I don't think I'll ever watch Enterprise's fiery demise across the sky of Genesis the same way again, in light of the recent Space Shuttle Columbia disaster...

I honestly can't see it bothering me. One is simple fiction, the other tragic reality. I'm not saying that you can't differentiate the two, I'm just saying for me, there will be no "real" association.

Sir Rhosis

I'm glad I'm not the only one who watched the footage of Coumbia's destruction and thought of the Enterprise in this film. Like Craig, I don't think I'm going to be able to watch that scene and not at least think of the seven aboard Columbia. I may know I'm watching a work of fiction, but all fiction, to be successful, must resonate with reality. And for me this will resonate in a way no one originally intended. It will have an added touch of sadness to it now.

Well, personally, I don't feel that way, but if you guys are inclined to do so--and I'm just asking out of curiosity--wouldn't you have had that feeling YEARS ago, after the Challenger was destroyed? After all, the Challenger disaster occured only a year and a half after this movie.

For me, the difference is that Columbia looked eerily similar to the Enterprise as it broke apart. Challenger looked different. Also Challenger was taking off, or leaving the Earth. Both Columbia and Enterprise were heading towards a planet's surface.

Ah. I see.

Yeah, Benn hit on the head what I meant, too. It's a visual association. And it's not like I'll never watch--or be able to watch--this film again, I'll just have the new association of the shuttle with it next time.

Re: Challenger... When I saw ST IV: TVH at the cinema, and the film's dedication to the seven Challenger astronauts came up onscreen, the audience was more silent than I've ever heard a cinema audience.

HERE'S ONE:
All through TOS & STTMP, Janice Rand was a blonde.
In this movie, she is a red head.

That's a nit? That's a dye job. Scotty's hair was black throughout TOS. In this film, it's grey/white? Is that a nit? (I'm not trying to be insulting John, but if Rand's hair was blonde in one shot in the film and red in the next, you'd have a nit. In this case, you're dealing with a woman's perogative.

True. However, Rand goes back to being a blonde in STIV.

Uh, speaking from the woman's POV: I repeat, John, that's not a nit. That's a dye job.

You seem to be under the impression that the creators can't adjust even the smallest detail without first submitting the proposed change in writing, or something! Stuff happens that way in RL, y'know? People make changes.

The only reason I mentioned it is because Phil mentioned in the TOS Nit book that Chapel went from a blonde to a brunette. (She was a brunette in "Turnabout Intruder")

It may or may not be a nit...but it is worth mentioning.

I'd usually preceed that sort of post with NNAN (Not Necessarily A Nit) or NANJAO (Not a Nit, Just An Observation).

Ah-hh. I'd forgotten the Chief's precedent, sorry.

Anyhow, I think Sophie's got the right idea. Notes on changes in facial hair, hair colour, hair styling, or anything else costuming-related should go under NANJAO.
Ditto the routine occasional presence/absence of regular characters (however beloved) and any equally casual mention of them during said absence.

I'm not sure if that has been mentioned before, but....

Why exactly is Chekov aboard the Enterprise at the beginning of this movie? Shouldn't he have rejoined the Reliant crew after the end of the last movie? I mean, the Reliant lost it's captain. How could it lose it's first officer too?

Sulu is supposed to be promoted in ST: II. I believe the script said so anyway.

"And how did Sulu become Captain before him?" - Rene

I always figured it was because Sulu had always outranked Pavel that the helmsman got a captaincy before Chekov.

"Sulu is supposed to be promoted in ST: II. I believe the script said so anyway." - Josh M.

And reportedly, Shatner mangled the line of dialogue revealing that bit of information, so the line was cut.

Chekov could have been still on board the Enterprise per Admiral/Captain Kirk's request.

How many donuts did Scotty eat between Star Trek II and Star Trek III? They apparently take place one after the other. I doubt it, considering Scotty's weight difference :p

Guilt trip after seeing Preston KIA?

On the back cover of the Collectors Edition of Star Trek III, is that a picture of the Enterprise crew as they stood in Star Trek IV when the president said bring in the accused?

I ask because Spocks there in uniform!

In a previous board posters wondered why the Excelsior's engines cut out, and left it drifting. The ship should have continued travelling at whatever speed she was last at (ie. 500 mph, 1000 mph) before the engines cut out, because there's no friction in space. I think Earth's gravity couldn't have latched onto her so quickly either, so my guess is Scott not only sabotaged the warp drive, but had her retro thrusters activate to slow her down and eventually stop her. This would make sense since the idea was to get away from her, and stopping her dead in her tracks makes an escape easier than even if she was crawling at impulse.

No, Will, that's a recurring nit in Trek, going all the way back to Court Martial(TOS), where if the engines don't run, the orbit will decay and the ship will burn up.

In The Galileo Seven(TOS), they have a similar nit -- they only have enough fuel for a single orbit. Orbital mechanics are such that if you're high enough (and Spacedock should be high enough}, you can go for years before you need an adjustment.

I believe the reason Excelsior would slows down was this:

Impulse engines contain a space-time driver coil which 'facilitates slippage through the continuum', allowing the ship to move far faster than Newtonian physics would allow.

When the engines stop, the space-time driver coil is shut down. What happens next is anybody's guess, because this is made-up-physics, but intuitively I feel that the ship would slow down to the speed that it would have been going had the space-time driver coil not been used.

The space-time driver coil allows the ship to break the laws of Newtonian physics. Shut it off, and Newtonian physics reasserts itself.

As Terry Pratchett put it, 'the Universe catches on'.

I like this anti-nit. It explains away a great many 'inertia' nits.

Or once Captain Styles realized his ship had been sabotaged, he ordered the helmsman to "full stop." The scene simply cut away before we could witness it.

Sophie, I don't believe impulse engines warp spacetime as warp engines do. I believe they're conventional action-reaction propulsion.

Hence the name "impulse".

Although they should be called "thrust" drive because they produce immediate propulsion instead of a gradual buildup of it.

With respect, my assertion that the impulse engines warp spacetime is based on two factors: 1) real life physics, and 2) TNG Techical Manual technobabble.

(I agree that impulse engines are basically rocket engines. I don't agree that they are just rocket engines.)

The real life physics argument is this:
Even with 100% fuel efficiency, space travel requires vast amounts of fuel. I showed some of the maths over on the Star Trek vs Star Wars board recently. It's simple Newtonian physics.

Basically, a ship which could regularly accelerate to a substantial fraction of lightspeed would be nothing more than a pimple on a humungous fuel tank. Think of an enormous Saturn V rocket with a tiny command module on top; now imagine something far far worse.

Since Star Trek ships, especially shuttles, have no visible fuel tanks, I conclude that there must be some magic tech in the impulse engines that gets around Newtonian physics.

The Technical Manual reference is this: (page 77)
The third stage of the (impulse) engine is a driver coil assembly ... six split toroids, each manufactured from cast verterium cortenide 934. Energy from the accelerated plasma, when driven through the toroids, creates the necessary combined field effect that (1) reduces the apparent mass of the spacecraft at its inner surface, and (2) facilitates the slippage of the continuum past the spacecraft at its outer surface.

That sounds to me like non-Newtonian physics.

Now add to that the fact that warp coils are also verterium cortenide - Tech manual page 65:
When energized, the verterium cortenide within a coil pair causes a shift of energy frequencies carried by the plasma deep into the subspace domain.

It certainly sounds as if the impulse engines share some operating principles with the warp drive.

Feel free to disagree with me. Do you have any other ideas about how they get round the fuel weight problem?

How about this, The warp engines were going to engage but didn't. Thus the warp field or matrix or whatever that would have been used only partially comes together, though it is enough to destroy all of the Excelsior's momentum.

Think about it this way; if a star ship is traveling at full impulse and suddenly goes to warp, does the ship continue at full impulse once warp engines are disengaged?

N!

We know that a partial warp field was established by the fact that the Excelsior seemed to speed up for an instant before rapidly deaccelerating. The brief acceleration was due to the warp engines.

Side Topic on Warp Engines,

If a star ship were traveling backwords on thrusters and then went to warp suddenly and after a minute or so disengaged the warp engines, which way would the ship go? If the Ship goes forward, if at all, then that must mean that warp engines can be used to propel a ship in real space. If the Warp Engines do not affect sublight speeds at all, then wouldn't the ship travel backwords with what ever acceleration it had prior to using the warp engines?

Also, the Excelsior is not actually shown coming to a dead stop. It does (to me anyway) look as if the Excelsior is creeping forwards at a tiny velocity.

Personally, I don't have a problem with it, because I always thought it was part of Scotty's sabotage that Excelsior crawls to a stop... it added to Styles' humiliation. The gurgling noise the ship makes as it slows down should have been an obvious clue, IMO.
I'm pretty sure the writers would have known people would wonder why the ship didn't drift, but thought the humorous aspects of the scene would outweigh the nitpicking.
Guess they thought wrong, if indeed that was the case!

Anyone ever notice the Klingon in the tree? There's an odd sequence on the Genesis planet, right before Spock has pon farr.

There's an earthquake, we see some trembling, and they show a tree shaking violently. Up in the tree is a Klingon. Saavik is awakened by the trembling, then notices that Spock is "feeling his blood burning." They then do the finger thing, and we never go back to the Klingon!

Yes; I always chalked it up to bad editing.

JAL: The only reason I mentioned it is because Phil mentioned in the TOS Nit book that Chapel went from a blonde to a brunette. (She was a brunette in "Turnabout Intruder")

That's true. However, I think the Chief's point wasn't necessarily a nit, just an incredulous observation that Chapel's hair color changes for the last episode of the series. Not that that means anything, I guess....I'll just be quiet now.

Cableface: How come the self destruct of the enterprise seems to originate from the bridge?In The Motion Picture, Kirk sets the self destruct and a worried woman asks Scotty if it will be enough to destroy V'Ger (or something like that) and Scott replies "when that much matter and anti-matter mix..."So basically, to self destrust, the computer allows all the anti-matter and matter to mix uncontrolably and they destroy each other and the ship.So shouldn't the drive section blow up first, instead of the bridge and saucer?And shouldn't there be a shock wave, like in generations?

I thought the same thing. My issue was that the self-destruct wasn't very thorough. After all, the whole point of blowing up a vessel (with your crew still inside, possibly) is to prevent the enemy from getting his hands on it. Yet the Enterprise is still somewhat intact after it supposedly is destroyed. The warp nacelles and the engineering section look pretty beat up, but that seems to be from the front half of the saucer exploding. If an enemy were looking to get some information from the ship, they could extract quite a bit from just the metallurgy alone.

However, according to Mr. Scott's Guide to the Enterprise, there are 2 destruct modes. If Kirk had said "000 Destruct 1", the computer would have done what Scotty was talking about in TMP, namely, overloading the warp core by bringing uncontrolled amounts of matter and antimatter together. However, "000 Destruct 0" just set off destruct ordnance packages throughout the hull, destroying key command points to make the ship thoroughly inoperable. The idea that was suggested in the book (and I assume they were copying the exact scenario as seen in this film) is that the overload scenario ("1") would have been so powerful as to annhilate Kruge's ship, and Kirk may have been thinking far enough ahead to want to keep that intact.

You're also neglecting that the Enterprise had sustained quite a bit of damage in the previous film, as well as this one. Perhaps something in Scotty's damaged automation interfered with the computer's ability to activate whatever destruct mechanisms exist in the Engineering section.

Star Trek III is my favorite of the Trek films. It just perfectly captured the charm of old Trek. The film also features Shatner's best acting in the series. In particular, the scene where he reacts to the death of his son. I enjoyed the more low key approach to the Klingon villain. Khan was a little too over the top for me. He seemed too 'theatrical'.
The destruction of the Enterprise was sad, but I thought its rapid reconsrtuction in Star Trek 4 was a bit of a stretch. Remember how it took 18 monthes to refit it in the first film.
The scenes on Vulcan, probably, seem hokey to many fans. As a fan of old Trek (every ep is seared into my memory, thanks to a thousand reruns on tv), they had a special appeal.
ST:III also introduced one of the best spaceship designs ever: the Klingon battlecruiser!

NGen, most speculation is that the 1701-A was actually a different Constitution class ship that was already being built or rebuilt, and the renamed it to Enterprise, instead of whatever they had originally planned.

I remember it being said that they renamed the under construction Yorktown. IIRC, this is a bit of an in-joke, since the original name for the Enterprise was the Yorktown, in Roddenberry's early drafts.

NGen: The destruction of the Enterprise was sad, but I thought its rapid reconsrtuction in Star Trek 4 was a bit of a stretch. Remember how it took 18 monthes to refit it in the first film.

ScottN: Most speculation is that the 1701-A was actually a different Constitution class ship that was already being built or rebuilt, and the renamed it to Enterprise, instead of whatever they had originally planned.

Luigi Novi: I don't see how it's speculation. The original Enterprise was completely incinerated. The E-A was definitely not a "reconstruction."

Luigi, he means that it was a ship that was already under construction, and not a ship they started building specifically to replace the Enterprise.

It would have to be one that was already built. Remember at this point the Constitution class was being decommissioned, why would they build an entirely new ship to a design that is being discarded??? For that matter why rename the Yorktown? Why not just name a new ship (the second Excelsior?) Enterprise?

The Constitution-Class was being decommissioned? Where was that established. The Enterprise-A wasn't decommissioned for at least another three years.

The real world answer would be the ST fans probably wouldn't want their favorite ship changed (again). Maybe the Yorktown was the only ship readily available or something.

Merat, that's not what the phrase "its rapid reconstruction" would seem to indicate.

"The Constitution-Class was being decommissioned? Where was that established."

When the Admiral said she was going to be decommissioned.

"The Enterprise-A wasn't decommissioned for at least another three years"

So they built a brand new ship to an obsolete design just so they could get 3 years out of it??? :/

I think the fans would have been just as happy to see an Excelsior class with 1701-A on its hull at the end of STIV.

Yeah, I know, Luigi, it wasn't the best phrase possible, but thats what he meant.

I bet the Enterprise-A was cooked up by Starfleet's Public Relations department.

Also, I thought the Admiral was saying that the Enterprise was going to be decomisssioned, and not the entire class of ship.

Granted the Admiral did say the Enterprise by name, however I think its reasonable to say that if one ship of a class is being decommissioned due to age the others can't be far behind, assuming others haven't already been that is.

JoshM: "The Constitution-Class was being decommissioned? Where was that established?"

Adam: "When the Admiral said she was going to be decommissioned."

Luigi Novi: Admiral Morrow said the ENTERPRISE was to be decomissioned, not the CLASS.

Merat: "Yeah, I know, Luigi, it wasn't the best phrase possible, but thats what he meant."

Luigi Novi: How do you know that?

Adam: "Granted the Admiral did say the Enterprise by name, however I think its reasonable to say that if one ship of a class is being decommissioned due to age the others can't be far behind...."

Luigi Novi: It is not reasonable to say that, because it's a non sequitur. What does the age of a SHIP have to do with the CLASS? If the class design is a sound one, then they'll continue to make more of them. What does a SHIP getting old have to do with its DESIGN? As far as the others are concerned, it would only be "reasonable" to say they can't be far behind if you first establish that they're as old as the Enterprise, and you haven't done that. For all we know, they've been cranking out Constitutions continuously for the past twenty years, and the one right next to the Enterprise in dry dock might be only a year old.

Well generally the ships of a class are of like design age and abilities. As time goes by technological improvements will render an entire design (not just hull) obsolete. Eventually you reach a point were its not economical to refit a class of ships for further service. A point where its actually cheaper to just toss it and build a new ship.
Yes you can upgrade a design over the building lenght but eventually you're going to alter the design so much it isn't the same class anymore.
On top of this the Enterprise A did only last some 3 odd years in service. This says to me that it was a previous ship of similar vintage simply renamed. I don't see them building a new ship and then decommissioning her 3 years later.

Except in the Trek universe, money has no value in the Federation... so it makes no difference if something is economical or not (except maybe in relation to time, rather than money).

In ST6, Kirk said that the senior officers were being decomissioned and that the Enterprise A would go to a new crew...

Was the decomissioning of the Enterprise A mentioned anywhere??? I thought that it was just the crew...

In the revised Chronology, it puts Star Trek VI in the same year as the Launch of the Enterprise-B.

Again I ask: Does it say that it was actually decomissioned? Maybe it was lost as Kirk piloted it into that star. (I don't remember him ordering the shields raised.)

(and yes moderator, if I continue the conversation, I will make sure it is relavent to ST3)

In the revised Chronology, page 90, last sentence of the entry for Star Trek VI. "The Enterprise-A is retired shortly thereafter."

Once mentioned in an interview, but not often noted in reviews of ST:III is the fact that Nimoy liked to use long special effects sequences in this film. Maybe, he was over eager to impress with this film. I do find the lengther effects shots in this one to be more satisfying than the overly short effects shots in ST:VI.
I love the long pans of space craft (the Klingon shuttle), and the destruction of the Enterprise still has to be the most impressive effects shot of an exploding spacecraft in film history. Not just visually impressive either: it had real emotional impact!

The ones in this one are longer than STVI but it's better than the loooooooooooong shots in TMP, which stretch on to no end.

Yeah, can't argue with that. The effects shots in this one had a grand feeling to them.

••••. lol. I forgot the Reliant blew up.

Still, Chekov's postion on the Enterprise-A seems like a huge demotion after being first officer of the Reliant.

Depends...

There's rank and there's position. Chekov's rank is Commander. As a Commander, he can serve any number of positions aboard a starship.

But positions aboard different starships aren't necessarily equal... a First Officer aboard a medical freighter, for example, isn't the equivalent of First Officer of the Federation flagship. So a transfer from First Officer aboard a science vessel to the Chief of Security (or whatever Chekov's position aboard the Enterprise-A was) of the flagship might not be deemed a demotion at all.

Commander Riker turned down several promotions because he didn't think that even being captain of certain starships was better than serving as First Officer of the Enterprise-D.

Commander Riker turned down several promotions because he didn't think that even being captain of certain starships was better than serving as First Officer of the Enterprise-D.

I can't say that I disagree with him. What other starship of that timeframe got as much screen time as the Enterprise? ;)

Doesn't every ship Riker turns down command of (the Drake, the Melbourne, etc.) almost immediately get destroyed in a horrific accident? Would YOU want him as your captain? 8-O

Well, the Aries didn't suffer that fate (that we know of), so that's 2 out of 3 ships that were destroyed.

AND ... ARIES is the first sign of the zodiac, so that means that Riker would have the benefit of the cardinal fire due the sign!

Well, if all the ships he passed up are destroyed... wouldn't you want to serve on the ship he actually CHOSE? :-)

The fellow with the mustache sitting next to Rand when the "Enterprise" is pulling into the dock looks an awful lot like Gene Dynarski. ("Mark of Gideon,", "Mudd's Women.")

Also, when Chekov is at Spock's station, and is saying that "a life form" has entered Spock's quarters, the schematic is of the pre-refit "Constitution class" ships. (The schematic looks like it was taken from the Franz Joseph blueprints, published in 1975. They were also appatently used for the ship schematics in TMP.)
Why does Chekov speak Russian to Scotty, when the former is pointing out to the latter that something is in Spock's quarters? And, just what is he saying?

And why doesn't Scotty understand him, when everyone has a universal translator on them or implanted? They must, because English couldn't have developed on Argelius, Excalbia, Beta Niobe, Vulcan, Exo-III, Scalos, Pollux IV (Apollo should have been speaking Greek, not English), etc. etc. etc...

"...And, just what is he saying? "

The text commentary on the DVD tells you. I don't remember the exact tranlation off the top of my head.

Chekov's white collar disappears sometime after Kirk & Co. steal the Enterprise and when he tells Kirk that Starfleet has warned the Grissom about the Enterprise

Janice Rand is a redhead in this movie.
(She's normally blonde)

I love Checkov's collar. I have one just like it!

The decision to scrap Genesis seems flawed at best. If I understood ST:II correctly, the detonation of the device created a planet out of the Mutara Nebula whereas the original purpose of the device was to terraform an existing planet in one fell swoop. Given the radically different scenarios, why did Saavik automatically declare Genesis "a failure"?

Anti-nit in regards Enterprise being 20 years old and decommissioned;

(Note - If the Enterprise was 20 years old at the time of this film, 2285, then that would mean she had entered service in 2265. This would be around a year before TOS, in turn creating problems at Captain Pike commanding the ship before Kirk, Spock having served on Enterprise for 11 years under Pike and the changes done to the ship between the first and second pilots. It seems a little unlikely that a ship could be launched, have a shakedown cruise, get to unexplored space in the Cage, have a major refit, get a second Captain and then get to the edge of the galaxy all in 12 months. The ST Chronology gives the date of Enterprises launch date as 2245 - one of the writers for In a Mirror Darkly (ENT) placed Archers death a day after seeing the USS Enterprise commissioned in 2245, although this part of the bio for Archer wasn't seen on screen and isn't cannon. Having said that it seems that 2245 is now the unofficial launch date of the USS Enterprise)

Starfleet may, as of the time of TOS, commissioned ships for a limited period of time, after which ships were given a detailed examination to see what condition they were in. If at the end of their commission it was considered impractical to keep a ship in service any longer, or if the design could no longer be upgraded, the ships were decommissioned permanently. Otherwise they could be recommissioned back into the fleet after a refit.

There is some evidence that this could be the case from ST Enterprise.
The NX 01 was launched in 2151 and decommissioned in 2161 when warp seven starships entered service. In season 3's E2 T'Pol comments that modifying the ship to reach warp 6 is impossible as the ship's structure simply wasn't designed for those speeds. If so this would explain why the NX series wasn't just fitted with the more powerful engines - the ships would have to be rebuilt to handle those speeds, and it was probably easier to build a new class.

If Starfleet ships were/are only commissioned for a limited period before being inspected, then Admiral Morrow may be talking about how long it has been since Enterprise was recommissioned into the fleet. This would fit nicely with the above dates - Enterprise was launched in 2245, recommissioned after inspection in 2265 (After 20 years) and then due for inspection in 2285 twenty years later. At which time it had been decided that after 40 years in service it would take to much work to keep her in service.

This may also explain why Starfleet mothballed some of its ships - Like the USS Hathaway. Those may be ships that might not have been in a good enough condition to remain in service for another full commissioned period, but which in a pinch are in good enough condition to serve for a few years to make up fleet numbers while newer ships are constructed.

How did Spock get out of the Torpedo casing his body had been buried in? Does Starfleet design its torpedo casings to allow someone trapped inside to get out easily?...which also begs the question do over enthusiastic crew members in the torpedo launch rooms frequently get stuck inside the torpedo's while preparing them for launch....?

Kirk; 'Where is my •••• torpedo?'
Sulu; 'Ensign Lee just fell into it again, we getting him out now'

Actually, maybe torpedoes are designed with such a latch built into the interior, in case an enemy boarding party on the ship places a legitimate occupant of that ship into the casing. I've heard that automobile trunks are now designed with such latches for similar reasons.

interior latch? ...doubtful

seeing how they're electronically locked.

In the first place, I was not aware of any episode or movie that established that they were electronically locked. But even if they were, why would this prevent a latch? Mechanisms that can operated both electronically and mechanically. The doors on modern automobiles are a good example. The person just inside a given door generally opens it mechanically by using the handle, but the person in the driver's seat can also lock them and unlock them electronically from his control panel. Why could this not also be the case with the torpedoes, which could be outfitted with interior latches that would prevent an engineer working on the interior from being accidentally trapped in one, or a crewman being locked inside one deliberately by a hostile party?

Lots of things that lock from the outside have a safety release on the inside. Car trunks and walk-in beer coolers are both like that. On one hand you want to keep the stuff inside safe but you don't want to accidentally lock a person in there.

Not accidentally, no. *shifty eyes*

I just don't think that they'd have a release. They really aren't burial casings and would normally have things in them preventing anyone from playing inside; and if they do have spare casings, the top half would likely be disconnected from the bottom half and they'd be stacked for better storage.

The enterprise designers aren't known for putting escape hatches in the main bridge, one would assume they wouldn't think of it for torpedo casings.

That may be true but.....
Mr. Leslie's casket DOES have a latch inside.

An expanded, two-CD soundtrack for this film has been released by Film Score Monthly/Screen Archives Entertainment. (Guess Capitol Records, who released the original LP, couldn't be bothered.) TrekMovie has a review and ordering information here.

I've got the expanded version of Wrath of Khan, but I have yet to get Search For Spock. That may change here soon.

I didn't mind paying $19.95 for the new Wrath, but $24.95 for the new Search does enter the realm of hurt! This is a case where I wish I could download only the previously unreleased track for $.99 or even $1.29! I have all the soundtracks of all the incarnations of Trek, sans Enterprise. So I'm not jumping at the bit to blow another 25 bucks for some 4 or 5 unreleased tracks.

There is also an expanded Star Trek (2009) soundtrack CD coming out. 2-CDs of course, more tracks of course, going for something like $34.95! Plus, it's limited to 5,000, so you can really wait too long in hopes of a discounted price or else it may already be sold out. Now they release this! Welcome to Hucksterville Central!

Okay, I now have the new soundtrack to STAR TREK III: The Search For Spock. Gotta say, this has always been my favorite of TOS movie soundtracks and listening to this CD only reinforces that feeling.

Live long and prosper.

When Kirk "rewinds" the flight recorder visual, it makes a squeal, kind of like an audio tape rewinding. Modern playback methods of digital media, like reversing playback of a DVD or a movie or TV show watched on-demand, are silent when "rewound".

And, check out the first scene on the USS Grissom. Capt. Esteban gets up from his chair, and performs the "Picard Maneuver" on his jacket - a full three years before Next Gen.

Why is Saavik talking to David about Pon Farr? I thought it was a part of Vulcans' PRIVATE lives

Expositional dialogue. It's everywhere. It can't be avoided. Virtually all movies, especially the ones about superheroes, outer space, or characters from classic literature have it. Even biopics about people that are either deceased or still alive have exposition in abundunce.

And Spock told Kirk about it in "Amok Time", remember? Of course, that was because Kirk *had* to know what was wrong with him, otherwise he could not have gotten better by going to his planet and purging the "Plak-Tow" from his system. Even though he did not take a mate, Spock was able to become stable abain and commence performing his duties.

Same when Saavik and the young Spock are interacting on Genesis. David had to know what was going on, it was in the script, after all. Too bad he was murdered by those Klingon bastards. And in order to purge the mating urge from Spock's system, Saavik obliged him. And a scene written for but not included in ST IV included Saavik revealing she was pregnant. Well, that and the non-canon notion that she was half-Romulan. I'm glad that they didnt do either of them. Also, I read that if Enterprise had gone to a fifth season they would have revealed that T'Pol was half-Romulan. That would probably have explained quite a lot about what we had seen her say and do throughout the series i.e. lack of emotional control, that sort of thing.

Do I have anything else to say about The Search For Spock? Only that it was for the greater good that Kirk stole the Enterprise (and had Scotty sabotage the Excelsior) to rescue his friend. He broke numerous Starfleet regulations, but in this case, I'm glad that he did what he did. Including setting the Enterprise to self-destruct to prevent it's technology from falling into enemy hands. One of the greatest sacrifices ever made in Trek history!

When Christopher Lloyd's Kruge screams "Get out of there!" to his shipmates on the soon-to-destruct Enterprise, you can see a filling in one of Lloyd's molars. Specfically, an upper right one. It may not be visible on a DVD viewing, but it is on an HD broadcast.

Ed Harris has posted a very fair minded essay on this flick at "The Agony Booth". It can be read here.
I've always thought that odd-even Star Trek movie nonsense was just that - total bunk. I really like this movie; I saw it in a theater four times way back when, and have watched it countless times on TV and video. (The less said about the ABC-TV edit, which lopped off the prologue, and had other cuts I've forgotten about, the better.)

Admiral Morrow tells Kirk that nobody will be allowed to go to Genesis, period. Well, USS Grissom WAS at Genesis, so why not call and ask THEM to look for Spock's body and bring it to Vulcan?

After the first fire exchange between Enterprise and the Klingon ship, Kruge is puzzled that Enterprise has not finished him off. When Kirk calls to demand Kruge's surrender, the Klingon speculates that he may have delt Entreprise a more serious blow than first thought. Instead of speculating, why didn't he scan Enterprise at that point? Kruge would have found out just how crippled and almost crewless the ship truly was.

What If? on Tuesday, August 12, 2003 - 4:44 pm:
How about this - the Excelsior is not actually shown coming to a dead stop. It does (to me anyway) look as if the Excelsior is creeping forwards at a tiny velocity.

I was hoping that someone else had noticed that!

I've never understood why the fight between Kirk and Kruge was made without any interesting fight music.
And enterprising fan on Youtube has corrected that mistake here;

https://youtu.be/IkDoZQVZcYw

We have Leonard Nimoy to thank for the iconic designs of the Excelsior and the Klingon Bird of Prey, which have remained constant for so long.
According to the new book, The 50-Year Mission, Nimoy chose that specific design of the Excelsior over others, which was drawn by the artist 'as if the Japanese had designed the Enterprise'.
And for the Bird Of Prey, it's an amalgam of several designs, which Nimoy liked parts of one, parts of another, and some of yet another ship. When the artist combined all of these separate elements, Nimoy had given us the final look for the Bird of Prey.

And for the Bird Of Prey, it's an amalgam of several designs, which Nimoy liked parts of one, parts of another, and some of yet another ship.
According to The Making Of "Star Trek", that's pretty much how the Enterprise was designed by Matt Jeffries back in 1964. Just substitute "Gene Roddenberry" for "Leonard Nimoy".

Upon returning to Earth, Admiral Morrow orders Scott to report to Excelsior as Captain of engineering. Now, I don't want to diminish Scott's great talents as an engineer, but he has several times expressed his contempt for Excelsior's new technology, and the ship's transwarp drive is something entirely new to him. Kirk even comments to him, "young minds, fresh ideas". I don't think Scott is qualified to head Excelsior's engineering section. It would be like asking an expert in steam engines to run and maintain more modern diesel engines.

Five years ago, Adam wrote:

I've always thought that odd-even Star Trek movie nonsense was just that - total bunk.

I agree, it's complete and utter rubbish. This was a great film.

And for those that still believe in this odd number movies bad, even ones good, well, Star Trek Nemesis was an even numbered film. Put that in your pipe and smoke it!

Despite all of the mostly touch screen flat glossy panels on the bridge of the Excelsior, the graphics are very crude. Even cruder than what the Enterprise had in TMP and this movie.

Ah, those long ago days of 1984.

Early in the movie, there is a scene at Kirk's apartment, where Kirk says "to absent friends". Present are Kirk, Uhura, Sulu, and Chekov.

Played by the now four surviving Classic Trek actors.

36 years later it just occurred to me:
Kirk never raised the Enterprise's shields inside Space Dock.
Therefore, when he and his crew were stealing the Enterprise, all Space Dock had to do was beam out the culprits, or beam in a security force and stop the hijackers.
End of movie.

That is a 'No-Prize from Marvel' class nit, kudos.

Looks like Starfleet was totally blindsided.

As Captain Styles said, who ever heard of a yellow alert in Spacedock.

If I had the capability I would be producing videos like this every week.
Below is a video on youtube that replaces the damaged Search for Spock Enterprise with the original Tv series Enterprise, as she's stolen from Spacedock.

https://youtu.be/FO7bShcL9Uc

An excellent video, IMO.

You ain't seen nothin' yet! Check out this ionterersting take on the same scene...just made to appear like it was filmed in 1907!

https://youtu.be/v_m6qNgEfCs

Thanks, Steve.

Scotty must have sabotaged Space Dock's tractor beams, because about 45 minutes earlier in the movie, Space Dock took control of the Enterprise and guided her in. They should have been able to easily stop the crew from stealing the Enterprise, but no.
Which brings up an interesting point, re. the fourth movie's court scene. The President is only willing to charge Kirk for his crimes and everyone else gets off without punishment. However, we have Scotty willfully sabotaging the Excelsior (and according to my theory, Space Dock, as well). Next to Kirk. Scotty is the most guilty of Kirk's co-conspirators and should have gotten into almost as much trouble as the Admiral.

Scotty did save the Earth. I think they just wanted to forget every thing that happened. They didn't want some reporter with an embarasing headline like "Scotty & Kirk saved the entire world, now there in PRISION for 99 years."

Due to them saving Earth, the charges were dropped against all of them, except Kirk, who gut bused back down to captain.

It seems like people like doing videos for this particular Trek movie. Here's the latest contribution that would change Star Trek III - TSFS (The Search For Spock) into Star Trek III - SSS (Short Show Syndrome);

https://youtu.be/IuTT6YZOGnQ

Me, from 2 years ago in July 2020:
"Therefore, when he and his crew were stealing the Enterprise, all Space Dock had to do was beam out the culprits, or beam in a security force and stop the hijackers."

Now part 2; without shields, the Enterprise could be scanned by Kruge, who would find just 5 people on the bridge. Beam them over to his ship, kill or imprison them, take the damaged Enterprise back to Klingon space. Kruge becomes a hero to the Empire. Spock is never recovered and dies on Genesis.
End of movie.

Read these same nits, in a book, decades ago (not Phil's).

Going back to 2008,

Torque:

---

quote:

seeing how they're electronically locked

---

---

quote:

In the first place, I was not aware of any episode or movie that established that they were electronically locked.

---

Have to re-watch and see.

Stephen Manley portrayed 17-year old Spock, and I just found out by watching a 1972 episode of 'All In The Family' that he had a role in it. It's the episode where he plays a little boy, whose mother thinks Mike is the father, and she just drops him off at the Bunker house, because she's overwhelmed by single motherhood.
Ironically, in both of these shows, he didn't utter a word!
He turned out to have a long career, still in the business today. Some his roles include shows like 'Marcus Welby', 'Kung Fu', 'Little House on the Prairie', and the 2016 'Ghostbusters'.

Been thirty-nine years now, since this movie came out!

Preparing to go after Enterprise, Styles orders Excelsior's tractor beams powered up. Why didn't he use them on Enterprise at that point? They were clearly within range, and the bigger, more advanced Excelsior would have had no problem overpowering Enterprise.

NANJAO. As Enterprise is backing up toward the space doors, we clearly hear Scotty's numerous attempts at opening them fail repeatedly, until he does succeed just in the nick of time. Or did he? In my own headcanon, I think it was Space Dock's personel who opened the doors, when they realized that whoever was stealing the Enterprise was possibly crazy enough to smash the ship against them. They though it was better to let Enterprise exit Space Dock and let Excelsior deal with her outside instead of dealing with the massive amount of damage such a collision would inevitably cause.

Styles orders Excelsior's tractor beams powered up

Powered up? Do they use coal or a giant space hamster?

Seriously, when has a tractor beam needed to be powered up before this movie?

I think it was Space Dock's personel who opened the doors, when they realized that whoever was stealing the Enterprise was possibly crazy enough to smash the ship against them. They though it was better to let Enterprise exit Space Dock and let Excelsior deal with her outside instead of dealing with the massive amount of damage such a collision would inevitably cause.

Wouldn't be more logical to have tractor beams inside the space dock to prevent collisions?

Perhaps Scotty gummed up the Excelsior's tractor beam, as well as the transwarp drive.

Seriously, when has a tractor beam needed to be powered up before this movie?

Ok, his exact words are "Stand by tractor beams", and Enterprise had already exited when he gave that order. Still, Excelsior does have a clear line of sight to Enterprise as it comes around Space Dock in hot persuit, Styles should have ordered tractor beams lock on her instead of wasting time telling Kirk to stand down.

Wouldn't be more logical to have tractor beams inside the space dock to prevent collisions?

A lot of things would have been more logical to happen in that scene, but then we wouldn't have had that awsome escape sequence and also, the movie would have ended very quickly.

As I said, Scotty probably sabotaged the tractor beam as well. He would have anticipated such a thing as Styles trying to use it.