How could've they overlooked THAT?
FYI..."Rura Pente" was mentioned in Disney's "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea" (Never read the book so I'm assuming it's in the book as well.)
Yes, it is the prison colony that Captain Nemo's family died in, if I recall correctly.
Does Rura Pente come from some where legit like Vulcan and Romulus? Is it based off of some roman or greek word?
It's a reference to Disney's 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea; where Nemo says that the ship he sank was carrying cargo from the prison slave camp Rura Pente.
My question was does "Rura" mean anything and does "pente" mean anything.
As in, were the words rura pente just made up or was there a basis for choosing it.
Trek Lore has two spellings ... (Federation) Rura Penthé while the Klingon spelling is Rura Penté ... neither spelling gleaned anything from an internet search beyond the already mentioned "20,000 Leagues Under The Sea". A quick trip to www.freetranslation.com did not produce any results either. However, I used the "free" translator which limits translations from Spanish, French, Italian, German, Dutch and Portuguese to English. If it is a Greek word (or Esperanto), I can't verify it (for free, that is).
Don't know if this has come up elsewhere, and I'm not gonna look thru 800 boards to find it. The scene where Spock probes Valeris' mind makes me wonder what kind of legal limits there would be on Vulcan mind melding against one's will. After all things like wire taps are legally limited, and information taken from them will not be legally acceptable if the taps weren't put in place legally. So its not hard to imagine some of the Federation conspirators having charges dropped against them because the evidence comes from the mind meld with Valeris, and this evidence gets thrown out of court because Spock didn't have the legal permission to perform the mind meld.
It's just torture it could render evidence inadmissable in court but but it was nessessary to do it to find out what was going on so they could stop it. To put it in perspective for the modern day if some millitary officers had a suspect who could tell them info on a presidental assasination attempt they'd probably do it so they could save the president's life no matter what that would do in court later on.
While elucidating on a fervent poster's comments in another thread, I happened upon this subtile nitpick ...
Azetbur: Mr. President, let us come to the point. You want this conference to go forward and so did my father. I will attend in one week on one condition. (1) We will not extradite the prisoners, and (2) you will make no attempt to rescue them in a military operation. We would consider any such attempt an act of war.
ONE condition!!?? ... hhumph!
Meaning one condition, we get to keep Kirk here.
Klingons, then have a meandering way of saying that. Azetbur specifically laid down two conditions for attending the conference ... so there!! She should have said, "The prisoners MUST remain here, no exradition, and no rescue attempts."
She was using the polite political way of talking which means use as many words as possible just to order a glass of water.
In light of the capture of Saddam Hussein and the debate over where he should be tried and under what charges, I find it interesting that Chang would arrest Kirk and McCoy and specifically cite the articles of interstellar law, but the trial takes place in a Klingon court, with a Klingon magistrate, under Klingon law.
And, even after all these years, I still find it way out of character for a Vulcan to demonstrate the "phaser alarm" by vaporizing dinner...
Not sure if nitpicking the media that the movies come on is kosher, but I will anyways. The second disc of the new ST VI DVD set has a picture of the Enterprise 1701-B, where it is supposed to (I assume) have a picture of the Excelsior. Both of them are Excelsior class, but the Enterprise has an extra ridge around the secondary hull. A picture of the DVD can be found here.
Also, the whole picture is upside down on the disc!
Priceless. How could've they overlooked THAT?
Or, the picture is okay, but writing is upside down.
Yes, the Enterprise-B has that ridge. It also has "spoilers' on the backs of the nacelles and I believe on the rear of the saucer section as well. This was to distinguish it from the rest of the class because it was the flagship, and in the case of that ridge, because it had to be badly damaged during the beginning ST Generations.
J. Ward asked: "Not sure if nitpicking the media that the movies come on is kosher, but I will anyways"
Why not? Isn't that why we're here? Anyway, that's a great find.
John, the DVD face may have been designed by the same inattentive person who put a picture of Picard in the TV series uniform on the Nemesis DVD.
star trek 3 has a pic form star trek 4 on its back cover.
are there errors on all of the DVD cases?
So, I just watched the movie on Dvd.
Deffinetly the second best Star Trek movie, right on the heels of Wrath of Kahn.
Up untill now, I've only seen the TV copy, so I was curious what the 2 re-arranged scenes were.
Were the (POSSIBLE SPOILERS) flashes of the faces of the conspiritors during the Valeris interogation scene new? Or were these just cut out of the TV release?
(END SPOILERS)
Anyway, the DVD presentation was pretty good. My only complaint was the animated menu: The judge/gavel stuff looked great, but the courtroom seemed far too empty.
The flashes of the conspirators are completely new.
Here's something...
Now that I've seen all of DS9, it has me wondering....
Martia is identified as a Shapeshifter / Changling.
Does that mean she's a Founder?
If so, it makes a Dominion espionage conspiracy that much bigger.
Well, she identifies herself as a "chameloid," though Kirk does refer to her as a shapeshifter.
Like allasomorphs (The Dauphin and a number of other lifeform-mimicking species encountered throughout Trek, Martia is a different kind of shapeshifter than Odo. Odo (and the Founders) are naturally liquid, whereas we get no indication that Martia is anything but a humanoid life form who can change into other humanoid forms (when she morphs, she doesn't turn into liquid first as Odo -- I think -- always did). Plus, if she were a Founder (or another being like Odo sent out by the Founders) I wouldn't think she'd have to make deals to escape Rura Penthe.
John. Not all shape-shifters are Founders. There is no evidence in the movie that Martia's normal state is liquid. If she were a Founder, she'd have to have a bucket or something somewhere to store herself when in a non-solid form, wouldn't she?
Live long and prosper.
Not really. Odo stopped using his in the beginning of the third season, telling Kira that he know just allows himself to revert to liquid anywhere.
But the main point still holds, John. "Shapeshifter" does not mean the same thing as "Changeling" or "Founder." The word "shapeshifter" is generic. It's like saying that Vulcans and Klingons are both "humanoid species." That doesn't make them the same race.
The word "Changeling" is how Odo's people referto their race, like "humans," "Q," "Species8472," "Ferengi," etc.
The word "Founder" is political/hierarchical. It refers to their status as leaders in the Dominion.
It was just a thought. Thanks all.
I think she was identified as a "Chameloid." That would tend to imply a different species.
After all, its not like the founders have a monopoly on shape-shifting...
In STTMP, Chekov was Chief of Security. Was he demoted...seeing that Valeris was put in charge of the investigation?
Great! I finally get to be captain and I'm not allowed to speak!!!
There is a crewman in the captain seat during the sabo speech. WHY? she appears to be oriental or the like. I can't tell what rank she holds. Who is this women and what is her reason for sitting in the captain's seat.
She is also the one who motions with her hands for the crew to "laugh" during the Klingon communication scene. Her uniform makes her an officer, but I can't tell what her role on the ship is let alone the Bridge?
Perhaps she is the duty officer for one of the shifts.
This may be on the archive nits, but it's not here, so....
When they're talking to the Klingons, they can't use the UT because the Klingons will be able to tell. But why can't Uhura have the *input* channel run through the UT, so they can understand what the Klingons are saying without having to look it up?
Phil mentioned it.
Thanks.
There is a crewman in the captain seat during the sabo speech. WHY? she appears to be oriental or the like. I can't tell what rank she holds. Who is this women and what is her reason for sitting in the captain's seat. - Torque, Son of Kelpar (Luigi Novi, right?)
Hmmm... is this the same one who announces the C-in-C at the beginning of the film, and/or the one(s) who later waves her arms about to encourage the crew to laugh, and later fills in at the helm for Valeris? I wonder if she's in the credits, and who she's supposed to be.
There is one thing not often noted about this film. The special effects for the exploding Klingon moon have influenced virtually every sci-fi film since. Specifically, the "shock wave" effect (with a prominent expanding shock wave moving ahead of the explosion). Star Gate almost exactly replicated the explosion in ST:VI (talk about a rip-off!) George Lucas even had to add "shock waves" to the explosions in the special edition of Star Wars.
While the shock waves do make explosions more impressive, the realism suffers. I read that shock waves are impossible in space.
It was a subspace shockwave.
Wha? Where did that come from?
The dialogue. Right after the Excelsior comes out of it, Valtane tells Sulu that it was a subspace shockwave.
Yeah, but Excelsior was travelling at "full impulse". So why would a sub-space shockwave effect the ship? I mean, doesn't travelling at impulse mean going through normal space?
Live long and prosper.
Phenomena that do not exist in normal space, or not fully in normal space, or partially in both our normal space and other spatial realms, have long been depicted as capable of being able to affect, to one degree or another, things like Starfleet vessels that exist only in normal space, as in episodes like Justice(TNG), The Loss(TNG), The Next Phase(TNG), Twisted(VOY), One Small Step(VOY), The Fight(VOY), etc. Perhaps the subspace shockwave produced ripples in normal space.
Keep in mind that when a ship is at warp, its warp field puts it in what is essentially its own universe (IIRC the Tech Manual correctly), but they are still able to interract with other ships at warp with their weapons.
And in general, remember that spacetime is pretty much a malleable rubber band in the Trek universe with which the creators can do (and do do) whatever they want.
I got to say I just finished watching part of the DVD with the commentary on. I stopped a third of the way in because I couldn't stomach it anymore....
*** anyone that doesn't want to read my opinion should stop reading NOW***
I haven't heard such a worn out, tired, pile of leftwing, liberal, Soviet apologist c--p in a very long time.
for the 1% of the population too retarded to figure out Praxis=Chernobal they say it. Then they keep on saying it. I think by the time we actually SEE the explosion (its the first thing in the movie) they've already said it 10 or so times. THEN they keep on saying it! They just can't get over talking about how clever they are to think of an analogy for Chernobal to use in the Star Trek universe! MOVE ON!!!!!!
FF over the Excelsior's china set bit.
Did we mention Praxis = Chernobal? >:o
Now we get to the briefing.
First off Praxis = Chernobal incase you forgot.
The point here is the evil narrow-minded Kirk is prejudice and has no problem letting the Klingons die by the mess THEY MADE just because EVERY SINGLE ONE he's EVER met has tired to kill him. Mean old Kirk.
Did we mention Praxis = Chernobal?
Next they mention "only Nixon could go to China" but then without realizing it deride the very reason "only Nixon could go to China." Only Nixon could go because only Nixon wouldn't cave in to the Chinese, and they knew it. He would have let them die (which obviously makes him a racist in the Star Trek 6 world??) rather then help them and they respected him for that.
So next we pick up the next well worn theme.
Gorkon = Lincoln and Gorbachov.
They make Gorkon out to be this great Lincoln-esque figure. They talk about how great Gorbachov is. How noble and heroic he was for taking "the first step." Excuse me? His country was in economic and ecological shambles. He, like Gorkon, had two options. Get help from the outside or die. The Soviet Union, like the Klingon empire, didn't fall apart because it was enlightened as to its faults. It fell apart because it was BADLY mismanaged and economically outclassed by its enemies.
They try to drawn this connection between Gorkon and Lincoln but it falls flat because they have no connection. Lincoln said "We're ending slavery, deal with it, now lets rebuild." Gorkon like Gorbachov said "a little help here?"
Did we mention Praxis = Chernobal.
Next we move to Spock/Valaris' conversation in Spock's quarters. Obviously Valaris is a racist because she questions the wisdom of helping the Klingons. I couldn't help but think of the airport security guards that we now know wanted to hold the 9/11 hijackers but weren't aloud to because that would have been considered racial profiling. 3000+ people were killed because airport screeners weren't aloud to take the chance of hurting somebody's feelings....
Did we mention Praxis = Chernobal and Goooorkon = Gooooorbachov?
The commentors spend the majority of the dinner praising Gooooooorkon as a visionary because he asked for help as his failed society fell apart around him. The humans are described as narrow-minded racists because they're ready to say "you wouldn't help us, screw you. You got *yourself* in this mess, get yourself out." The Klingons are absolved of any guilt for the predicament they're in because they're asking for help. The blame is shouldered entirely by the Federation because their society isn't falling apart. This is like the folks who blamed the US for Chernobal because we wouldn't help the Soviets build "safe" reactors.
They then picked up that third dead horse they're going to beat. "Shakespear in the original Klingon" = "Shakespear in the original German." I watched a little bit more but can't stomach to write anymore. I'm glad this movie got edited down from what Nimoy wanted, I'm sure by the end of his version they were all holding hands and singing "give peace a chance."
Have to admit I've recently acquired and rewatched this film in the Special DVD Edition. Frankly, I'm less impress with it than I was back when it was originally released. As Adam more or less has pointed out, it is quite ham-handed in its symbolism and parallels with the downfall of Communism. The whole Praxis thing doesn't work for me. I mean, come on, surely the Klingons had other sources of power/dilithium crystals, didn't they? Too many of the Enterprise crew felt like they were "out of character". I mean, after 79 eps of the original series, I found the crew's racism hard to believe. It makes a mockery of all the lines stating that prejudices no longer exist, that humans have risen above them.
The problem I have with the commentary track is how self-congratulatory Nick Meyers and Denny Martin Flinn are. Meyers had a large hand in what I feel is the best of the TREK films (Wrath of Khan), yes. But I think he completely blew it with this one. It's not the worst, but it is a bit overrated.
BTW, if you watch the interview section on disc two, Leonard Nimoy makes a hilarious gaffe. He's talking about how many times STAR TREK was supposed to have ended. He mentions the 1979 film, and says, "Well, we thought that would be it." Then he says, "in '72, Spock died." Uhhhh, no Leonard, that was '82.
Live long and prosper.
I didn't like the more low-tech look of the sets for the Enterprise in Star Trek 6. Star Trek 5 established a sleeker look for the bridge of the Enterprise (somewhat resembling the set for Star Trek:The Next Generation). The kitchen in the film looked a bit low tech too.
It was also a cheapo trick to reuse the shot of the exploding Klingon ship in Star Trek: Generations. The space battle scenes in this film have more of a Star Wars look and feel to them compared to the earlier films.
I do remember reading a funny letter in Starlog from one woman who was upset with the character of Spock; she thought he had "raped" Catrell's character. What?
I do remember reading a funny letter in Starlog from one woman who was upset with the character of Spock; she thought he had "raped" Catrell's character. What? - Treklon
Um... Spock forcibly penetrated an unwilling Valeris's mind in order to extract information. According to Trek lore, mind melds are a "deeply personal experience, providing an intense intimacy" (from the Trek Encyclopedia). Not to mention that it caused Valeris extreme anguish and pain.
Sounds like rape to me.
And I guess we know what Kirk/Spock's position on the Iraqi prisoner abuse scandal is...
That was another point I felt that was completely out of character. Not only didn't it feel right for Spock to psychically rape Valeris, but that flash of anger he exhibited earlier in Sickbay seemed to be completely out of whack, too. It's amazing. This film, at least in my opinion, played fast and loose with the characters as much as STAR TREK V did, but it's still regarded as one of the better films. It is better than The Final Frontier, sure. (Having also rewatched that recently, I find V has diminished even more in my opinion. If that's even possible.) But it's not in the same league as Wrath of Khan or The Voyage Home, IMHO. I think Meyers had an agenda he wanted to push and shoe-horned the crew of the Enterprise to fit into it. And that worked against the film as a whole.
Live long and prosper.
In I Am Spock, Nimoy said that *he* was the one who decided to push the character.
I've read that book, but I don't remember that passage. But if that's the case (and I have no doubt that it is), then Nimoy made a very bad choice, I think. I felt, that despite Spock's growing acceptance of his emotions, it was a mistake and out of character for Spock to go into a rage and later psychically rape Valeris. Now, if they used Saavik instead of Valeris (as originally planned), it would have worked better. But not by much.
Live long and prosper.
As far as the thing with Valeris, what would you suggest that he do instead? They needed the info that she had and the needed it quick.
Personally I think that this is one of the best trek films, along with 2. I like 4 but think it's mega-overrated.
Ummm I know that the novels may not be acceptable topic for the movie but in the movie it wasnt rape it was spock entering valeris' mind and then just hanging there giving her the option of telling him or not. I know the movie had to up the drama but thats always movie and i think the novel is usually better than the movie anyhow.
Nimoy discusses the sickbay scene on p. 320. He makes it clear that it was his decision to show the anger. Sort of a way of showing that Spock was once again comfortable with both his halves.
Yeah, I thought that his anger in Sickbay made sense. I mean, this was his protege who'd betrayed him.
For some reason, even though it contradicts established aspects of the character, that way he swiped the phaser out of Valeris' hand in sickbay just worked for me. I dunno why, but it just did.
As for the rape, hey, Valeris was asking for it. She was wearing a very tight, revealing headband.
Well, I'm glad the anger works for everyone else, and that I'm the minority here, but to me it still seems to come completely out of the blue. For what, 25 years Spock has been shown to be in control of his emotions (with rare exceptions)? And now he comes unglued like this? Did the anger serve any logical purpose? I dunno. I think it might have worked for me had Kirk shown some surprise at the anger. Had McCoy protested Spock's psychic rape (or even the other bridge crew reacting with shock.) Instead, everyone treated this as being normal. It wasn't. (It would also have helped if the anger had been directed at Saavik instead of Valeris. Saavik's previous history with the series would have added weight to the scene, IMO.)
I'd've also preferred to have seen Kirk ask Bones to try some truth serum on Valeris first. Then Spock could say, "No, Captain. It will not work on her. There is only one way." Then proceed to mind-rape her. It might have worked a little better for me. But again, as noted, mine is the minority view here. So I guess TPTB did the right thing.
Live long and prosper.
For what, 25 years Spock has been shown to be in control of his emotions (with rare exceptions)?
The end of Amok Time comes to mind.
Had McCoy protested Spock's psychic rape (or even the other bridge crew reacting with shock.)
Scotty seemed alarmed to me.
(It would also have helped if the anger had been directed at Saavik instead of Valeris. Saavik's previous history with the series would have added weight to the scene, IMO.)
Wasn't the original plan to bring Saavik back? Then something fell through? The creators changed their minds or the actresses didn't want to do it?
The end of Amok Time comes to mind. - Josh M.
The end to "Amok Time" was one of the exceptions I was thinking of. "All Our Yesterdays" and "This Side of Paradise" are two others.
Scotty seemed alarmed to me. - Josh M.
Could be. I'll have to look at him again.
Wasn't the original plan to bring Saavik back? Then something fell through? The creators changed their minds or the actresses didn't want to do it? - Josh again
Yeah, the original idea for Saavik to be the traitor. But for one thing, Gene Roddenberry objected to the idea. He said Saavik was too popular. (I think that's one reason why the idea would have worked so much better. If we were to have seen Saavik again, and then learn that she was one of the conspirators, that would have added a tremendous amount of emotional weight to Spock's actions.) Then there's the fact that for various reasons neither Kirsty Alley nor Robin Curtis were available to reprise the role. So rather than recast the character a third time, the idea was dropped and Valeris was created. You can, I think, still tell that the part was written for Saavik, though. They didn't change it too much. But that's just me.
BTW, as I've mentioned on the "Journey to Babel" board, this movie marks the first time we see one of the Enterprise crew members smoking. In this case, it's Kirk taking a puff off of Martia's cigar. Supposedly, no one smokes in the future. At least no one human. (I believe that's been established on Voyager anyway.) At any rate, we've never seen Kirk smoke before, so isn't it remarkable he doesn't go into a coughing fit when he took what was quite probably his first drag off a cigar? (Or has this been mentioned before?)
Live long and prosper.
Not to mention that by that point, Kirstie Alley was a huge star on Cheers!, and her cost went waaaaaaay up.
...so did her weight!
Phil makes a note in the TOS nitpickers book of the number of times Scotty defends the honour of a woman, which might explain the ammount of surprise shown towards the mind meld with Valeris.
For what, 25 years Spock has been shown to be in control of his emotions (with rare exceptions)? And now he comes unglued like this? - Benn
There's one important point that you're missing... Spock has changed. Part of his arc in ST4 was to acknowledge that he is half-human and that sometimes his feelings will surface. In ST5, he tells Sybok he isn't the same person he was before. And this is all ignoring one important detail: Spock died. He's not the same person he was before.
Spock DIED ... and THAT makes him a different person? Come on ... I know that people who've had near-death experiences will begin a different lifestyle, but that doesn't make them a different PERSON ...
(sorry for posting as "anonymous", but my identity as "Derf" is currently lost in the Phil-World archive)
Besides ... Spock had a "lifechanging" experience in Trek Movie One, when he discovered that V'ger, despite all it's knowledge, was lacking a direction in life, a meaning of existence ... THAT, I think was Spock's "lifechanging realization" that he was alluding to in ST5.
Derf: Spock DIED ... and THAT makes him a different person? Come on ... I know that people who've had near-death experiences...
Luigi Novi: Ah, but Spock had a full-death experience. Not just a "near" one.
There's one important point that you're missing... Spock has changed. - Darth Sarcasm
No, I am not ignoring that. I quote from my Saturday, August 07, 2004 - 11:05 pm post: I felt, that despite Spock's growing acceptance of his emotions, it was a mistake and out of character for Spock to go into a rage and later psychically rape Valeris. I mean, despite all else others might think, I'm not that stup1d. I know he's changed. But it has not, to my satisfaction, been established that he had changed so much that he would fly off the handle like that. It works for you? Fine. It doesn't for me. (And I agree with Derf that the change in Spock began in STAR TREK The Motion(less) Picture and not with his death in Wrath of Khan.)
Live long and prosper.
Well, I was quoting from your Sunday, August 08, 2004 - 12:22 pm post in which you suggest no such thing.
I apologize that I didn't go back and read everything that was said on the topic. But you can't lay the entire blkame for the confusion when you fliflop on your position:
I felt, that despite Spock's growing acceptance of his emotions, it was a mistake and out of character for Spock to go into a rage and later psychically rape Valeris.
For what, 25 years Spock has been shown to be in control of his emotions (with rare exceptions)? And now he comes unglued like this?
In the second statement you don't acknowledge any kind of character change... you seem to expect him to behave the same way he was for the last 25 years. And it was this second statement that I was disputing.
Your first statement isn't a statement of fact, it's your opinion... which you are entitled to. But your second statement suggests that there was never any growth for the Spock character... that all aberrations in his behavior were just that... aberrations. But this is contrary to the stated facts in the last few films.
You've explained your position much better in this last post.
Peace and long life.
Spock DIED ... and THAT makes him a different person? Come on ... I know that people who've had near-death experiences will begin a different lifestyle, but that doesn't make them a different PERSON ... - Anonymous
Spock died... had his "soul" placed in the mind of a human (and an emotionally volatile one at that)... had his "soul" and memories reintegrated into his resurrected body... was reeducated... and you don't think he hasn't changed?
Why was Spock acting all goofy in ST4, then?
And LOL, Luigi...
I'm afraid I don't see a contradiction or "flip-flop" as you put it. In STAR TREK IV, Spock was still being re-educated, getting used to being alive again (think about the quiz sequence on Vulcan). McCoy even notes that Spock "isn't firing on all thrusters". For the Vulcan's next two appearances, STAR TREK V and most of The Undiscovered Country, he's once again the same stoic Vulcan we've known all these years. If and when he showed emotions, it was in moderation. (Hell, even if you toss in his appearance in "Unification" of TNG, it still holds true.) So, no, I'm not as you believe, flip-flopping. The Voyage Home presents an abberation in Spock's behaviour, one they explain. (He's still getting acclimatized to being alive.) Moreover, just because Spock has accepted his emotions (and I agree he has), doesn't mean he now so freely expresses them. This has not been established by any of the films. (BTW, I do not expect Spock, or any of the characters to behave as they did in the Original Series, but I do expect a little more of a set up if you're going to have Spock blow up like he did. Perhaps having him display a little more emotion earlier in the film?)
Live long and prosper.
Hell, even if you toss in his appearance in "Unification" of TNG, it still holds true.
Not quite. During the meld with Picard at the end (to touch Sarek's memories), you can see grief and sadness on Spock's face. I didn't notice that the first time I saw it, but after I read I Am Spock, where Nimoy mentioned it, I looked for it, and it's definitely there.
Benn: ...but I do expect a little more of a set up if you're going to have Spock blow up like he did. Perhaps having him display a little more emotion earlier in the film?)
Luigi Novi: What if he was feeling it earlier, but was able to hold back any external expression of it until Valeris' crimes were exposed? Perhaps the fact that he placed so much trust in her, hoping that she take his place after he left the Enterprise, is why he lost his cool?
Moreover, just because Spock has accepted his emotions (and I agree he has), doesn't mean he now so freely expresses them. This has not been established by any of the films. - Benn
Well, then I disagree there. I think the films do present Spock as occasionally lapsing into emotion.
And this change is established through his arc in ST4. As I mentioned earlier, Amanda tells him that his emotions will surface from time to time... it is unavoidable because he is half-human. And in the end, he accepts this ("Tell Mother I feel fine."). We see his anger and frustration surface at least once in ST5 when he is insistent that Korrd help him in dealing with the Klingons ("•••• you, sir. You will try.").
Certainly, we hadn't ever seen him express himself as violently as in ST6... but then, this was only the second movie after ST4... hardly a large enough sample of behavior on which to base a definitive conclusion.
But because the previous two features established Spock accepting his emotion (and his expression of them from time to time) and displaying the more intense emotions... Spock's reaction to Valeris's betrayal seems entirely consistent.
What if he was feeling it earlier, but was able to hold back any external expression of it until Valeris' crimes were exposed? Perhaps the fact that he placed so much trust in her, hoping that she take his place after he left the Enterprise, is why he lost his cool? - Luigi Novi
I agree.
And I'll add that up until then... the assumption was that the perpetrators were humans (or non-Vulcans, at least). It was the human crew we saw displaying their resentment of having the Klingons over for dinner. It was the human crew who seemed unwilling to bury their prejudices. It was a pair of humans who boarded the Klingon ship and assasinated Gorkon. Spock, in essence, was allowing his own prejudices (based partly on the crew's behavior, of course) to blind him to the possibility that Valeris was responsible. Presumably he wouldn't have put her in charge of the investigation if he suspected her.
I feel it should be pointed out that the "mind rape" wasn't spontaneous or emotional on Spock's part. It seemed clear to me that he and Kirk had known going into it that it might be necessary if Valeris wouldn't talk. Spock waited for Kirk to give him the nod before doing it.
I didn't get that from Kirk's cue. What I got was that Spock simply understood what Kirk wanted because they worked so closely together and understood one another. That's just me.
Either way it didnt exactly look like Spock was enjoying doing it or going to enjoy doing it. So if it was a spur of the moment decision on the bridge or a preplanned worst case scenario response it was a grim task that needed to be done to get the information to save the Federation, at least in Kirk and Spock's POV. Myself I didnt exactly see it as a choice that was taken lightly by Spock but was the "logical" method. But I have to say I much prefer the way it was done in the novel which wouldnt have gone over quite as dramatically as in the movie.
Luigi Novi: True. Scotty told Geordi that he’s a captain "in rank only" in Relics(TNG), and that he prefers being an engineer, but I still find this practice odd. Is there 21st century precedent for this? Does this occur today in the navy?
I can think of a few examples. On a U.S. Navy aircraft carrier, the vessel's commanding officer (its "captain") has the rank of captain (O-6 in DoD parlance, equivalent to an Army or Air Force colonel). There is an also an officer called the CAG (Commander, Air Group), who holds the rank of captain as well. Because federal law requires that a carrier's commanding officer be an aviator and not a sailor, the chief engineer must have a VERY strong naval background to compensate. In some cases, the "ChEng" will be a captain who has commanded a smaller vessel, such as a destroyer. So in this case there are three captains aboard the ship.
(Also, while this doesn't necessarily count, the headquarters of the carrier battle group, which is commanded by a rear admiral, is aboard the carrier, and some of his staff, such as his chief of staff or his intelligence officer, might hold the rank of captain. So there could be 4 or 5 captains aboard, though the latter ones are not technically part of the carrier's crew.)
Soviet submarines often had 3 or 4 officers who held the rank of captain. The CO, the XO, the political officer, and the ChEng were usually all captains, though to be fair there were two ranks of captains, Captain Second Rank and Captain First Rank. But they were still captains.
I think that the core of your argument is not that there shouldn't be two people aboard with the rank of captain, but that Spock--a fully rated commanding officer capable of having his own command--still serves as a first officer. I can live with Scotty being a captain, as engineering is really a specialty. But if Sulu were promoted to captain (which was one of the best things about this movie, imho, seeing Sulu get his own ship like he deserved), Spock should have been given a ship. (More likely, in the case of this movie, since Spock was a special envoy, he should not have been pulling shifts on the bridge.)
Spock was offered command several times (and in fact, held command in STII), but (according to non-canon sources) perfers not to.
ScottN: Spock was offered command several times (and in fact, held command in STII), but (according to non-canon sources) perfers not to.
Canon tells us this too. I believe he says, somewhere in ST2, that he's "content" to serve with Kirk. My objection is that a qualified officer shouldn't have this option. If TPTB said that everyone on the Enterprise signed up for a 5, 10, or 15 year mission, I could see that. But the idea that Spock (or Riker, or Data, or La Forge) can refuse advancement is baffling. What if every XO refused advancement? And obviously it's not so crazy, because Admiral Hanson (in BOBW, Part 1) tells Picard that Riker needs a "kick in the butt."
I have a slightly different perspective on Spock's actions toward Valeris. I too was made very uncomfortable by them, and they seemed out of character. But rather than try to account for them, I tend to discount much of the movie, which is in my opinion by far the worst. Someone way back in these posts said it was second only to STII, and I respect that opinion, but I really don't agree. Spock, and everybody, acted really weird throughout the film. The emotional intensity seemed overplayed. I may be absolutely alone here, but I preferred STV! I would rather hear Spock singing rounds and see him roasting "marshmelons" than see him behave so uncharacteristically! I don't think his death can account for it - he really was presented as the same person I think.
I was watching someone being cuffed on "Law & Order," and it occurred to me suddenly that McCoy & Kirk's handcuffs (given to them on Kronos One)seem rather pointless. Yes, they keep their arms together. But their hands are free to, say, grasp a weapon, esp. being cuffed with their hands in front. In fact, I'd think that you could kill someone with a blow to the head from those heavy cuffs. What's the point of them? (I understand that Klingon cuffs might need to be much beefier than the steel bracelets in use today, but....)
I thought I read in one of the books that Klingon cuffs have built into them a form of agonizer or other pain inducer. This would make sense in Klingon culture.
I guess on some level the Klingons are really kinky people.
I would say on most levels, Luigi.
Kinda makes you wonder what a tame klingon red light district might be like? Much less a wild one.
They probably read Shakespeare there.
What do you call that Cool,
Anaglog Digital Clock, above the Viewscreen on the Enterprise-A, as seen in ST:VI TUC?
Bernard, of course.
A minor "headscratch" to ponder ...
During ST3 Kirk mocked the Klingon words for "beam me/them up" in order to escape death on the Genesis Planet by saying (phonetically) Chooo-Eee-Chew!
When General Chang requested the same onboard the Enterprise after the evening meal he said, (also phonetically) Dakth Makth Cheakth ...
Now I know there is a difference in being beamed up from a planet surface and being beamed over from one vessel to another, but if Chang had said "Chooo-Eee-Chew" ... would the same results have been accomplished?
It's no different than Kirk sometimes saying, "Beam us up" and sometimes he says, "Energize."
Maybe different accents in Klingon that sound different to our non-klingon ears?
I like Darth's theory, because I sometimes get annoyed when people seem to forget that there are synonyms and synonymous phrases in human languages, so why can't there be them in alien languages too?
Luigi Novi: Yes, the Enterprise-B has that ridge. It also has "spoilers' on the backs of the nacelles and I believe on the rear of the saucer section as well. This was to distinguish it from the rest of the class because it was the flagship, and in the case of that ridge, because it had to be badly damaged during the beginning ST Generations.
Me: I know about the ridge being added so they could have some damage there without cutting into the original model, but...
(DA-DA-DA-DA-DA-DA-DAAAAAH!!!)
...when was it established that the other items were added because the Enterprise-B was the flagship?
They were added by the model-makers for that reason. I was not implying that they were added by the ship builders internally.
During ST3 Kirk mocked the Klingon words for "beam me/them up" in order to escape death on the Genesis Planet by saying (phonetically) Chooo-Eee-Chew!
When General Chang requested the same onboard the Enterprise after the evening meal he said, (also phonetically) Dakth Makth Cheakth ...
It's no different than Kirk sometimes saying, "Beam us up" and sometimes he says, "Energize."
Maybe different accents in Klingon that sound different to our non-klingon ears?
Okay ... here's one that puzzles me ...
Kirk and company beam over the Klingon group, and Gorkon introduces General Chang by name. In the scenes where the "Enterprise" fires on the Klingon ship, the gravity is lost and Gorkon says (in English subtitles) "Find Chang!" In Klingon, he says (phonetically) "kung gay dar shom". Either Gorkon is calling Chang by another name, or Klingon for Chang is different than English.