick and Nimoy shot down Paramount on that
As someone who finds Eddie Murphy really annoying I'm forever grateful this idea was nixed.
Hmmm… A Rosenman score described as "generic". That's a first.
I should have explained myself better. I said "generic" in the sense that the score, as good as it may be, could have been used in almost any other movie. I'm not the biggest Rosenman enthusiast, but many of his scores I like very much indeed.
Star Trek IV is the popular favorite among the normals. It's my least favorite of the films. It's far too self aware for my taste and as soon as the jokes got stale, there's little else to keep my interest. I love the 23rd century bookends, but the stuff in 1986 puts me to sleep.
I am also not a fan of Star Trek as a full on comedy. I like comedy in Trek to relieve the tension and humanize the characters, but this a conscious effort to lighten up. Fair enough and I get why. The problem is, they never bounced back from that. Star Trek 5, which was meant to be deadly serious, was "funnied up" at the insistence of the studio and it feels forced. However, when the jokes dry up, I still have an adventure with great music.
Star Trek VI is one I have a love/hate relationship with.
My favorites are the first 3. They hit exactly the right tone for me. Their aimed at the adults in the audience and ask you to take all of it seriously. 4 obviously doesn't, 5 tries and even #6 has a ton of awful gags which diluted the drama. It's not Nicky Meyer's finest hour.
It would have been SO cool if Saavik had played the traitor rather than a new character. It was enough of a struggle getting Brock Peters to speaks his lines, but coming from his character, the words had a very real and tragic heft to them.
Ock, I agree with you about Rosenman's score. Not a bad score, but IMO, not "memorable" in any way, good or bad.
Others may have stated it better and probably have, but Trek films have a rather sizable challenge in that they can be "too Star Trek-y" or "not Star Trek-y" enough. Well, maybe that applies more to the ones with the original crew/cast.
I would have been ok if they'd stopped with Wrath of Khan. The emotional content of Spock's sacrifice and the hopeful ending was enough for me. I was disappointed with STIII. Not just that they brought back Spock. After all, how many of the main cast didn't "die" in one episode or another during the original series? I just couldn't connect with it.
STIV was more enjoyable for me than STIII. However, it suffers now much like TOS from having been made during a time when contemporary, short-lived fads/fashions were so prominent; "Punk Rock", "Boom Boxes", and even the "Save the Whales/Save the Earth" underlying theme, for example. BUT - if you saw it in '86, it was funny and topical. Watched with a 21st century mindset, it's self-absorbed and corny.
