The Web    www.100share.com    Google
 
Star Trek V - The Final Frontier (Two-Disc Special Collector's Edition)
List Price: $12.98

Our Price: $12.98

You Save:

 


Product Description

The crew of the Enterprise truly goes where no man has gone before, after a Vulcan takes over the ship and steers it to the center of the universe.
Genre: Science Fiction
Rating: PG
Release Date: 10-APR-2007
Media Type: DVD

Movie critic Roger Ebert summed it up very succinctly: "Of all of the Star Trek movies, this is the worst." Subsequent films in the popular series have done nothing to disprove this opinion; we can be grateful that they've all been significantly better since this film was released in 1989. After Leonard Nimoy scored hits with Star Trek III and IV, William Shatner used his contractual clout (and bruised ego) to assume directorial duties on this mission, in which a rebellious Vulcan (Laurence Luckinbill) kidnaps Federation officials in his overzealous quest for the supreme source of creation. That's right, you heard it correctly: Star Trek V is about a crazy Vulcan's search for God. By the time Kirk, Spock, and their Federation cohorts are taken to the Great Barrier of the galaxy, this journey to "the final future" has gone from an embarrassing prologue to an absurd conclusion, with a lot of creaky plotting in between. Of course, die-hard Trekkies will still allow this movie into their video collections; but they'll only watch it when nobody else is looking. After this humbling experience, Shatner wisely relinquished the director's chair to Star Trek II's Nicholas Meyer. --Jeff Shannon

Customer Reviews:

  • going where no man has gone before....literally!
    The premise for the Final Frontier, where the ultimate advanture is of the supernatural, where we as human seeks the purpose of life, wow what a storyline huh? I give Mr.Shatner credit for taking a risk of combining the almighty with sci fi as they are truly going where no man has gone before. I like the friendly humor among the big 3...Bones, Spock, and our favorite capitan, Kirk but the whole plot of just too wacky to be believable for the sane that i do not know where to begin so why bother. I do suppose those of faith would be curious in how it would end but the rest of the masses just don't give a hoot. And Kirks directions might be acceptable for his tv show but not so for a motion picture of this magnitude but then again, even with the capable Spock directing it, might not be enough to save this movie from being the worst of the best.

    Do i recommend the Final Frontier? Unless ur a big trekkie fan who would watch anything involving the world of trek, just skip it and check out the Undiscovered Country, a great closure to the original series (TOS)....more info
  • Not The Best, Not The Worst!
    Ok so this movie had scenes that totally stunk but there was aslo some scenes that were totally great so I think that though this is one of the worst Trek movies its not the absolute worst and isn't all bad and is probably worth buying if you are a major die-hard Trek fan and have to own every Star Trek item!

    Personally my least favorite Star Trek movie is Star Trek III: The Search For Spock wich I personally find to be the worst!...more info
  • Not the worst one, quite entertaining!!
    Like many, I feel this one should have been better, having read William Shatner's "Star Trek Memories" it is clear that he was passionate about this one, but was screwed by Paramount & their lack of concern for his passion, having read other reviews here, I can say this, I don't believe you can pin this one's failure on Shatner, & here's why>> for starters he wanted Sean Connery for the role of Sybok, but Connery was already obligated to do "Indiana Jones & the Last Crusade", also, ILM was not available for this reason too, secondly, there was a talent guild strike(can't remember which) that kept some of the best producers & cinematographers, & special effects people from doing this one, probably the reason Paramount made budget cuts, & thirdly Hollywood was hyping up the first "Batman" film, & "Indiana Jones", so "Trek" sort of got shafted, unlike "Trek III" which went head to head with "Indiana Jones" in 1984, Paramount in 1989 decided not to do the same, "Back to the Future II" was slated for summer'89 as well, but was pushed back to Christmas time for this very reason, & one can't help but wonder if "Trek V" would have done better if pushed back also, overall, I like this one, it is way better than 1998's "Inserruction" & 2002's "Nemesis", In this one we see more character substance come out of Kirk & Spock when they are forced to confront their emotional pain courtesy of Sybok, a renegade vulcan & half brother to Spock, the character of Sybok is interesting & not as boring as some might say, he is quite developed, what is disappointing about this one I think is toward the end when they reach the great barrier, in Shatner's book he stated that he wanted to create a beautiful heaven-like place, but his vision was never realized, the being they encounter would have been more menacing & threatning, like many I feel Shatner got a bum rap for this one, & with today's technology, they could polish it the way they did the first film for Robert Wise, they could & should do the same for Shatner on this one, maybe they will, it is long overdue!! ...more info
  • The Final Frontier is Like Pizza...
    ...it's good even when it's bad. As a result, I believe The Final Frontier is severely underrated. There are many flaws with this movie. First, Klingon Commander Klaa is an extremely weak nemesis with equally weak motives. Most of the time, he just comes off as cheesy. Also, the ending is a major let down. But one must remember that Shatner didn't have the budget to have rock-like creatures attack him.

    Even though the special effects are awful, TFF more than makes up for it by having great character interaction. TFF gives ample screen time to Scotty, Sulu, Chekov, and Uhura (even though some of it was cheesy). But most importantly, the movie focused on the Kirk-Spock-McCoy triad. This movie shows the best Kirk-Spock-McCoy interaction of any Star Trek movie. The 2009 Star Trek movie clearly lacked this essential element....more info
  • 2.5 Stars: Capt. Kirk and Co. Meet the Man Upstairs?!!
    After seeing what I considered the worst Star Trek movie thus far in the series (Part IV), I had my hopes that this film would bounce back with good results. Well, I can't stay that this film is the best one in the series, or even one of the best ones, but it is slightly better than the cheesy Star Trek IV. Yes, the plot has its problems, but at least its not about saving whales!!! The basic storyline is that a renegade Vulcan (who ends up being Spock's half-brother) steals the Enterprise and travels to the center of the Universe in hopes to find God himself!!! Yeah, not what you call a great plot, but again, at least theres no whales!!! But don't worry, this film still has some of the humor that Part IV was smothered with. Though most of it comes in the first few opening scenes with Kirk, Spock, and McCoy camping out during shore leave. Here we have Kirk, who's had to be pushing 60 by then, climbing a side of a cliff and Spock with rocket shoes on. The scene where Kirk and McCoy attempt to teach Spock to sing "Row, Row, Row Your Boat" is especially painful. We also have a close to 55 year old Nichelle Nichols doing a "striptease" dance, and implications that her and Scotty were romantically involved. Just the plot overall has too many holes in it, and the ending was just plain disappointing and unclear in the fact that there is no indication on what or who this entity (whom they first thought was infact, God) was or if it was really destroyed. Also, the crew themselves really start to show their age in this one and the special effects were mediocre at best. This time, instead of Leonard Nimoy directing, none other than William Shatner himself directs this one. And though I've seen much better directed films, I think Shatner did a much better job than given credit for. Nevertheless, there are many more things wrong with this movie than right. I read one of the other reviews saying that this was more like an episode than a movie, and I agree. If this one would have been an old original episode, I would have probably loved it, but to be a feature film, the plot just suffers, and there's too much feeble attempts at humor that ultimately, just hurt the film even worse. Obsessed Star Trek fans may still find some solstice in this one, but for more realistic fans, I just don't feel that this film makes the grade. Still, its worth owning and watching a handful of times, and a must have in order to complete your Star Trek film series collection....more info
  • Good Compared to Some, Bad Compared to Star Trek
    There are so many bad movies out there, it's difficult to get too upset about Star Trek V. In fact, compared to the sludge that Hollywood mostly produces, this is an above average film. The plot while a bit silly, is moderately coherent. It does attempt to engage the viewer intellectually, albeit in a clumsy manner. In some ways, therefore, it's exceptional.

    The only problem is that it isn't exceptional compared to other Star Trek films; it is definitely the worst of the lot. Some things, such as Sybok allowing his emotions to govern him, are unforgiveable; the Vulcans learned emotional control in order to prevent violence from breaking out amongst them. Sybok's emotionality seems to suggest the Vulcans controlled their emotions to prevent hammy acting. Which is reasonable, but less compelling than the original explanation.

    Overall, this is a "Rainy Saturday Afternoon With Nothing Better to Do" kind of film, a bridge between IV and VI that only occasionally seems worth watching. If you have a completion fetish or just want to ensure you don't miss ANY good Star Trek moments (and there are a few in this film), get it. If not, skip it. ...more info
  • Outstanding
    Was a film ever more misunderstood. A great Star Trek film this is. Great events will rock you....more info
  • Not the worst Trek film, by far!
    First off, let's be real. Star Trek V, The Final Frontier is not the worst Star Trek film to date. That "honor" will always go to Star Trek - The Motion Picture: The Director's Cut (Two-Disc Special Collector's Edition). No matter how many times they release new "Director's Cut" versions, that movie was horibble. It had only one redeeming quality: It was the first effort for the Trek film franchise. Compared to that, ST V is quite good.

    The problems with ST V are many, though. It was William Shatner's first (and only?) opportunity to direct a film. And although he brought an interesting view of the Star Trek universe, the film does fall flat on many levels. The "nemisis", Sybok, isn't that interesting as a character for Kirk & Spock to play off of. The plot was one dimensional at best. And the final scenes where Kirk and crew are opposing some ridiculous, god-like being is almost laughable. Add to that, the soundtrack was nothing original. Shatner just used the theme that was from the first film, which was then appropriated by the Next Generation show. After James Horner's beautiful, and sometimes haunting, score from Star Trek II & III, and Leonard Rosenman's more upbeat music for Star Trek IV, this re-working of an 8 year-old soundtrack was disappointing.

    Having said all that, there are some things to like here. The look of the film is different than any ST film before or after. Shatner seem to purposely give it a darker look & feel which I found intriguing, especially during certain scenes. The opening sequence, with the "not-so-sane" person digging holes out in the middle of nowhere, and then him seeing a horse and rider coming at him partially obscured by the heat waves rising from the desert is just an outstanding look. Also, the scene where Sybok takes McCoy & Spock back to view their inner-most "pain" is well done and almost hypnotic. But unfortunately, these are small islands in a not-so-great ocean of mediocre scenes. The promise of what could have been after the great lead in of Star Trek IV is, I believe, what makes this movie very disappointing.

    Overall, I would give this movie a pass unless you are buying it only to round out your collection.
    ...more info
  • The Worst of the Bunch!!!
    Star Trek 5- the worst Star Trek film of all- sufferes from a REALLY BAD script and way too much reliance on face gags and stupid jokes. PAINFUL from begining to end. That said the actual story it self isn't that bad and often reminds me of the hippy episode of the original series. Not a great episode mind you but if they had actually connected those stories and took a serious look at Sybok's quest and explained his relationship to "God" and Spock better it would have worked far better. At least there may have been a kind of connection to Spock having a brother (an adopted brother would have worked far better one who became fascinated with a half human Spock- anything would have been better than what we got) which came out of no where. Uhura falling for Scotty comes out of no where too. Since when did she have any interest in him? The embarrassingly stupid scene of Chekov and Sulu lost in the woods off the top should have been on the cutting room floor. The god awful dialogue between Kirk and Spock while he climbs the moutain just about get me kicking the thing across the room. Them singing Row-row-row your boat just about had me toss my drink at the movie screen when I saw it in the theatre (Doctor McCoy suggests Camp town races which again would have been the better one). A marsh melon? Is that a generic name for a marshmellow?? Although the film sucks it does have a few saving graces which are the serious moments with Sybok although few and far between they at least make it watchable. They couldn't get the special effects they wanted so they hired a third rate shop.. although they do pull off a fairly reasonable shuttle craft (which wasn't ready for the opening spot light shot) and although the barrier could have been way better it wasn't completely hopeless. Nice touch was the viewing room where Sybok works on McCoy and Spock the barrier in the window approaching was pretty good however going through it looked like a bunch of clouds. Over all the biggest problem with this film is the script which has so many errors in it that even a rainy day fan could spot half of them. Did they even watch the other films?? Strictly for those wanting the whole collection. ...more info
  • MST3K Fans Rejoice -- Rifftrax is Here!
    The bittersweet sequel to Star Treks I, II, III and IV was indeed the "Final Frontier", one last voyage for our heroic Captain Kirk and the brave crew of the Enterprise - except for another one to follow. And then of course the several dozen spin-offs and spin-off sequels to follow. "The Final Frontier" sees a special guest appearance by the one character fit to take equal billing with William Shatner: God.

    And so this RiffTrax deserves an awe-inspiring guest appearance by none other than Kevin Murphy, Mike's riffing companion for years on the Satellite of Love! It's a RiffTrax lover's dream come true. (And Mike and Kevin promise not to make any jokes comparing the Enterprise and Charmin

    ...more info
  • Pathetic Trek
    This is undoubtedly the worst of the Star Trek movie series.Directed by William Shatner,it should have been titled "Star Trek meets T.J.Hooker"simply because Shatner tried to direct it with the same style that he used to direct his old series.This should be thrown in the trash.F- at best....more info
  • About as inconsistant as America's foreign policy
    Star Trek V:The Final Frontier is, not the best Trek film by a longshot, but it isn't as bad as say, Episode 1 The Phantom Menace. It starts out pretty good but there are some inconsitances in the story which leave more to be desired. I have also heard that the deleted scenes probably would've answered questions like, who was the thing that claimed to be God and why did it zap Kirk, Spock and what the Hell happened to Sybock?! The film isn't a total loss though, since Laurence Luckinbill had an awesome performance as Spock's half-brother and the film was pretty exciting. The only thing wrong are the inconsistances in the story. It ends with still many questions to be answered and a lot to be desired, but it is still worth watching....more info
  • You Know, I Don't See What's SO Bad...
    STAR TREK - THE FINAL FRONTIER is by no means the best STAR TREK movie. It drags on in several places, and the visual effects look like they went through absolutely no post-production. Aside from that, though, there is an engaging story, great acting, and some great moments that make this film memorable.

    I enjoy the STAR TREK films just as a casual movie-goer. I'm not a Trekkie in the least, so I have no idea if this film goes against some of their rules. That's my disclaimer: If you're a Trekkie, see the film for yourself. However, I read quite a bit about the film before I watched it, and it seemed no one liked it. Even Roger Ebert, whose opinions usually coincide with mine, called it "pretty much a mess". I could see where fans might not like this one, as it varies from the usual STAR TREK formula, but I enjoyed it.

    The plot goes like this: Kirk, Spock, and McCoy are on vacation, but are called back in (with the rest of the crew) when intergalactic consuls are taken hostage in a neutral zone. Sounds okay, right? I kept waiting for something horrible...Back to it. The ENTERPRISE, which is in pieces, flies to the planet, Nimbus 3, to rescue the hostages. While there, however, they are captured by a renegade Vulcan, Sybock, whose quest for the Divine has robbed him of his sanity. He holds the crew as prisoners on their own ship, while piloting it to Sha-Ka-Ree, the fabled Eden of the galaxy, where God is supposedly located. (oh, and there are some angry Klingons in there too, but they're not important)

    Yes, yes, it sounds pretty ridiculous, but not any more than any of the other films (VOYAGE HOME, I'm talking about you). And the crew of the film execute the story pretty well. The acting is great (especially by the two Vulcans, Spock and Sybock), and the script was fine, with some genuinely funny and touching moments. The film picks up speed after the first 15-20 minutes, and it doesn't slow down all that much. Some of the visuals are awful (take the Klingon ship firing at an old space probe), but they prove not to be a distraction from the film's real centerpiece, which are the characters. Supporting roles, like Uhura and Scotty, get increased roles in this one.

    About the big climax of the movie: I can see where it might be a bit disappointing (and a bit reminiscent of WIZARD OF OZ), but for me it was okay. The end of this film, for me, was quite like the end of THE SEARCH FOR SPOCK: The real climax didn't come at the big showdown at the end. For me, the best part of the ending was after, when Kirk, Spock, and McCoy speak of what they mean to each other. Sounds corny, but really: moments like that are those that make STAR TREK magic. And, even if no one else agrees, I think this film gets that right....more info
  • Why Does God Need A Spaceship?!
    With the Star Trek II-IV movie "trilogy" (one long plotline) finished, the fifth film of the series is a self-contained story about growing old, friendship, and religion. Sadly, the film fails on all those accounts.

    The gist of the film is that Spock's half-brother, Sybok (who has rejected his Vulcan heritage), hijacks the Enterprise in search of God in the outer reaches of the universe. Once found, "God" turns out to be a rather tempermental being who becomes angry when his escape from beyond the galaxy (the Enterprise) is taken from him. When Kirk utters the phrase "why would God need a spaceship?", the major plot point of the film turns to shambles. The entire mission (which wasn't all that compelling to begin with) turns into a sham, and ultimately a waste of time.

    Perhaps the largest downfall of the film, however, is the inability of the writers/producers to create dramatic tension between Spock and Sybok. It is too much of a stretch to believe that the emotionless Spock will succomb to the rash tendencies of a character only just introduced to him.

    Yet, despite failing on nearly all accounts, a few scenes are inspiring for their place in the Star Trek cannon. Kirk, Spock, and McCoy's vacation at Yosemite National Park is awe-insipring, heartfelt, and funny (Spock's marshmallow roasting machine is classic!), while the scene where Sybok diagnoses McCoy's and Spock's greatest pain is classic Star Trek fare (even down to Kirk's defiant refusal to be given the same treatment).

    To conclude, this fifth installment in the Star Trek movie franchise is a forgettable romp through the deepest galaxy. Besides a few interesting scenes, the majority of the movie is unemotional, bland, and even hokey. Hard-care Star Trek fans will enjoy the moments (however slight) of character development this movie brings to the table, but I would advise less dedicated viewers to skip over this installment entirely....more info
  • Original Star Trek Series
    This was a great addition to
    my son 'Scotts ' collection of
    ' Trekkie ' memorbilia!!
    He Loves it !!!!!...more info
  • The Final Frontier? We hope so...
    "Star Trek V" stands as the one&only ST movie directed by William Shatner himself. It's a dubious honor,since Roger "Easily Entertained" Ebert dubbed this "the worst Star Trek movie ever made." "Final Frontier" brings up important questions about God's existence,religious fanaticism and fundamentalism...and bungles the whole enterprise.

    "Final Frontier" begins on a desert planet, in Paradise City,of all places. Spock's half-brother, Sybok, takes the Nimbus III hostage to go to the "Great Barrier" (not the reef off of Australia,unfortunately) to meet his Creator. In the meantime, Kirk, Spock, and McCoy are climbing fake rocks in Yosemite (supposedly they're ascending Half Dome,but it looks like papier mache to me) They sing "row,row,row your boat" around the campfire when they find out about the Nimbus III situation. The Enterprise comes to the rescue-complete with a paunchy Lt. Uhura doing a slinky catwoman dance. Yes,that requires a suspension of disbelief! You must have faith...as Sybok would say.

    Sybok's a smooth-talking outer space preacher. His charisma hooks everyone except Kirk, McCoy,and his skeptical half-brother Spock. One expects Sybok to ask for "love gifts" and give away cheesy gifts that look like they came from the Intergalactic TBN. But no. It turns out he's a result of Sarek's first marriage to a Vulcan princess. Darn pon farr. Sex DOES make people- and Vulcans- stupid. Or Sybok has father issues because dear ol' Dad remarried to an Earthling,and lavished all his favors on the younger. It's Oedipus Wrecks. Star Trek-style.

    The Enterprise comes to Sha-Ka-Ree,the cheesy home of the Creator. It looks like a desert matte painting,but Sybok is impressed and has a mystical experience. But the Creator is not so pleased. Sybok does meet his Maker- literally- and the movie ends with Kirk pointing at his paunchy belly, saying that's where God is.

    "Final Frontier" is compelling in its badness. At several points it's long-winded and boring. For Shatner,this movie was the final frontier. He never directed another Star Trek movie....more info
  • Decent entry in a variable film series
    Having seen the entire original series, the animated series, all feature films, most Next Gen episodes, and some of those of the other series; these are my Trek credentials for writing this review. As a film review, I should state that I've shot some tiny films of my own and done a fair amount of acting on stage and (independent, low to no budget) screen, and have seen thousands of films in my life, written a feature screenplay, read numerous books and studied something of literary criticism and aesthetics, and with this background, I would also like to strongly advise other reviewers to refrain from blindly criticizing things they evidently know little about (such as film direction, writing and acting). Filmmaking is a collective process, and to try to apportion blame for a product that for whatever reason didn't meet someone's expectations seems to be a weakly productive enterprise at best. Let's consider, first of all, the writing of this film. Although evidently influenced by the success of Star Trek IV to include as much humor as possible in the script, the writers were trying to bring Trek back to some of the core ideas of exploration and philosophy that were part of the original show. (Those who dismiss Star Trek The Motion Picture either forget or don't care that that was the only feature film in which ST creator Gene Roddenberry was heavily involved.) What seems to be "off" in Trek V is the balance between these elements, which impedes the ability to develop a strong momentum behind any particular part of the story. The script needed to better unify disparate elements, and more carefully weigh their relative importance and emphasis. Where Trek V does succeed is in continuing to relate the story of, and development of, the main "trio" of Trek's characters as they mature. One of the elements of this film that is controversial among fans is the change in Spock's character (actually traceable to Trek III) which is based upon the idea that his death (in II) and retraining (in IV) would actually result in noticeable changes. Spock's human half becomes more prominent than ever, as a result, and the character is apparently meant to be continuing to explore the functions (and uses) of human emotions and "intuition." While it is true that some of the humor feels forced, some of it nevertheless does work.
    One scriptwriting guide suggests that the events in an ideally structured story should feel surprising, yet inevitable. That is, a properly plotted work establishes its themes and momentum in a manner that is consistent within its own fictional context and that ultimately serves the aims of the work as a whole, while not feeling overly predictable or simplistic - a difficult balancing act to achieve! While the majority of films from Hollywood these days seem to have problems with consistency and momentum, it is understandable that Star Trek be held to a higher standard. The theme of ST V would seem to be to examine (even if only by scratching the surface) people's desire to explore ultimate questions. The film starts, however, by introducing Sybok as an emotional healer whose brand of spirituality is oriented toward getting people in touch with their own selves. While this ability of Sybok's would obviously impress many people, the script fails to explain why that ability should also give him the ability to sway the masses to do his bidding. Sybok's quest to meet the ultimate force is not revealed until the second half of the film, gambling that since both aspects of his character are related to American religious practices, that the two will be accepted as consistent by audiences. Sybok's character is arguably handled inconsistently during the film, with too little explanation provided for his motivations and behaviors to register as truly convincing. With greater time devoted to such issues, such ambiguities and missing details could have been thought-provoking and engaging for audiences to ponder, but instead, between the segments of the film that serve that main theme (including its impact on and relevance to the three main characters), audiences are sidetracked on parallel events that do not serve the main theme of the film, and instead only distract from it. The tendency of the feature films to rely on a "heavy" (a snarling villain) is a serious script weakness that demonstrates the general superiority of the television series. Here we have a snarling Klingon subplot that really contributes nothing to either the story or the characterizations throughout the entire film, but merely distracts from the aspects of Trek V that would have made it a unique and distinctive work. In addition, too much of the humor does not actually serve characterization and plotting so much as it distracts from what should be more dramatic and serious themes. Some of the action sequences (especially those involving Spock's flying jetpack) do more to interfere with believability than they do to enhance the story or to successfully advance the plot. Background details on the desert planet (exotic dancers and a cantina atmosphere) seem similarly out of touch with the film's theme. There were ways in which the desert setting, the poor and lost beings, etc. could have been made to clearly serve and enhance the theme of intelligent beings' desire to transcend their flaws and pain and to seek meaning, but such connections are not developed and are merely left to the imaginations of those who are searching for such connections. More suggestible (i.e. easy to convince) audiences should nevertheless find much of interest in this film - while the depth and impact of each element is limited by lack of development and consistency in its on-screen treatment, nevertheless the film does include some nice elements of comraderie and humor, some interesting implications about the functions of religion (not seen in a purely one-sided simplistic manner here) and some leanings toward an examination of the basis of personal motivation. That these were not all successively explored in their proper depth doesn't mean the film was a total failure - especially since most Hollywood product seeks meaning only in violent body-counts. Given the script problems of not committing itself seriously and consistently enough to the issues it raises, the resulting product is not a problem of poor direction or "special effects" or acting. These are good actors here, but many fans question the portrayal of changes in their favorite characters. The direction of the script seems to be generally solid, keeping in mind that the director on a franchise product like this does not have total control over everything that ends up on screen (remember? people like producers, studio heads, editors, directors of photography, art directors, visual effects and post-production people?) And in the end, the film is, by today's Hollywood standards, decent enough. People really shouldn't complain. I, for one, am happy the film is there and do not feel that it actually takes away from the accomplishments of Star Trek so much as merely fails to focus on and commit to developing the kind of Star Trek strengths that it reminds us fans about. I suspect that such commitment must have been difficult to obtain in the midst of debates about such things as whether the film has as much humor as Trek IV, whether it includes the cliched villain characters that were in II and III, whether it contained the quality music and visual effects of the others, etc. The film is certainly not the worst of the bunch, however. That dishonor should go to the ST:Nemesis product that appeared simply to try to recycle all the elements that surveys suggested were the best-liked, most impressive elements of previous films (plus throwing in some new, highly dubious attractions such as a Riker-Troi bed scene). In addition, over the years, I have found the villainy of Khan and similar "heavies" to be increasingly difficult to tolerate, due to its one-note nature. There is little that is so dull and depressing as a character whose only known motivation is revenge (Khan), machismo (the Klingon Trek V and elsewhere), or simplistic evil (take your pick of the majority of the feature film Trek villains). The series wisely didn't use such one-dimensional characters; neither did the first Trek film. I believe that Trek IV's success was, in part, the absence of such cliched, one-note, villains. And yet, such villains have increasingly dominated the films and the series, as they descended from interesting science fiction into youth-oriented serial-style fare. Fortunately for Trek V, the Klingon villain's part is modest in size, and Sybok, although not as thoroughly characterized as he should be, is not merely a one-note flat character. That makes this film, in my book, just as watchable as Trek II and III with their reliance on bloodshed and death, and definitely superior to the later, PG-13 Trek (VIII and X), where visual effects, swift editing pace, one-line throwaway humor, and technical production values are considered more important than anything else. This film is not a failure for trying to deal with a weightier topic (while trying to serve a buffet for all potential fans in the same meal); rather, films like II, VIII, and X are to be questioned for trying to turn Star Trek into a series of simplistic action tales oriented around stock villains, fantasy tactical combat tales, and "Alien"-like monster fare.

    ...more info
  • top off with RIFFTRAX!
    this movie has its charms, especially (and obviously) for fans of the original series like myself. but it really is a pretty crappy movie overall. the perofrmances seem to almost border self parody, especially with scotty. the crew has a sort of 3 stooges routine going on, acting like bumbling fools. there's even two scenes featuring kirk, bones and spock camping in what are suppose to be 'futuristic sleeping bags'. in actuallity the aging sci-fi icons look like potatoes wrapped in foil. while acting like average joes in the woods dressed with flanels tucked into tight wrangler jeans, spock treats himself to a "marsh-mellon" and they make sad attempts to sing one of the easiest and also dumbest sing alongs ever.......row row your boat. ya no joke.
    other highlights, or lowlights, depending on where you stand with sort of thing, include what is supposed to pass as a sexy kinked up dance by uhura wearing some kind of feathered wings. close ups of "her legs" just seem to wriggle and dig her feet into the sand. back in the day of the original series this would have been pretty sweet but now this kind of exploitation is just awkward and straight up bizarre. as are the sexual overtones between her and scotty. with soft caresses n all that seem to come out of know where. this could really go on and on but rather than spoil all the surprises i simply suggest downloading the mike nelson and kevin murphy (mst3k) from rifftrax.com to properly view this surreal trek.
    4 stars with the commentary!...more info
  • It all Begins and Ends with the Human Heart
    This is a great tale focusing on the three central Star Trek characters (Kirk, Spock and "Bones"). It examines their strengths, weaknesses, their diversities but ultimately shows us why they have grown a great sense of camaraderie through the years in search of that final frontier. It is a more personal story than the title of the film indicates and perhaps that is the film's true notorious weakness. The title gives one a sense of going beyond the beyond to find what lies beyond us, to find truth, but that is entirely misleading. Instead this film examines what drives these men to search for the all elusive unknown going literally great distances, to go where no man has gone before, when all the time the answer lies in the heart. In one sense this film is a scaled down version of STAR TREK: TMP and again that has unfortunately remained the bottom line for diminished appreciation for what STAR TREK V truly is. Even William Shatner's brilliant direction has been diminished into obscurity by this film's poor reputation. Even Shatner admits that he wanted the film to take on epic qualities. Shatner admits in the extra footage that the constraints of the budget and the poor special effects destroyed what he was trying to accomplish. I believe unwittingly Shatter seems to have wanted something larger than life, yet he captured the true essence of life and why we exist quite efficiently and successfully in this film. This was not a fly by night production, as one would have been lead to believe, and the seriousness of the intent of this production as seen in the extra footage is quite evident. Visually Shatner did not get the greatness he wanted but Jerry Goldsmith's outstanding score fills that void. Goldsmith's score goes beyond giving this film a feeling of the great adventure going to the ends of life's final frontier and once again coming full circle back to the conclusion that it all begins and ends with the human heart.
    ...more info
  • Outstanding Trek Nears Cult Status
    STAR TREK V is very underrated. It is the closest motion picture to capture the spirit of the original TV show. The TV series was about characters and their combined experiences integrated into cohesive stories based upon their trek into space. This film reverts back to the characters and forgoes the special effects. Jerry Goldsmith's rich score bolsters this approach directed by William Shatner. ...more info
  • What you've heard is true
    Yes, this movie has a strange plot, lots of bad humor, sub-par special effects, and an ending which falls flat, but rather than taking this film to task on what many other people have already pointed out, I'm going to present a small list of the things this film actually does right. And even though I share the opinion of this film with the consensus, I do have to give this film credit on a few marks:

    1. Each of the 7 main characters has their moment to shine - Some of Shatner's co-stars have been pretty hard on him over the years for being a camera hog, but in this script co-penned by the Captain himself, each of the principals has their moment in the spotlight. Chekov has temporary command of ths ship, Uhura has her moonlight dance, Sulu takes part in the Paradise City raid and pilots the shuttle, and Scotty gets a relationship with Uhura and breaks Kirk, Spock, and McCoy out of the brig. As for Kirk, Spock, and McCoy, we're with them throughout most of the film.

    2. Music by Jerry Goldsmith - 'Nuff said.

    3. Pacing - The film moves along at a good pace and doesn't stay at one place or on one scene too long.

    4. The opening scene - It may not be a popular opinion, but I love the opening scene with Sybok in the desert.

    5. The Sybok character - I don't like Sybok's quest, but I like the character, and the actor who plays him (Lawrence Luckinbill). Though I found it odd that he got a haircut before they went out to meet "God".

    On a side note, not long after Star Trek IV came out, Starlog magazine printed a small comic which showed two people looking at a movie poster for a fictonalized Star Trek V which showed Spock wearing a fake nose and glasses, and having a pie hurled at him. The poster read "A laugh riot because you demanded it." One of the people looking at the poster said to the other "I'm starting to wish Trek 4 wasn't so successful" (referring to the humor in Star Trek IV). Ironically, considering the attempts at humor made in this film, it seems that this carton was, at least partially, prophetic....more info
  • The best of the "bad" Trek-flix
    On one hand, I'm glad to see Paramount's finally come `round, and is giving the Star Trek movie line the Special-Edition-DVD-with-all-sorts-of-extras treatment (yes, even "Star Trek V"). On the other hand, I wished they'd done this the FIRST time they put the movies out on DVD! But hey, why release the best stuff at the outset when they can get the fanboys to purchase the stripped-down, movie-only DVD, then turn around and release the Special Edition version a couple years later, knowin' full well the UberTrekkies will be more'n willing to trade up? Once again the ol' Dreaded DVD Double-Dip Ploy (read about this annoying phenomenon at www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/guides/guide-display/-/3CVFIEG84F2PF) rears its ugly head...

    Anyhoo: even with all of the ridiculously silly attempts at humor and plausibility-stretching (even more so than usual) moments of high adventure contained within its confines, I actually enjoy watching this less-than-able entry in the cinematic Star Trek series. Unlike the drab dullness of the first Trek-flick, "The Final Frontier" is the kind of film that falls flat on its face, yet is still fun to watch. You got Kirk, Spock, & McCoy singing campfire songs, Scotty having trouble keeping the ship together & banging his head on an overhanging bulkhead, and Sulu & Chekov literally lost in the woods. Bad Trek just doesn't get any better than this! Oh yeah, there's also the movie's "big message" featuring Spock's emotional half-brother on a mission to find God... which kinda gets lost in all of the ludicrous shenanigans surrounding it.

    Oddly enough, director/star William Shatner and daughter Lizabeth don't really bring up the film's critical & box-office troubles in the commentary track. He does, however, talk about the budget that kept decreasing, as well as point out the "talents" of his other daughter Melanie, who appears as a yeoman in the Enterprise bridge scenes. Also pointed out are the shifting deck numbers in the jet-booted-turbolift-shaft-ascent scene, as well as several other fairly interesting memories and anecdotes.

    Included among the second disc's bonus features are the usual cast interviews, behind-the-scenes/making-of featurettes, and the obligatory theatrical trailers and TV spots. The most interesting bits include a somewhat uncomfortable press conference with Shatner and producer Harve Bennett, a mini-doc on the future of Yosemite National Park (the movie's opening & closing setting), and a really annoying session with Todd Bryant and Spice Williams, AKA "The Klingon couple". Also shown are screen tests of the rockman that Shatner wanted so badly to be in the movie's climax... but it just didn't work out. While the rockman looked like he'd be right at home as a villain in "Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers", he wasn't realistic enough looking to take part in a Trek flick.

    Speaking of non-appearances: rough-cuts of several deleted scenes are also included, the most notable being an extension of the Sulu-and-Chekov-lost-in-the-woods scene at the Mount Rushmore National Park. Also included is a not-so-well-acted scene between the downtrodden Nimbus "dignitaries", and a ludicrously over-acted extra piece from Spock's Hidden-pain-revealed-by Sybok scene. After seein' all of these cutting-room floor-sweepings , I thanked God Shatner decided NOT to restore these snippets to this "Special Collector's Edition" DVD release...

    `Late...more info
  • Star Trek V - The Final Frontier
    The most hillarious one of the Star Trek movies. I really enjoyed all the bits of funny things this episode provided. Agreeably not as a great story as some of the others, but a funny, human (Vulcan?) type of story. ...more info
  • Ah, yes, I was disappointed, BUT, there are some great aspects about this outing..
    Like most folks, I had very high hopes for this film, definitely after the loosely connected 3-movie story arc preceeding it. This movie didn't have the punch nor leave the audience with the typical satisfactory feeling afterwards. I despised the use of an otherwise talented and beloved supporting cast for comical relief. Instead of allowing the secondary characters a real chance to run, it resorted to sight gags and pretty much made them look like buffoons, and Shatner clearly didn't rectify the more-embarrassing moments. However, that being said, the film show several wonderful moments..:

    1) LOVED the campfire scenes both at the beginning and end, effectively bracketing the film's story in a poignant way. Why couldn't you have had moments like these for the secondary characters??? ~ They are seasoned ACTORS for heaven's sake..! After how many movies and episodes, not only are they relegated to remain as secondaries, but treated with even less respectful screentime. Again, warm moments you WISHED they did more on the big screen ~ Taking time out to EXPLORE these characters and what makes them tick together, after all these voyages. Without families, who have they really become..?

    2) Loved the horseback and wilderness scene's overall. Gave the normally 'sterile' starship crew a more beneficial and agreeable backdrop to work against.

    3) Despite the lack of good effects, the Kirk/Spock interplay at the end was excellent ('Spock, not in front of the Klingons...'). It helps to make up for the heavy-handed 'I-need-my-pain' message you had to slog through.

    The Sybok character was entirely miscast and misdirected.. Who would believe he would be a Vulcan, even Spock's half-brother, raised by Surak...? Terribly chemistry between him and the stars. Granted he was no Khan, but a more cerebral and reserved, less jovial approach would have made for better and conflict with depth. Instead we're treated to some painfully embarrassing exchanges.

    All in all, some excellent, warm screen moments found nowhere else in this franchise, but try not to wear out your fast-forward button....more info
  • This Trek Has Always Been A Favorite of Mine
    I honestly can't understand the vehement angst and negativity against this film by Trekkers and average viewers alike. The tragedy about this film is that it was pre-judged by rumors in the press, thoroughly trashed. When this movie came out, I was actually publishing a magazine and my film critic quit because I wouldn't publish his review (rather than write a review, he chose to write a biased tirade about why he hated Star Trek).

    Enough of that! The FX in this film are awful, some of them aren't even as well done as the FX in the original 1960s TV series. However, that wasn't William Shatner's fault. What happened is that there were too many leaks in the press that got back to Paramount, and they pulled the plug on FX. Luckily ILM allowed them to reuse select previous FX shots from previous films...so that, at least, you won't really notice anything amiss until about 30 minutes into the film.

    The opening scene in this movie took my breath away. It's desolate, haunting and epic, with some of the best scoring by Jerry Goldsmith ever. This scene, which introduces Sybock, is one of the best introductions in ANY Star Trek film, or ANY film for that matter. It's that good.

    The campfire scenes with Kirk, Spock and McCoy are some of the greatest scenes in the entire pantheon of Star Trek. There is great chemistry here, and McCoy's "special ingredient" in that chili, plus Kirk's remark about "an explosive combination" are truly delivered to evoke side-splitting laughter. Sure it's adolescent humor, but as a preamble to their subsequent philosophical discussion, it works!

    Although much of the humor works, some of it doesn't. It works when Nimoy delivers a very subtle "Yes!" to Shatner's uninvited exclamation that "I could use a shower!" Where it doesn't work is when Scotty hits his head on the bulkhead. Again, when a bumbling Kirk, McCoy and Spock accelerate up the elevator shaft, it's more like a scene out of the Three Stooges.

    The scene where Sybock shows them their greatest fear is underrated and perhaps the greatest acting ever presented in the sequence of Star Trek films, particularly by DeForrest Kelly. Kirk's adamant refusal to participate (e.g. "I need my pain!") is perhaps the closest that one ever comes to looking into the window of Kirk's soul, the real driving power behind Star Trek.

    Finally, the confrontation between Kirk and "God" is the most pronounced and philosophical statement of Star Trek, a point hinted at in the TV series to be sure, but never so humorously depicted as in ST 5. To wit, Shatner's brilliant line about "Why does GOD need a starship?" With all due respect to those of faith, that is a question that any thinking person would ask about the angry war-making "god" of the Old Testament.

    As for Jerry Goldsmith's musical score, this soundtrack is the second best soundtrack of any of the Star Trek films (his score for Star Trek: The Motion Picture is obviously the first best score). When Mr. Goldsmith died last year, we truly lost one of the Great Ones, second only to John Williams, and some might even debate that.

    This film actually works better on TV. I attribute that to William Shatner's somewhat uncertain use of film and being more familiar with television. But, considering the fact that some scenes fully exploit the film medium on an epic scale, it is probably true that what ultimately spoiled this movie on the Big Screen is Paramount's pulling the plug on FX...virtually ruining the whole experience for Star Trek fans who by that time had become accustomed to good effects. That they were simultaneously broadcasting Next Generation with first class FX just made Paramount's decision that much more damning. Remember that this is the same studio that sat on the Star Trek franchise for almost 9 years before being prompted by the success of Star Wars to dust off their property and save Gene Goddenberry from Skid Row (typo is lovingly intentional).

    One may be confused as to why I gave this film 5 stars in spite of the obvious flaws mentioned. The reason is that this film has an important story to tell, and tells it very well, despite the flaws. In a way, the story really begins at the campsite with Kirk, Spock and McCoy, and it ends at the campsite with Kirk, Spock and McCoy (literally), leaving a very good feeling inside. Originally I thought Star Trek V was their swan song. I'm glad it wasn't, but wouldn't have minded if it was...like a fade out into retirement...

    This is a great Star Trek film and I never get tired of watching it!...more info
  • Star Trek V: The Gods Must Be Aliens
    For real Trek fans, this one is fairly frustrating. There are just so many things here that don't quite fit with what had been established before: The Enterprise flies all the way to the center of the galaxy in a matter of hours (a trip that should have taken years); Scotty becomes a bumbling, head clunking oaf (though he may have been drinking some more of that famous green stuff with Uhura which might also explain her feeling him up in sickbay); Spock suddenly sprouts a half brother who, despite being fully Vulcan, gives a great belly laugh in the first five minutes of the movie.

    It doesn't help that they had to settle for sub-par special effects because their usual effects studio (ILM) was unavailable at the time. And the studio kept cutting the budget until Shatner had to settle for a horribly cut-rate ending rather than the smoking rock monsters he had originally envisioned.

    In the end, this movie has problems, but there are moments that, for me at least, still work: the "Plan B" is okay; the "Face Your Pain" moments, while over long and a bit out of place, give nice insight into the characters; there are several interpersonal exchanges that feel organic and lighten the mood.

    A fair to middling movie, but the DVD release helps out. By better understanding what Shatner was going for and why he was unable to pull it off, I can more easily forgive some (note SOME) of the missteps. The ending got short shrift, and a better ending can do a lot to help out a movie....more info
  • The worst movie of the series but not the worst movie ever!
    As Captain Admirel James Kirk (William Shatner) with Spock (Leonard Nimoy) and the rest of the crew (DeForrest Kelly, George Takai, James Doohan, Walter Koenig and Nichelle Nichols) are having a nice pleasant camping trip since their newly christened U.S.S. Enterprise are having it at spacedock for repairs. They get called on a urgent mission to head to planet Nimbus III where a renegade Vulcan named Sybok (Laurence Luckinbill) has taken some people there hostage as he wants the Enterprise to find the universe's most supreme being.

    Considered by fans and critics alike as the worst movie in the franchise! William Shatner who directed and wrote the story for this movie. One of the biggest problems in this movie is too much lighthearted humor unlike "Star Trek 4" which worked like a charm but this movie overdoses on it too much especially on Scotty and Uhra who feel romantically involved and of course the infamous teaching Spock how to sing campfire songs. The special effects themselves are quite bad without the help of Industrial Light and Magic as they come off as laughable and the characterization is thin as a pencil but at least Shatner got to give this movie a try at directing and co-storying the film but he failed at that.

    This 2-Disc DVD contains good picture and sound with great extras such audio commentary from William Shatner with Liz Shatner and Text commentary by Michael Okuda co-author of the Star Trek Encyclopedia. Featurettes, deleted scenes, production gallery, trailers and TV Spots....more info
  • The Enterprise Finds God?
    Many people write off "Star Trek V: The Final Frontier" as the worst film in the Trek franchise. However, it's like the old saying goes, "A bad day fishing is still better than a good day at work." "Frontier" has its downfalls but it still manages to be a solid science fiction film.

    In this tale, we are introduced to a renegade Vulcan named Sybok (Laurence Luckinbill) who has embraced the ways of the ancient Vulcans who deemed emotion more important than logic. He has plans to find God (or at least the Vulcan version of Him) on Sha Ka Ree, a planet that is supposedly the Vulcan equivalent of Eden. How's a religious zealot to do this? By simply kidnapping Federation, Romulan and Klingon officials on Nimbus III, the planet of galactic peace. Sybok determines that by doing this, the Federation will send a Starfleet ship to rescue the hostages. When this occurs, he and his small band of followers will overtake the vessel and fly it to the center of the galaxy which is where Sha Ka Ree is supposed to be located.

    Kirk and the gang are called away from shoreleave to take an undermanned and malfunctioning Enterprise to Nimbus III to save the hostages and find out what's really going on. Also en route is a Klingon Bird of Prey guided by the eager and cocky Captain Klaa and his right-hand man, er, woman, Vixis. Klaa longs to fight a Federation ship. When he learns that it's Kirk's ship on the way to Nimbus III, his hunger grows stronger. Vixis also longs for power, and uses Klaa as a means to gain it.

    Of course, Sybok manages to overtake the Enterprise and gains the trust of most of the crew by allowing them to "show him their fears." Kirk doesn't fall for this so easily and Spock is more familiar with Sybok than even his longtime shipmates know but, in the end the Enterprise does make it to Sha Ka Ree. Do they meet God? Have they really discovered the final frontier? What happens when Klaa decides to give cloaked chase to the Enterprise on its way to the center of the galaxy? I'm sure most of you already know, but I won't spoil it for anyone.

    What is good about this film is the fact that it doesn't make light of Sybok's religious beliefs. Sure, he's a bit "out there," but he has true feelings for his god and for his followers. I also like the fact that he isn't seen as a tyrant. While Kirk questions the "god" creature in the film, he doesn't necessarily eliminate the possibility of there being an actual God somewhere out there.

    The beautiful shots of Yosemite National Park are also welcome to this film. In a future cluttered with starships and technical jargon, it's nice to see some green for a change.

    Jerry Goldsmith's music is spot on as usual, and is one of the highlights of the film.

    The downside to this film is the fact that it has a rather cheap feel to it. The special effects are poor even when compared to other films released at the same time. Paradise City looks like it was built from the scraps of "The Road Warrior" film. Also, in the reveal of the god creature, I felt that this all powerful being was just too hokey to be feared.

    This DVD release does up the ante for those who are on the fence about purchasing this film. Highlights include an interview with William Shatner, a conference on the bridge of the Enterprise, a few deleted scenes that are worth looking at, Rockman test shots and a very lively interview with "That Klingon Couple," Klaa (Todd Bryant) and Vixis (Spice Williams-Crosby, billed as Spice Williams in the film). An Easter egg awaits those who take the time to search for it as well.

    Overall, the Enterprise and her crew took a hard blow from this film. While I enjoyed the added humor and even the storyline, most were turned off by it. This DVD is a must-have for Trek completionists, but casual fans may want to skip this entry into the Star Trek universe. For those who tire of watching films based in a bleak future, the breathtaking shots of Yosemite are more than enough reason to check this film out. Is this a terrible Trek film? Maybe, but I like it just fine....more info
  • The 3 Stooges In Space
    Trying to capture the clever humor from the previous film, Shatner only manages to turn Spock, Bones and Kirk into The 3 Stooges of the federation.

    Without a clearly defined threat for the first hour of the film, the plot and any attempts at creating drama are meaningless. We are introduced to the "villain" in the first 3 minutes of the film, but he never commits any acts of evil other than commandeering the Enterprise and finally revealing his not at all evil plan near the end of the film. Meanwhile a pathetic Klingon crew hovers around as a possible back-up threat, never delivering and being turned into a sad joke by film's end.

    Usually the Enterprise crew themselves can save the day entertainment wise, but under Shatner's hand they all become slapstick buffoons throwing out the occasional one-liner. The only enjoyable scene is when Spock and Bones are made to confront their fears so there is at least a tiny glimmer of character development in the film.

    Definitely a chapter in the Star Trek mythos to be skipped. It should be noted that the Amazon rating system will not let me choose anything lower than 4 stars, my actual rating would be 2 stars.

    ...more info
  • What Can I Say
    This movie is horrible. I simply cannot understand viewers who give it more than the lowest rating of one star. This movie was bad in every conceivable way. At least STTMP was trying to be operatic, without understanding that most people (I am not one of them) find opera too long and boring, so it became all that it was trying not to be. I loved #2 with Khan, really liked #3 because it was a transitional film to explain Nimoy being back as Spock, I loved #4 with the Whales because of it's message and its role in Spock fully realizing himself. This however was dreck so bad that I prayed that William Shatner stay in front of the camera (a major miracle given that even though I loved the series, I think Shatner's acting blows chunks). Luckily the studio allowed them to do #6, which was excellent -- Christopher Plummer still rocks, and set the stage for the Klingons' new position as friend.

    See this movie only if you must see all of the Star Trek films. DO NOT HOWEVER BUY THIS AS YOUR MONEY WILL BE BETTER SPENT ELSEWHERE!...more info
  • Finest of the "Trek" Films
    I must admit, I'm a bit dismayed by all the terrible reviews of this film. It especially angers me when I hear film critics refer to this film as "reviled by Trek fans and others alike." I have been, and continue to be, a Star Trek fan, and I consider ST 5 by far the best of the Star Trek films (including the Next Generation films). The commonly beloved ST films, including ST 2 and the inane ST 4, suffered from cheekiness. For some, that's alright, because all Star Trek ever was to them was an assortment of jokes and action scenes in space. Star Trek V managed to elevate above space shootouts and wisecracks (although it had those too), and deliver a thought-provoking and satisfying philosophical journey. Star Trek, at its best, dealt with difficult questions, with speculations about humankind, the future, and our place in the universe. At it's worst, it resorted to jokes and immediate dangers, with plots that can be summed up with "oh no, how do we save ourselves and the world from getting destroyed!" or cheap laughs (Trouble with Tribbles, ST IV). Star Trek V, although not a perfect film, gave us lasting questions--what is the nature of the divine, and how far will humans go to discover it? Are we deceived by the very thought that there is such a thing?
    The characters are at their boldest and most exciting in ST V, with Kirk delivering classic performances, such as his insistance that he needs his pain, for it makes him what he is. Before ST V, I didn't really even like Captain Kirk, but I after it, he became one of my favorites (almost as great as Jean-Luc Picard). I suppose I'll never understand the shunning of this film by ST fans, who gobbled up some of the more nonsensical Trek projects.
    But, lest it go completely battered and bruised, let me defend once more this spectacular film.
    Please, film writers, don't claim that ST V is universally hated. This is coming from a hardcore Trek fan: at least one of us thinks that ST V is the greatest of the Trek films. I'm not embarrassed to admit it....more info
  • Pretty cool in some ways
    While this film is nothing like the others, I find it refreshing in that regard. We need a film in the collection where McCoy, Spock, Kirk are sitting around a campfire. After all, Spock pretty much just died, and is trying to get back to his usual self. But beyond that I thought the plot was indeed sketchy to say the least, but still kind of interesting because it was so different. The conversations between the three main guys, are just priceless though....more info