Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982) movie review - Sneak Previews with Roger Ebert & Gene Siskel
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 29 ก.ย. 2024
- This is the original review of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan by Siskel & Ebert on "Sneak Previews" in 1982. All of the segments pertaining to the movie have been included.
![[TH] FS vs BME - VCT Ascension Pacific - Lower Bracket Final](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/wnygqsR2Fig/mqdefault.jpg)
Nicholas Meyer said directing Ricardo Montalban as Khan was like driving a Lamborghini -- he was so responsive to direction and instinctive that just the merest suggestion and Montalban would take it and make it ten times better than written. Benedict Cumberbatch, himself a great actor, reprised the role years later but he was out of his league -- Mr Montalban was truly a giant and he made the role his forever.
he tasks me, he tasks me..
He made the leather truly Corinthian.
You can't compare Montalban and Benedict. Not because one is a better actor than the other. Montalban was an excellent actor as is Cumberbatch. But he wasn't trying to emulate Montalban....he was doing his own new thing. No reason to compare or diss Benedict whatsoever.
my first Star Trek movie in the theaters, at the age of 6 in 82 --- wonderful memories, love you Dad
I was 10 and saw it with a group of friends. I thought it was great then I think it's even better now.
I was probably 5 and boy was the ear creature scene terrifying
1st time seeing a movie by myself was in 82 at 11 years old..I caught Rocky II.Then went right next store and saw ST II Wraith of Khan..One of the most AMAZING days of my life!!
9:00 Ebert on the phaser power - Khan wanted to damage but not destroy the Enterprise - The movie would have been over pretty quick otherwise haha
When Star Trek was great🥲
The James Honer score for this film was excellent.
Joseph I still enjoy listening to it
Totally cutting his teeth for what would be a great soundtrack in Aliens
Don't forget Cocoon and Apollo 13!
Not Jerry Goldsmith?
Goldsmith did the themes for Treks I and V, then First Contact through Nemesis. Horner only did the themes for II and III.
the one trek movie that even non trekkies have to admit is goddamn amazing
agreed i am not a trekkie and this is one of the best science fiction films ever made
Having never seen anything Star Trek, and despite even my particular standards to film, I think this looks pretty interesting.
bozo the clown star trek 6 is pretty awesome too
Thought 6 was pretty good, a mystery and conspiracy trek movie.
Yep...a 4 star movie if there ever was one...definitely most improved sequel of all time too :)
I really miss these two guys. There will never be critics like them again.
Agreed. My review of Siskel and Elbert is a definite thumbs up!!
I believe this is the best “Star Trek” film. Nicholas Meyer did a great job and it is very satisfying for fans of the original series and new viewers.
As much as I love IV, I agree. this is the best Star Trek has to offer.
This and "The Undiscovered Country", no accident they're both the ones directed by Nicholas Meyer.
@@Lightningrod75 I will make a bigger case for IV, as it is closer to the heart of Star Trek. Perhaps a bit more blatant with its message, but Star Trek wasn't always known for subtlety. But it had no need for a villain, even the Alien Probe was treated not so much like an enemy to defeat, but a mystery to be understood and communicated with. Every cast member was given something important to do, other than just "course laid in, Captain" and "hailing frequencies open", and there was probably the most heart of any Trek film.
Wrath was definitely a great film, but I argue it may not be the best "Trek". Shatner didn't even really play Kirk for most of it, he was more like Pike. A better character, sure, but not true to who he was.
I fear Wrath of Khan is put on too high a pedestal, and it makes bean counters at Hollywood think what we want most is ships shooting each other and a bad guy obsessed with revenge... and what did we get for the last three films? ... yep. Star Trek needs more lighthearted fun adventure with an important message to tell.
@@k1productions87 I'm curious, how was he more like Pike in it?
@@mikerosoft1009 Mostly in his unsurity. Decisions becoming too much for him, and contemplating retirement as a result. In fact, the scene with McCoy and Kirk at his apartment is practically straight off Boyce and Pike in his quarters in The Cage. When Carol questions Kirk about how he's feeling, he mentions "my life that could have been, and wasn't", shoot that is basically an entire plot point from the Cage.
Meanwhile in the previous movie, you have a far more true-to-character representation of Kirk aging. Still gung ho and putting himself in the action, despite being out of touch with the current technology, and refusing to acknowledge the fact that maybe he just doesn't have it anymore. That SHOULD have been a far more prominent story element in TMP than Decker and Ilia... but coulda, woulda, shoulda. It was still far truer to Kirk's character than wearing charming little glasses, having an antique collection, and needing a tranquilizer while being on a moving starship.
I was able to watch this movie last year at a local theater hosted by none other than William Shatner himself. What a treat. This is the best Star Trek movie by far and I would put up against any Star Wars movie.
There are only two good Star Wars movies
@@markallen2984 A New Hope and The Empire Strikes Back. At least those are the two I think are good.
@@randyspears9827 Those are the only two great Star Wars movies. Return of the Jedi and Revenge of the Sith are good movies, but not great. The rest suck!
@@markallen2984Yes.
@@markallen2984 The Last Jedi and the Rise of Skywalker?
James Horner deserves ALOT of credit too, RIP.
Absolutely. The one thing I wish they had for Voyage Home was James Horner returning to compose it, instead of the soundtrack that sounded like it belonged in Ralph Bakshi's Lord of the Rings
K1productions Leonard rosenman did good drama scores for movies like Rebel Without a Cause but sci th wasn't his bag :)
@@robertwiegman1 There are a couple good tracks in there, and it did lend to the far more lighthearted nature of that film, and even the more mysterious theme during the probe segments worked well enough. But overall... Voyage Home shares the spot with Generations for the only Trek soundtracks I have no desire to own.
Amen
@@k1productions87 Yeah, particularly as that is the last part of what is effectively a self-contained trilogy. Horner was asked to return, but with Aliens that same year, he turned Star Trek down since he didn't want to get typecast as a sci-fi composer.
That opening for wttw Chicago is one of the most profoundly early eighties things ever.
Good times. I miss them.
70s.
I was in awe as it unfolded. No CGI. A painting and analog tech combined.
The malfunctioning cup dispenser was probably not a trick. That really did happen a lot with drink vending machines back in the day.
Saw this at the theater in '82. Haven't really watched it in decades, but these clips reminded me how solid it is.
Though... one of the clips lifted wholesale from The Motion Picture, just with a different soundtrack
Jeez, man, get basic cable sometime.
@@k1productions87 It's called "stock footage" and plenty of films do it.
Give it a watch. It's time well-spent.
@@notyou8716 Correction, plenty of TV shows do it. Not films. Worse, when a supposed film critic acts like "wow, this looks amazing" and doesn't realize it is stock footage from a previous film.
A few clicks short of 40 years since _Wrath of Khan_ was made, and it remains *THE **_BEST_** STAR TREK FILM ... EVER!!!*
Apart from Star Trek 2009 and Into Darkness of course. Wow. Now THERE are a couple of solid Star Trek films.
@Big Cat Little Lion Funnily enough, when I first saw Star Trek 2009, that opening sequence with GEORGE Kirk (before I knew it was Jim Kirk's dad) I thought YES! YES! THEY'VE FOUND THE PERFECT JIM KIRK! But no, he died and that was Jim's dad, and we ended up with Chris Pine instead of Chris Hemsworth. But I thought Pine was fine. A little too tall, not as Shatner-looking as Hemsworth, but... fine. Just fine. I really enjoyed the films though, no matter how badly they were written! (The original TOS movies had their silly moments too, trust me :D)
@@ryans756 They are solid all right. Solid, hard, turds. Especially the latter.
@@ryans756 eh, while I wouldn’t Star Trek ‘09 or Into Darkness are up there with Wrath of Kahn, they’re still better than Star Trek 1, 5, 9 or 10 in my opinion... not like being better than The Final Frontier or Insurrection is much of a feet.
Star Trek II is on my TOP TEN all time favorite movies! It had everything!
I never tire of it...and the music! Fabulous!
Agreed! Hubby and I watch it every year, throwing lines back and forth between us as Kirk and Spock, respectively.
When I saw this for the first time when it was just released in the theaters, it was one of the greatest film experiences I ever had. While the credits were rolling, the theater was filled with people who were either crying or angry at the ending. The long-time Trek fans were in shock.
Not me. Trekkers or Trekkies *all knew Leonard Nimoy hated playing Spock.* And wanted out. Then he saw how good *Wrath of Kahn* was & it opened the door for him to comeback for *Search of Spock* as a director. That opened up for *The Voyage Home* as a director again.
Why, *besides a paycheck,* Nimoy came back for *Into Darkness* (Bad Robot's Kelvin universe) is beyond me. A blatant *VERY POOR REIMAGINING* of *Wrath of Kahn.*
@@kevinthetruckdriver353 Ah, Into Darkness, the second worst Star Trek film after Nemesis. I mean, at least Final Frontier had some original ideas. Nimoy appearing on that was my most depressing cinema experience of that year. I mean, why would they even think of phoning up Spock to ask? Do they do that for everyone they meet? Also wasn't the entire thing that Khan was only crazy because he lost his wife on account of Kirk's neglect, and no longer the same man that Kirk had reasoned with before? That never happened in the Kelvin universe, so why aaaaaaaargh...
@@PeterEvansPeteTakesPictures - What put me over the edge was the Tribbles. They ripped off the best Trek movie. Then ripped off one of the best ST:OS episode. Surprise they didn't throw in Harry Mudd. Even Q or the Borg from ST:TNG for good measures.
To me, Nemesis was 50 times better than Insurrection (my second worst Star Trek film). And a tiny better than The Final Frontier. But Into Darkness IS THE WORST TREK FILM. Seen it only one time & hated it half way through.
@@kevinthetruckdriver353 won't watch into darkness
As with "The Empire Strikes Back" for the Star Wars saga, "Wrath of Khan" was the best of the Star Trek universe.
Of course they both loved Wrath of Khan!! It's the pinnacle of Star Trek movies. Nothing even comes close. And yes, James Horner made this movie what it is!
The excitement and fun is not that Saavik is flying the enterprise in a straight line out of space dock, but from the characters. We see Kirk’s love of his prior ship, and we see Spock being playful and needling Kirk. The fun and enjoyment comes not from special effects, but from the interplay of characters.
I believe we call that plot trumping special effects
And Bones bringing the sass!
Ahh, remember when scifi films clocked in at a brisk run-time, but still had plenty of character moments and room to breathe?
toddjh Would you like a tranquilizer?
Why does Spock call her "Mister" Saavik? 3:19
Yep, excellent movie...Best star trek by far, and most improved sequel ever made :)
What's so incredible is that Ricardo Montalban and the writers took a small obscure character from a 60s Star Trek episode and made it iconic. Montalban also showed that he had range and could play a character which was the total opposite of the character on the tv show he was playing at the time Fantasy Island.
.
Obsecure ? I wasn't around in the late 70s or early 80s but at the time, was Khan not regarded as one the most venerable Star Trek antagonists ?
And Ricardo Montalbán buffed up for the role, too.
@@ricardocantoral7672 if I recall correctly Space Seed is considered one of the best Star Trek episodes.
@@metalmugen Yeah. The thing with Space Seed is a lot of local TV stations around the country would play that episode A LOT. Along with Trouble with Tribbles. So, Khan, by cultural exposure, was given a lot of attention. He was pretty well known to TV audiences because of the syndication. Which is why the film doesn't feel the need to bog itself down with 20 minutes of explination on his backstory. They give you just enough as a general viewer to get up to speed. They don't delve into the nuances of Marla.
@@reneedennis2011 Nah, Montalban was always a tough cookie. He worked out on the regular. He was a huge stage performer and often played larger than life characters. He stayed in excellent physical shape his whole life.
"BURIED ALIVE!!!!!!!" "KHAN!!!!!!!!!!" Montelbon was very good here.
Ricardo Montalban was given the chance to really flesh out the character of Khan.
In the Original Series he was a one-dimensional "baddie" but no here.
@@anaperez5442 He and Shatner took turns chewing up the scenery. For years I thought of it as over acting. Having watched Shatner enough t realize, That's how Shatner acts. The guys a genius.
Chrysler Cordoba with fine Corinthian Leather
1982 was a great year for movie releases. Definitely some of the best/classic sci-fi movies were released that year!
I think 1982 & 1984 are contenders for the best year ever for movies. Some of the best/classic sci-fi movies & other genres were released in those 2 years.
wow, this, apparently, predates thumbs.
My parents took me to a double feature it was dragonslayer and star trek wrath of Kahn one of my favorite childhood movie memories
The best Star Trek movie.
Always will be the best Star Trek film. And it's interesting how often TWOK has been imitated and referenced to in Star Trek lore.
To quote the great Admiral James T. Kirk, “Mmm-hmmm”.
Yep. This, First Contact, and the 2009 film.
@@ThePoreproductions First Contact was dumb and '09 was even worse.
the mad magazine parody of ST2 was excellent too, find it, its hilarious
How true, I have a copy and it's parody-satire is hilarious good fun.
..."your first, best destiny..."
What a phrase.
James Horner was the man!
I went to a wedding at the director's house, he was super cool, and I loved his electric train set in the library.
Cool!
I hear the train was rigged to run on dilithium. Lemme tell ya, when that thing went to warp speed, all the air was sucked from the room.
Great star trek movie one of the best.
Talk about a quality sci fi movie! A+
Hollywood is simply not capable of this quality anymore.
Another movie where the score is the protagonist all in itself. James Horner, you are the stuff
I like the traditional Christmas Special, “The Wreath of Khan.”
🤣🤣🤣🤣
TAB
Or the Chinese rip-off “The Wrath of Chan”
@@TooCooFoYou 🤣🤣🤣🤣
Did you hear? The guy who played the writer in _Misery_ is going to star in a remake.
_The Wrath of Caan._
I remember Dr. Detroit, in which the villain was known as “Mom” and at the end of the credits, they said the sequel would be called Dr. Detroit II, The Wrath of Mom.
Siskel and Ebert give a good bit of the movie away with their review. If I hadn't already seen it 150 times I might be angry.
I love how Siskel said Kirk left Khan stranded on an island. XD XD XD
I can't believe they allowed these key scenes to be shown in the Siskel and Ebert review.
I remember seeing "The Merv Griffin Show" salute TWOK with Shatner and some of the other cast members as guests. They showed these same clips and at one point Merv actually said "Now I don't have to see the movie."
I remember seeing this one in the theater. Probably the best one in the series.
Best Star Trek to this day
Yeah, this movie hit hard when it came out -- it was fun to see it in theaters at the time. Audiences were packed and reacted really well to it.
"the evil 'creature' Khan...?" "marooned on an island????" What movie did Siskel watch?!
Planet, island. whatever.
Too much Fantasy Island, where was Tattoo "Ze plane! Ze plane!"
Human. Not creature.
@@xxnightopsxx rotflmao! 🤣
Siskel is often way off base
It’s entirely reasonable for Gene to say he’s not a fan of sci-fi in 1982. Too close to some of the best entries to realize it but also not a genre taken seriously by too many then.
Every time I see this scene, I think of the parody of Galaxy Quest where they took the ship out of space dock, and the ship veered to one side and scraped horribly along the side of the wall all the way....
I think Galaxy Quest is definitely one of the better Trek movies along with this one.
Ready for the body shop LOL!
@@Sashazur Agreed, absolutely!
The best Trek Movie by far in my honest opinion !!
Kristi Alley was HOT!!!
She was. She was.
I used to please myself with that thought back in the day.
I wish she reprised her role in Star Trek 3 and 6.
Interesting that Gene viewed TWOK as a sort of "throwback" even in 1982. If it was a throwback then, you gotta think of how it compares to over-bloated action movies of today, which the reboot Star Trek movies sadly fell in line with.
had to look up Hanky Panky, Gene Wilder plays a architect in Chicago named Michael Jordan ,, classic
FREAKY. MJ was still at UNC in 1982, years before he went to the Bulls.
Kirk left Khan marooned on an ISLAND? I think he is confusing it with another show Ricardo Montalban was in...
The best Star Trek movie they made. Love it.
Well said...the Darth Vader of Star Trek...exactly 🌟
Star Trek II: Wrath of Khan is 40 years old!
Top notch tension, cool effects, the end of life and the beginning of new one balanced beautifully
Great memorable lines
Definitely one of the franchise's best installments and director Nicholas Meyer saved it
Such a miraculous performance by the late Ricardo Montalban
Full of Shakespearean elements and lots of Moby Dick and Captain Horatio
Amazing the filmmakers had the gall to kill off Spock and it got quite the emotional reaction from fans
It was cool too this movie tied specifically to the 1967 tv series making Khan's motivation very clear
Plus it left fingerprints on modern blockbusters like X2: X-Men United and Transformers 3
Saw this movie twice in summer 82. The second time a double feature with Disney Tron.
That must have been epic.
Lucky you!!!!! Must have cost something like $2, BACK THEN!!!!!!
What an incredible time!
I’m amazed at how much this review showed from the movie. Some of it revealed major plot points. If I had seen this review as a kid before seeing the movie, I would’ve been pretty pissed.
I’m fairly sure the studio only provided certain clips for them to show - so it’s also probably the studio’s fault.
no shit right? I would have still payed to see it though.
One of the greatest movies of all time. A perfect movie from start to finish
Meyer was meticulous about making everything naval... the little pitch pipe for the captain getting onboard, the uniforms were naval, everything. The ships moved slowly, the battle action was frantic and hard to control. Gene called it perfectly, it was absolutely a throwback to naval battle much like the TOS episode Balance of Terror. Star Trek should never be in competition with Star Wars because it's a completely different type of science fiction, and Meyer fully understood how to put that on the big screen. If you can make Gene Siskel like your scifi you nailed it.
I think the difference between Star Trek and Star Wars is that Trek is science fiction. Star Wars is science fantasy.
I know... I know... everyone else has already said it. But having seen all the Star Trek and Star Wars movies in the theaters when first released... this is by far the best Star Trek movie ever. The scene with Chekov and Captain Terrell when Khan first reveals himself by slowly removing his gear... just chilling! To this day I still get chills down my spine every time I see that scene! Still holds up today.
Terrell starts sweating his ass off, and so do I! LOL So sick. Once they see that tank it's fucked up.
Love this Trek movie the best but boy did Paramount make a huge mistake dropping Kirstie Alley for Saavik in Trek III. She became a huge star on television and the movies.
Why did they drop her?
@@jetuber she wanted too much money
To be fair, she got greedy.
This and Rocy 3 were the two best movies of 1982. 1982 was the last year i had my father whole. Dad had a brain tumor removed in 83 and hung on for two years. He was my ROCK.
We didn't care about spoilers in the 80's did we!
⌚😲 *KHAAAN!*
I think that all started with Star Wars...Vader being Luke Skywalker's real father. Probably the biggest spoiler at the time.
I didn't.
Nobody did.
If you had HBO in the 80s, you watched The Wrath of Khan whether you wanted to or not
I have to agree with Siskel & Ebert here. Two 👍👍 up!
I love Star Trek but it always gets me when a spaceship is under attack they show fallen or falling beams. That is, a beam which has fallen out of a ceiling as if it were attached at the ends only. No modern ship or airplane has "beams" that are are not continuously supported, mounted or attached. I doubt spaceships will either. Also hanging wires and sparks?
Definitely better than the '79 film; they spent a half-hour just circling the ship!
Exaggeration...it was "only" five minutes... ☺
The pacing was sluggish but judging the experience overall, I believe The Motion Picture the best Star Trek film. I love the atmosphere, the sense of the awe, the desire to venture into the unknown, and the fact that the entire affair concludes on an ambiguous note. V'ger departs the third dimension to evolve into something that we don't really comprehend. That's what Trek is about. Going an adventure and learning. Sans The Final Frontier, The subsequent TOS films are good but they aimed low by comparison.
Star Trek: The Motionless Picture
Why aren't they debating if it takes place in San Francisco or not?
Oh, how I miss these guys...
People complaining about the amount of the movie being shown… the internet wasn’t a thing.
You couldn’t just find this. You had to be watching it in real time, or you missed it. I don’t even think most households would’ve had a VCR to record it.
So they could get away with showing more of the movie, since all it does is show the audience what sort of time they’re in for.
The ham was flying between Shatner and Montoban! GREAT MOVIE!😎
The first one isn't bad at all but this is the better movie
Siskel says Trek 1 was worthless and how much better Trek 2 is. He then shows a clip from Trek 2 to prove his point. He points to the Enterprise leaving on it's voyage and how "majestic" that scene is. Suprise!... that is footage from the aforementioned Star Trek 1 that they just reused for 2.
maybe that was a clever joke on his part? i wouldnt put it past a film critic to put a joke at thier expense and comment subtly on thier viewers with something like that who they must work to please at all times and more
Film review shows for new movies are always somewhat constrained, because they can only show whatever footage was provided to them by the studio that made the film. Maybe that's just what they had to show.
It's much shorter.
Siskel is a fraud.
@@Clay3613 AND it had James Horner's soundtrack as well...
This review is spot on. Wonderful!
1982 is possibly the best ever year for movies!!
Such a good movie, JJ hack Abrams had to spend 200 million dollars to remake it 30 years later.
He's a third rate Bob Zemeckis.
And still didn't really succeed
...and poorly, at that.
I like the little groan Ebert does when Siskel says he was never a fan of the TV show.
One of the few movie sequels that is MUCH better than than the first.
Thank you for these uploads! It's great to watch these older reviews
Living in the Chicago area I looked forward to seeing Sneak Previews and followed the show when it changed to Siskle and Ebert. And before Sneak Previews it was Coming Soon to a Theatre near you and was broadcast on the local PBS station. Good times
Actually, after Sneak Previews I think it was called At The Movies.
A few years back I greatly enjoyed watching this movie again with my kids. At age 13 when I first saw it I was quite sad at the ending.
04:32 - Marooned on an island. Lmao. Shows how much attention Siskel actually paid to the movies he watched. It was a planet/moon. Not an island. At least he got the "deserted" part right.
In his defense, it was probably a matter of him being used to the whole deserted island thing and misspeaking. Siskel was very bright, but had speech impediments
Wow, this is old school from when Siskel and Ebert were on PBS in Chicago! Awesome to see.
Marvel, DC, and modern Star Wars all take a back seat (and often a trip to the dumpster) to this fantastic movie! Watch it again and be amazed at what Hollywood used to be capable of.
Indeed
I remember seeing it opening night 1982. There actually was an intermission halfway in the movie!
I knew zero about this film except that I wanted to see it. I was completely blown away.
1982 was also the same year we got a VHS player and it seemed like every film was better than
the next: Blade Runner, The Thing, E.T., Road Warrior II, Poltergeist.
What an amazing decade the 80s. Started with Indiana Jones and ended with Silence of the Lambs.
...road warrior2?
I remember intermissions!
Same. I remember the theater I attended even handed out program brochures. Definitely a magical year at the movies.
@@robertwilson214 "road warrior2?"
Everyone in Canada called it "Road Warrior 2" because they were fans of the first Mad Max. But the sequel was released as "The Road Warrior" and not "Mad Max 2". I think the marketing was that Mad Max wasn't well known enough in North America and releasing a 'sequel' would have been bad marketing, hence the name change.
I'd rather have a beer with Ebert.
I had laugh/shake my head at Gene Siskel's description of "the evil creature Khan"---WTF???!! Khan Noonian Singh could be described as an augment, genetically engineered superhuman, dictator of the Eugenics Wars, all around badass; but "creature" is not a term I would use to describe Trek's greatest villain.
DoctorPretorious616 But he told you in the intro, he is not a Star Trek fan. He has no idea who Khan is.
@rvd356 The Borg are definitely the most menacing Trek antagonists, certainly as an existential threat, but since they were soulless automatons they lacked that swagger, charisma and ruthlessness that Khan had in spades.
Brilliant. Khan Stole the show The ending brought me to .....dear I say to tears.
Mark Heller I was 8 in 1982 seeing this for the first time and it was also the first time I sobbed openly in a movie. Spock was so brave at the end and William Shatner’s performance while always played over the top was subtly and genuinely done heartfelt in that scene. That simple “No” with the pained face was so emotional
The way Kirk faltered at the end of the eulogy always gets me. Here was a guy who lost a man who was like a brother from another mother.
Kirk (Star Trek V): "I lost a brother once." (turns to Spock) "I was lucky I got him back."
I've watched this movie I don't know how many times, and I'm emotional every single time.
@@toob1979 Agreed. Although I no longer cry every time, I still cry sometimes. That's a powerful scene.
Obviously neither of them knew about "Space Seed"
This intro to Sneak Previews was great, so corny and fun!
I never quite figured out the big deal about "piloting" a ship out of spacedock, as presented in the clip shown here. As far as I can tell, you sit in the chair, say "ahead 1/4 impulse power" and it's Miller TIme. The only danger is if some psycho sits down and says "WARP 9!" and then only if the helmsman is dense enough to follow the order.
Now, if he had asked her to take Mr. Sulu's chair, then it's a different story.
well, the general rule of thumb is... you are very very careful, because its the start of a long journey, and if you break the ship at the very start of the journey... no one's ever going to forget it and it's going to ruin your career.... you screw up when the missions nearly have done because you hit an asteroid in a huge asteroid field, everyone does their best to forgive it because everyone's exhausted and there's a lot of asteroids and a lot of near misses where lots of people nearly screwed up
but at the start where everyone's recharged, full of piss and vinegar, and you screw up just starting up the ship and gently pulling it out of dock without banging it against the docking station or another ship that is also coming in or leaving... and people are going to be pissed. it's not that it's difficult to do safely, its because on the faint chance you ruin everyone's day and the space dock or the ship, you're not going to live it down. for a long time. its that story everyone will keep telling.. let me give you a real life example of it...
th-cam.com/video/MmQbEgUVz40/w-d-xo.html
there is some excuse in that video, that is the end of the journey and something was wrong with the ship, but if you mess up the navigation buttons when its working at 100 percent function and everything cleared the mechanical checks and engineers have said its all in perfect condition, there's no excuses, its just your actions as the pilot that are at fault, not even the faint argument that the ship had its balance messed up by passing to close to a star or a planet that caused its sensors or systems to be out of balance, just you as the pilot.
It the quick reactions and decisions you have to make if something unexpected happens. You can pretty say the same for piloting a vessel into a seaport.
@ Good points, but more (I think) for the pilot than the captain. And starting from rest in space dock, the chance of an immediate catastrophe requiring quick decision-making by just the captain is highly unlikely, definitely not to the level Kirk's reaction seems to make it. He's acting like she is at the controls.
Lt. Rebecca...make it so.
The point is she is an officer of the lowest rank with zero experience in doing this, She could have froze up entirely, gave silly orders, or started pushing random buttons on the captain's chair, thereby ejecting the warp core or detaching the warp nacelles. I'm sure if you were given a comparable task like taking a billion dollar attack sub from the dock to open waters with an admiral standing behind you, you would be sweating bullets.
The first Trek film was like a TV movie. An expensive looking one, but still slow and stodgy.
Just a perfect Star Treck film! Saw it as a kid and has aged great!
Ricardo Montalban should of won an Oscar
at least a nomination....but the academy hated genre films
'Beautifully pplayed by williwm shatner' how often do u hear that?
Shatner really did give a great performance in this movie though! Kirk's inner conflict in the story gave him a lot more to work with. In the TV show he pretty much just had to say his lines and emote.
I thought he was always great on Star Trek. F the haters.
If only he had directed as well!
@@john-ms8gl Shatner was not solely responsible for what happened with Star Trek V. The writer's strike occured that year, ILM was unavailable to do the special effects, and the studio demanded that the film run no more than two hours.
KHAAAAANNNNN!!!!!!
Me and my brother wore out our VHS copy of the tale as kids. I think it was taped from HBO, and somebody had taped over the death of Peter Preston.
Buried alive, buried alive.
KHAAAAAAN!
I actually like *The Motion Picture* and I feel the hate is because people were expecting a thrilling adventure like *Star Wars,* as opposed to a cerebral and occasionally trippy film like *2001*
It was too slow in many places and not well directed.
Star Trek is quite slow overall and I dare say The Motion Picture was far better directed than most of the original series. I place it on par with Wrath of Khan as the best movie in the series.
Love both 1 and 2.
@@TobeyStarburst Agreed!
Star Trek 1 is hugely underrated and a great sci fi film, but I do think 2 is better.
I didn't realize how ham-fisted the performances were when I was a kid.
Let's show some love for Gene being dressed like Tintin. xD
🤣🤣🤣🤣
I can still smell the popcorn ❤; Eric Twin Lawrence Park, Springfield, ,Pennsylvania.. I saw it twice there.
I think everyone agrees that Star Trek 2 is awesome and Star Trek 1 and 5 are the weakest.
Sister Susie...Brother John...
Star Trek 2...The Wrath of Khan...