Star Trek (Film Collections) (DVD)

Connect to Facebook/Twitter, recommend via email and much more.

---

Note: In the following joint DVD review, John and Eddie offer their opinions on the various films, with John also writing up the Video, Audio, Extras, and Parting Thoughts.

Since Paramount Pictures released their prequel movie "Star Trek" in 2009, they probably figured it was about time to reissue the first six of the "Star Trek" films, too, refurbished and remastered, the ones featuring the original Capt. Kirk and Mr. Spock (William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy and company). Although it's interesting to see Kirk and Spock in their younger days, there's nothing quite like seeing Shatner, Nimoy, and the old gang in their old big-budget movies.

STAR TREK: THE MOTION PICTURE
Reviewed by John J. Puccio

More of an event than a movie, 1979's "Star Trek: The Motion Picture" reunited the crew of the old television show for the first time in nearly a decade and provided a showcase for nostalgic Trekkies, Trekkers, and Trek fans everywhere. As an introduction to the movie series to follow, I suppose you can forgive the first of these big-screen adventures for being more flash than content. The plot line, frankly, is pretty thin and the characters only superficially developed. The filmmakers probably figured we already knew the characters well enough that only their showing up was necessary. But they were all together again, and that's the main thing.

A former writer for DVDTOWN once described "Star Trek: The Motion Picture" as "eye candy without a soul." I wouldn't go quite so far as to say that it's without a soul, but the producers surely worried more about its looking good and about maintaining the "Star Trek" TV tradition than about telling a compelling story. To be certain they did the job right, Paramount brought in the series originator, Gene Roddenberry, to produce the film. Then, they hired veteran director Robert Wise, no stranger to science fiction ("The Day the World Stood Still," "The Andromeda Strain") or megahits ("The Sound of Music," "West Side Story") to manage the project. Next, they got experienced special-effects experts John Dykstra ("Silent Running," "Star Wars," "Battlestar Galactica") and Douglas Trumbull ("2001: A Space Odyssey," "Close Encounters of the Third Kind," "Blade Runner") to give the film the proper appearance; and they used noted scientist, science writer, and sci-fi author Isaac Asimov as technical advisor. Then, they engaged Jerry Goldsmith to compose some new tunes, whilst wisely retaining Alexander Courage's familiar television theme music. And, of course, they assembled all of the original television cast members: William Shatner as Captain (now Admiral) James T. Kirk, Leonard Nimoy as Commander Spock, DeForest Kelley as Dr. Leonard McCoy, James Doohan as Commander "Scotty" Scott, George Takei as Lt. Commander Sulu, Walter Koenig as Lt. Commander Chekov, and Nichelle Nichols as Lt. Commander Uhura. So, what more could they do? Well, apparently in all the fuss and bother they forgot to finish the script (despite Roddenberry being an uncredited cowriter). And it shows.

Apparently, the success of George Lucas's "Star Wars" a year or two earlier encouraged Paramount to reassemble the old "Star Trek" cast. The fact is, the movie seems slow and overlong for its subject matter. The first half re-introduces the old crew, with Mr. Spock appropriately making his grand entrance last. Then there's the business of introducing us to the newly refitted Enterprise, displaying it from all angles while Goldsmith's and Courage's majestic music plays in the background; this also takes up a good deal of screen time. Finally, there's our introduction to two new crew members, Stephen Collins as Captain Decker and Persis Khambatta as the beautiful (and bald) Lieutenant Ilia.

The plot of the new film, what little there is of it, involves a mysterious, intelligently controlled object hurtling through space destroying everything in its path and heading right for Earth. There's nothing to stop it but the Starship Enterprise and its hardy crew. Admiral Kirk assumes command of his old post, much to the chagrin of the Enterprise's new commander, Decker, which sets up a minor friction between the two. What is this huge, hurtling, moon-sized intruder so hell-bent on reaching Earth, all the while radiating energy of a type never before encountered? What does it want? Can our heroes stop it and save the planet? Well, in regard to that last question, we're still here, so I guess the answer is "yes."

The filmmakers set the stage with a musical overture that reminds one of the similar prologue for "2001," perhaps a suggestion that we should interpret this new "Star Trek" along the lines of Kubrick's pacing and imagery. Then we get a brief action sequence involving the destruction of several Klingon warships in deep space by an unaccountable force that's shrouded in clouds. Cut to some beautiful shots of Starfleet Headquarters in San Francisco, and the show's on the road.

The special effects hold up pretty well and make for some attractive viewing. The visual-effects people render the Enterprise, the wormhole encounter early on, the strange cloud surrounding the intruding vessel, and the alien spacecraft impressively and realistically. Wise uses his camera adeptly and develops interaction among the crew members well. That the film doesn't go anywhere is beside the point. It creates a nice sense of awe and wonder; Kirk gets to execute one of his famous poker bluffs; the ending is typically on the metaphysical side, raising more questions than it answers; and the whole thing concludes with the kind of philosophical message that the old television show was so famous for.

Thought of more as a celebration than a movie, "Star Trek: The Motion Picture" works pretty well; it re-introduces fans of the TV series to their heroes, produces a handsome degree of spectacle, and gets the "Star Trek" movie-sequel business underway. But as Scottish poet Robert Burns wrote in 1785, "The best-laid schemes o' Mice and Men,Gang aft a-gley, And lea'e us nought but grief and pain, For promised joy." No matter how well we plan things, something is bound to go wrong. Scotty would appreciate that. Anyway, the next installment, "Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan," would give viewers everything this first movie sets out for them, with more action, a more formidable foe, stronger interpersonal relationships, and a moving send-off for Spock. Meanwhile, when Kirk says at the end of "Star Trek: The Motion Picture" in answer to where they're heading next, "Out there, thataway," it's at least a point in the right direction.

John's film rating: 6/10

STAR TREK II: THE WRATH OF KHAN
Reviewed by Yunda Eddie Feng

"Khaaaaan!" --James Tiberius Kirk

"Star Trek II" took its inspiration from an episode of the original TV series called "Space Seed." Basically, at the end of that episode, Captain Kirk (William Shatner) sent Khan Noonien Singh (Ricardo Montalban) into exile on Ceti Alpha V. In the movie, the genetically engineered, super-genius Khan manages to escape from Ceti Alpha V, and he commandeers the starship Reliant to destroy Kirk. Khan also manages to steal the Genesis device, developed by Kirk's ex-flame Dr. Carol Marcus and their son, Dr. David Marcus. Genesis, designed to create life out of nothing, could be used as a weapon since it destroys preexisting life in order to create its own "matrix." So, for the better part of two hours, Kirk and Khan chase each other across the galaxy. Admiral Kirk uses his experience with Starfleet ships while Khan uses his superior intellect in order to outwit one another.

Shatner and Montalban do their best to out-overact one another, and I have to say that they conclude with a draw. Although the two actors manage to chew up plenty of scenery, they don't actually stand face-to-face, sparing the story from becoming a free-for-all wrestling match. The usual suspects also appear in the movie, including Captain Spock (Leonard Nimoy) and "Bones" (a delightfully grumpy DeForest Kelley). Look for Kirstie Alley as Saavik, a Vulcan Starfleet cadet who learns a few things from Kirk and Spock about being "human".

While I prefer "Star Trek VI," I agree that "Star Trek II" is fun, spirited, moving, and highly enjoyable. There are a couple of tense space dogfights between the Enterprise and the Reliant, and the script focuses on the deep bonds that have developed over the years between Kirk, Spock, and Bones. If you've followed the series at all, you already know that a major character passes away towards the end of "Star Trek II." Don't worry--if you look at the title of the third movie, you'll know right away that he comes back to life. Oops, was that a spoiler? Hee hee...

Undoubtedly, fans will want to get "Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan" in their hands as soon as possible. They shouldn't be the only ones buying it, though. "Star Trek II" is a remarkably accessible movie. My sister, Shing-yao Sandra Feng, enjoyed it even though she's not usually a fan of science fiction. Fans should be extremely pleased. Well done, Paramount!

Eddie's film rating: 7/10

The Film According to John:
For me, 1982's "The Wrath of Khan" is the best "Star Trek" ever made, period, and that includes the newest "Star Trek" movie, no matter how much I liked it. Not only is "Star Trek II" concise and well-plotted, with the usual camaraderie among the Enterprise crew, it's got the best villain ever seen in the series--Ricardo Montalban as Khan. Montalban is every bit as cunning as Kirk and as clever as Spock, making a formidable foe. The movie also seems the most likely throwback to the old television series as well, forgoing too many of the big, expensive visual effects that would sometimes overshadow the crew in later "Star Trek" movies. As Eddie said, the film is fun, spirited, and moving. I couldn't agree more.

"The Wrath of Khan" is exciting, homey, clever, and funny. The movie ends with what may be the most genuinely tear-inducing scene in all of "Star Trek" lore, and it even poses a few philosophical concerns worthy of the old television series. Most important, though, it raises the all-important question of Ricardo Montalban's chest. When asked about his uniquely pumped-up physique during an interview after the movie's opening, the actor replied that he had done a lot of push-ups before making the film. I doubt there has ever been so pressing a concern as this one until the release of "300" almost a quarter of a century later, nor is there likely to be such a monumental cinematic issue again.

John's film rating: 8/10

STAR TREK III: THE SEARCH FOR SPOCK
Reviewed by Yunda Eddie Feng

The third "Trek" movie takes place immediately following the events of "Trek II." Spock dies while saving the Enterprise from destruction at the end of "Khan," so the Enterprise is now without a science officer. Admiral James T. Kirk (William Shatner) and his crew take the heavily-damaged Enterprise back to Earth. Kirk and Co. assume that Starfleet will repair the ship and re-enter it into active service. However, Starfleet actually wants to decommission the Enterprise and slowly ease her senior officers into desk jobs. Meanwhile, ship doctor "Bones" McCoy (DeForest Kelley) begins to act strangely, as if he were suffering from a split personality disorder. Ambassador Sarek (Mark Lenard) of Vulcan reveals that Spock might have transferred his katra (or non-corporeal essence) to McCoy, and the ambassador solicits Kirk's help in reuniting Spock's katra and his body.

I won't reveal any other plot details because the movie needs a healthy lack of knowledge in order to be engrossing. Once you know everything, the pacing seems to suffer appreciably. In fact, for a film where not all that much happens, "The Search for Spock" moves a bit slowly for my tastes. Suffice it to say that Christopher Lloyd appears as Kruge, a Klingon who wants the Genesis device for its destructive capabilities, and Kirk's son (played by Merritt Butrick) also appears in order to lend "Trek III" with some emotional heft. Robin Curtis replaces Kirstie Alley as Saavik. Curtis does not project the kind of presence that Alley did, so the once-promising character seems to have shrunk to an afterthought.

You've probably heard of the "Evens good, odds not so good" rule when it comes to "Star Trek" movies. Well, "The Search for Spock" does lend some credibility to that adage. "Star Trek III" is the only one in the series to begin with footage from the previous film and to end with the equivalent of the words "To Be Continued..." The film depends very much on the existence of "The Wrath of Khan" and "The Voyage Home," so it feels like a child afraid to let go of his/her parents' hands. This attitude saddles the project with the "can't-stand-by-itself" factor, making it an important contribution to "Star Trek" lore but slightly inaccessible to newbies. Since there is a lack of independence and a lack of urgency, the movie ends up being slightly less than the sum of its parts.

I am a fan of "Star Trek," so I enjoyed "The Search for Spock" as another outing with old friends. However, as a film critic, I also see the movie as what it is--a good premise handicapped by not enough things happening, by uneven pacing, by its dependency on other entries in the series, and by a curious lack of emotion. Of course, since "Star Trek II," "Star Trek III," and "Star Trek IV" (as a trilogy-within-a-series) are the core of the movie sagas, "The Search for Spock" is very much required viewing for anyone interested in the "Star Trek" universe.

Eddie's film rating: 6/10

The Film According to John:
I agree with Eddie that there really isn't a lot going on in the 1984 installment "The Search for Spock" beyond, well, the search for Spock. The intrusion of the Klingons seems almost like a second thought to get more action into the story. That said, there is much to enjoy here.

I liked that director Nimoy got to bring himself back to life. To paraphrase Mel Brooks, It's good to be the Director. I liked Christopher Lloyd as the Klingon captain, although he is practically unrecognizable under all the heavy makeup, and it's hard to take Lloyd seriously after seeing him in so many comic parts. I liked how in the "Star Trek" universe, the bad guys always "look" bad; even their spaceships and their pets look evil. It's like they know they're villains and have to behave as such at all times to maintain their nefarious image. It's the equivalent of the old black-hatted villains in B Westerns. And I liked the idea of reviving Spock's Katra, his living spirit; it reminded me of stuff that would have happened on one of the old TV shows.

Most of all, I liked the humor, the friendship, and the love displayed in this motion picture. Without falling into some of the silliness and self parody of the next movie, "The Voyage Home," this one manages to show genuine emotion and sentiment. Besides another touching ending, there's even a cute scene with tribble-like creatures and mercenaries in a colorful "Star Wars" cantina scene. "And the adventure continues..."

John's film rating: 7/10

STAR TREK IV: THE VOYAGE HOME
Reviewed by Yunda Eddie Feng

In "The Voyage Home" a space probe of unknown origin hurtles towards Earth and begins to change the planet's weather. Admiral James Tiberius Kirk (William Shatner) and his crew take the Klingon bird-of-prey (that they stole in "Star Trek III") and head for Earth to stand trial for violating various Federation regulations while retrieving Spock (Leonard Nimoy, who also directed the movie) from the Genesis planet (created at the end of "Star Trek II"). The probe's assault on Earth has made it dangerous for anyone to approach the heart of the Federation, and Kirk and Company realize that the probe won't leave the planet alone until a whale song responds to it. Therefore, our seven heroes--the rest being Dr. "Bones" McCoy (DeForest Kelley), Scotty (James Doohan), Sulu (George Takei), Chekhov (Walter Koenig), and Uhura (Nichelle Nichols)--journey back in time in order to take some whales (hunted to extinction) to the 23rd Century to answer the probe's call.

"The Magnificent Seven" find themselves in the San Francisco of 1986, and much hilarity ensues when the gang finds itself confronted with the primitive humans of the past. Military officials wonder why the Russian Chekhov is snooping around the nuclear reactor on the aircraft carrier USS Enterprise. "Bones" bemoans the medieval medical practices that he witnesses in the 20th Century. Meanwhile, Kirk and Spock team up with Dr. Gillian Taylor (Catherine Hicks), a whale specialist. Kirk and Spock amuse Gillian with their misuse of words like "hell," "asshole," and "damn" and with Spock calling Kirk "Admiral" all the time.

"The Voyage Home" concludes the mini-trilogy that began with "The Wrath of Khan." We see the departure of the Saavik character (played by both Kirstie Alley and Robin Curtis), and we see the full resuscitation of Spock's psyche after his death in "The Wrath of Khan" and the unification of his katra and regenerated body in "The Search for Spock." We also get to see the cast having fun with their roles, roles that they had inhabited for so many decades with mostly straight faces.

Although only the fourth entry in the big screen "Star Trek" chronicles, "The Voyage Home" already began the tradition of retreating to covered ground. The menacing space probe recalls the V'ger of "The Motion Picture." By the time we get to "Nemesis" (the tenth effort and actually a very good one), we see a "Star Trek" movie that references at least two previous entries ("The Wrath of Khan" and "The Undiscovered Country") as well as countless TV episodes of genetic engineering, warming political relations between two groups, etc. While I enjoy "Star Trek" immensely, I also hope that the franchise's handlers will begin utilizing fresh ideas rather than relying on old standards. Repetition tends to kill a series faster than anything else (James Bond in "Die Another Day", anyone?).

"Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home" has a case of the giggles, so it is easily the most accessible "Star Trek" film in the series. That strength--the humor--is also its weakness. "The Voyage Home" has a serious message about respecting the environment that would've been better served had the script not been so lighthearted. "Star Trek IV" didn't have to be (and shouldn't have been) militant about its environmentalism, of course, but the touchy-feeliness of the final product makes it seem as if saving the world were as easy as saying, "One, Two, Three, GO!" Yes, I know, it's "only" "Star Trek," but before "Star Trek: Voyager," the franchise was about something. When you have something to say, I hope that you say it with a seriousness of purpose rather than with a nudge and a wink.

Eddie's film rating: 7/10

The Film According to John:
"There be whales here"

Only humpback whales, extinct since the twenty-first century from man's overhunting and killing them, can save the world, so Kirk and the crew must return to the late twentieth century (what a coincidence--about the time they made this film) to find two whales and return them to their own time. Yes, it's another time-warp plot, a device familiar to old-time "Trek" fans and to the newest "Star Trek" film as well. Familiar is always safe.

Nimoy again directs, this time with an eye to all-out humor. Indeed, "The Voyage Home" from 1984 may be the closest "Star Trek" has come to complete comedy since "The Trouble With Tribbles." What I liked: Old Doc McCoy at his crankiest, most disputatious best; the line "...everybody remember where we've parked"; the relationship between Kirk and a pretty biologist; and the Monterey Bay Aquarium, a location I know well, substituting for the Sausalito Cetacean Institute.

A few things I didn't like: Leonard Roseman's background score, which aspires to grandeur but sounds tired and trite to me; the Klingon line "There shall be no peace as long as Kirk lives," which is not only clichéd but made me laugh unintentionally because, of course, if there were peace, we'd have no movies; and Mr. Spock's being able to figure out in two minutes that whales can save the Earth, when the collective minds of the best scientists on Earth couldn't come close to figuring it out in far more time.

Oh, well.... This is the movie that many fans find too cutesy for its own good and tend to disparage. However, I've always found it charming and easy to approach in spite of its most-vocal detractors.

"My friends, we've come home."

John's film rating: 7/10

STAR TREK V: THE FINAL FRONTIER
Reviewed by Yunda Eddie Feng

I wasn't a "Star Trek" fan while growing up because I never got in the habit of watching TV shows on a weekly, dedicated basis. The only bits of the "Star Trek" films that I saw were scenes that I caught on TV on lazy weekend afternoons. I usually caught only the first or last five minutes of "Star Trek V: The Final Frontier," and I was charmed by the warmth of positive feelings generated by William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, and Deforest Kelley as Captain James T. Kirk, Spock, and Dr. "Bones" McCoy. Little did I know how hated it was by the "Trek" community, and little did I know about how bad the rest of the movie is. The movie is so simplistic, banal, non-eventful, non-engaging, and drawn-out that it's basically a waste of time.

In "Star Trek V" Spock's half-brother, Sybock (Laurence Luckinbill), hijacks the Enterprise in order to reach a planet that is surrounded by an energy band known as The Great Barrier. Sybock--a Vulcan who rejected his culture's embrace of logic--believes that "God" is to be found at Sha Ka Ree, and he intends to meet "God" for the answers to life's big questions. Complicating matters is the fact that a young Klingon captain wants to make his name by defeating Kirk in battle, so he gives chase to the Enterprise.

I know that the filmmakers wanted to satisfy fans' desires to see the entire Enterprise crew hang out all the time, but given the physical conditions of some of them (James Doohan in particular), it's just not very believable to see all of them (Shatner, Nimoy, Kelley, Doohan, Walter Koenig, Nichelle Nichols, George Takei) traipsing across the universe as members of a military establishment. I'm also bothered by the makeup job done on Walter Koenig (Chekhov); he looks like he wants to be a transvestite sometimes. I know that this is a science-fiction project, but the more improbable something is, the more "believable" it has to be in order to maintain its credibility.