Star Trek IV is not a great movie after all...

[unixknight]

WAIT WAIT

 

Hear me out...

This is the highest grossing film in the Star Trek franchise and is often considered the most popular, next to Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan.  In this movie, an alien probe starts causing devastation and chaos on the Earth when it arrives, looking for humpback whales which are extinct in the 23rd Century.  Kirk and his crew are able to save the day by going back in time to 1986 and bringing a breeding pair of whales into their time, thus convincing the alien probe to stop what it's doing and leave.
 
There's a lot about the film to like, and being set in 1986 San Fransisco instead of an alien planet or spending the entire story aboard a starship made the film accessible to a wider audience than would normally be interested in a Star Trek movie.

To be honest, I don't think this movie was particularly interesting.  It was funny and enjoyable to watch in the way any comedy film is fun to watch, but at the end of the day it wasn't a thoughtful social commentary, it was a propaganda piece.  

Here's what I mean...

The message of the film is made crystal clear: Whaling is bad, especially when the whales being hunted are endangered, such as with humpback whales.  All of the moral, credible characters in the movie have lines condemning the practice and it's one sided in that any alternate view is given absolutely no voice at all, with whalers only appearing onscreen to add tension to the climax of the film and to give the audience the warm fuzzies of seeing them terrified when the Bounty decloaks directly above their vessel.

Now don't get me wrong... I agree completely that hunting endangered species is morally wrong and should not happen, but that's part of the problem.  The movie knows that its audience already agrees with the premise, so it makes no effort to delve into just why it's bad to hunt endangered whales.  It's as if the point of the movie is to make audiences feel good for sharing that view, and serves as validation and a pat on the back.  You know you're a good person.  See?  Captain Kirk agrees with you!  So does Spock, who points out how illogical it is to hunt a species to extinction.  To round out the chorus of voices preaching the message we have a contemporary of the audience:  Dr. Gllian Taylor, marine biologist and expert on humpback whales.  

I'm not saying that the movie could credibly have included a perspective representing the idea that hunting endangered whales is a good thing.  What would have been more interesting is a chance to see a glimpse of the lives of the whalers themselves, and why they do as they do.  Not so that we would necessarily support their work them, but so that we could at least understand them.

What I mean by that is that whalers are not evil mustache twirling villains who wake up in the morning to a steaming mug of whale tears and laugh maniacally as they imagine a future in which all whales are dead and they can move on to hunting baby seals.  No doubt the ones who break laws by doing it believe that they're only doing what they have to in order to make a living and feed their families.  Maybe they don't think they have any other choice.  Maybe they believe strongly in a family tradition and are unwilling to change.  Maybe they live in a country where the government does not cooperate with international laws prohibiting whaling and just don't see what the problem with it is.  
My point is that there's an alternate perspective, however unpopular it may be, and to show that perspective would challenge the audience.  

Would it change the minds of moviegoers about the morality of whaling?  No, nor should it, but what it might do is show that the issue isn't black and white, and that if we really want to end the practice of whaling once and for all, the needs and concerns of whalers and the cultures they come from need to be understood and addressed or it will just keep happening.  There are no cloaked Klingon ships in real life to scare them back to port.

Sadly, it does none of those things.  Whalers are actually vilified more in the movie's dialogue than the planet killing alien probe itself.  The movie is actually so lazy in setting up its own premise that it doesn't even give much of a reason why the loss of humpback whales is bad for the planet.  As far as we can tell, the Earth of the 23rd Century was just fine without them, and it took a completely featureless, completely unknown alien probe to show up and start destroying the Earth just because there were no humpback whales on it.  

I'm not kidding, that's the actual premise of the film.  

Honestly, that may well be the worst part for me.  There were so many more interesting ways to show the impact of a species going extinct on the planet's ecosystem.  Maybe once the ecology of sea life is disrupted it starts a chain reaction over the next couple of centuries that culminates in mass extinctions in Earth's oceans.  Maybe a premise similar to the film Medicine Man, in which a particular species of ant carries a trait that can be used to cure cancer in humans, but is being eradicated due to deforestation in the Amazon region.  Instead, the writers just fell back on the sci-fi setting and came up with a completely boring, featureless black cylinder that's utterly invulnerable to attack because, conveniently, it drains power from any starship or starbase in the vicinity.  When the probe arrives does it land in the sea to search for whales?  Nope.  It just sits in orbit and deploys some sort of blue marble device that apparently not only transmits whale song through space, (then the atmosphere, then the sea,) but it also starts to completely vaporize the Earth's oceans.  The motive for this behavior isn't ever explained.  Is it throwing a tantrum that there are no humpback whales?  Is it taking revenge?  Is it somehow doing this to get hidden whales to respond?  We don't know.  The motivation of this villain is never made at all clear.  All we know about it is that it will wipe out all life on Earth because there are no humpback whales on it.

And when Kirk and crew come back with whales brought forward from the past, the whales start singing.  The probe, now satisfied, flies away and is never mentioned in Star Trek canon again.  The most significant event in the movie to the overall Star Trek canon is the introduction of the Enterprise-A, which takes place in the last two minutes of the film.  The alien probe is never explained, the fate of Dr. Taylor is never explained (beyond being assigned to a science vessel., which makes absolutely no sense at all since the whole reason she came forward into the future was to be with the whales...  But whatever.  I guess everyone who's anyone in the 23rd Century lives and works on a starship.) the fate of the whales is never explained.  None of those things matter at all.  

So ultimately, Star Trek IV is a pat on the head to all of those in the audience who agree that hunting endangered whales is bad, and nothing more.  Star Trek is at its best when it explores themes and social commentary in a way that's challenging and makes us think about things from a new point of view.  Star Trek IV does not do this.  It's a propaganda poster.  It tells us what we already know and makes no effort at all to provide a new way of looking at anything.

Sure it was a funny movie and is enjoyable for that, but it isn't a Star Trek movie.

[Overwatch]

what's your thoughts on killing the baby seals?

mi mi mi

OOOoooh

 

♫♪  WAY up north where the air gets cold

We’re running out of money and we’re running out of gold

So now I earn my living

Killing the baby seals

 

You can hit `em with a bat you can hit `em with a brick

You can poke `em in th eye with your eye pokin stick

That’s how I earn my living

Killing the baby seals  ♫♪

 

 

 

*totally not serious about killing dem baby seals

 

[bytebear]

Well, my favorite Star Trek movie is First Contact.  Any commentary on the Borg?

[Overwatch]

5 minutes ago, bytebear said:

Well, my favorite Star Trek movie is First Contact.  Any commentary on the Borg?

The same thing I think about Klingons, gross.

I mean, the borg have some pretty cool head accessories to cover their slimy visage. The Klingons just have a big ol'  scab looking forehead. I just want to pick it off.

[bytebear]

I hate Klingon storylines.  Although Undiscovered Country was surprisingly good (especially the version with the Scooby Doo ending - cut in some releases).  But I love the Borg stories.

 

Edited June 13, 2018 by bytebear

[Overwatch]

7 minutes ago, bytebear said:

I hate Klingon storylines.  Although Undiscovered Country was surprisingly good (especially the version with the Scooby Doo ending - cut in some releases).  But I love the Borg stories.

 

I really need to watch some Star Trek. I am a Star Wars fan but that is now dead. The next movie will be "How Boba Fett Pours His Cereal"

Star Trek always just seemed underwhelming to me after watching Star Wars blasters in action BUT I suppose I can make some room for it now.

[bytebear]

I really liked Solo.  but everything else is.. meh.

I love Voyager (watching it now, and yes, it's a Borg episode).   If you do watch more, find a viewers guide online. Its the only way I got through DS9. And ended up liking it.

[Still_Small_Voice]

I did not really care for the Star Wars Prequels made by George Lucas.  The Star Wars movies I liked were the following:

Rogue One  -- A New Hope  -- Empire Strikes Back  -- Return of the Jedi  -- The Force Awakens -- The Last Jedi

I hated when they made the Solo movie.  It does not look or sound like the young Han Solo and we already know what happens to his character.  It is boring and I have no desire to see it.

I really liked Star Trek II and III.  Star Trek IV in my mind was more about comparing 1980s technology with possible technology in a science fiction 24th century.  Star Trek VI was also good as was the First Contact Star Trek movie in my opinion.

[unixknight]

9 hours ago, bytebear said:

Well, my favorite Star Trek movie is First Contact.  Any commentary on the Borg?

Oh do I ever...

Stay tuned...

[anatess2]

10 hours ago, Still_Small_Voice said:

The Last Jedi

Seriously, dude???

[anatess2]

12 hours ago, bytebear said:

I love Voyager (watching it now, and yes, it's a Borg episode). 

Voyager is the only Star Trek show that I watched from episode 1 through to the end (it started to get ugh there towards the end - I really don't like the way they handled time travel).  I watched it because of the Borg.

[bytebear]

11 hours ago, Still_Small_Voice said:

I hated when they made the Solo movie.  It does not look or sound like the young Han Solo and we already know what happens to his character.  It is boring and I have no desire to see it.

I was very leery of Solo, but I really loved it.  The actor who plays Solo is not Harrison Ford, but on occasion he does channel the Solo character.  And Lando is just awesome.  Totally awesome.  Don't give it up just yet.  It's probably my favorite film after the original trilogy.  It, along with Rogue One are really much better prequels than I, II, III.

[bytebear]

42 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Voyager is the only Star Trek show that I watched from episode 1 through to the end (it started to get ugh there towards the end - I really don't like the way they handled time travel).  I watched it because of the Borg.

The last season was too quick of a wrap up, and their return home was rushed and felt forced.  But the Borg arc throughout the series was awesome.  "Janeway" - grumbling Borg Queen.

[NeuroTypical]

I'm in my 2nd year of rewatching all the Star Trek shows on Netflix.  Halfway through Voyager right now.  I forgot how deep into the human psyche they dove in a few episodes.  (or tried to dive but looked silly, in other episodes).

Ah, the '90's.  Back when nobody saw anything out of place in a picture like this:

lol eye candy?  What's that lol?  We got the first female captain, it ain't about that any more!  Gee, I wonder what they tried to boost their ratings for the fourth season lol!  Probably more phaser fights or something.

 

[Still_Small_Voice]

Why do you dislike The Last Jedi movie Anatess?

[anatess2]

2 hours ago, bytebear said:

I was very leery of Solo, but I really loved it.  The actor who plays Solo is not Harrison Ford, but on occasion he does channel the Solo character.  And Lando is just awesome.  Totally awesome.  Don't give it up just yet.  It's probably my favorite film after the original trilogy.  It, along with Rogue One are really much better prequels than I, II, III.

Solo continued on to the ruining of Star Wars.  They just made Solo the one and only linchpin that set the rest of the Star Wars universe.  Dudes, Solo is awesome.  But he's not THAT important to Star Wars!  And of course, now we got that stupid droid in every episode from IV on up. 

I love I, II, III... despite the terrible dialogue.

[anatess2]

1 hour ago, Still_Small_Voice said:

Why do you dislike The Last Jedi movie Anatess?

Oh my goodness, where to start.  If you loved IV-V-VI, you can't possibly love VIII.  We built the entire Star Wars universe over Luke Skywalker - layers added on to his character from the whiny teen-ager of IV to the greatest Jedi in VI.  They held us in great suspense in VII getting the fandom into a frenzy... and he throws away his lightsaber and got beaten by an untrained wanna-be-Jedi like a crazy old man all in one episode.  

And that's just the beginning...

[bytebear]

3 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

 

lol eye candy?  What's that lol?  We got the first female captain, it ain't about that any more!  Gee, I wonder what they tried to boost their ratings for the fourth season lol!  Probably more phaser fights or something.

 

Not disagreeing, but 7 of 9 was a huge improvement over Kess.

[NeuroTypical]

Agreed.  

"Who? Jeri Ryan?  And she said yes?  Whoa...    Um, hey Kess - in this next episode, you, um, like, turn into a multidimensional ghost and fly away.  Or something.  Yeah, you're just not cutting it with the 18-45 guy demographic, sorry.  Now someone tell the bodysuit guy he's un-fired!!"

Edited June 13, 2018 by NeuroTypical

[Still_Small_Voice]

This conversation is over Anatess.  Heh heh!  How can you possibly like the Phantom Menace movie and say the Last Jedi is terrible in comparison?  Phantom Menace had a terrible, awful plot line with major holes in it, no character development, awful dialogue.  The movie is irrelevant to the Star Wars saga storyline.  It has been banned from my house.  

"Sandstorms are very, very dangerous. Come on. I'll take you to my place."

[NeuroTypical]

Awful dialogue?  Heaven forfend!

[bytebear]

I tried to watch episode I.  I got maybe 30 minutes in, and just had to turn it off.  It was just unwatchable.  Solo, I could watch again and again.  It just felt like the Star Wars of my childhood.

[bytebear]

To distinguish, I feel that Star Wars is fantasy, and Star Trek is science fiction.  So, they really aren't comparable as a genre, other than they both take place in outer space.

[anatess2]

16 hours ago, Still_Small_Voice said:

This conversation is over Anatess.  Heh heh!  How can you possibly like the Phantom Menace movie and say the Last Jedi is terrible in comparison?  Phantom Menace had a terrible, awful plot line with major holes in it, no character development, awful dialogue.  The movie is irrelevant to the Star Wars saga storyline.  It has been banned from my house.  

"Sandstorms are very, very dangerous. Come on. I'll take you to my place."

The Phantom Menace is George Lucas terrible - that means the dialogue is awful (Yippeee!) but the characterizations are solid.  It doesn't take an existent beloved major character and turn him into a schmuck.  It doesn't force a political narrative out of nowhere (Canto Bight, ugh!), rather the political narrative is ingrained into the storyline (This is how democracy dies).  It doesn't take a character and give her Jedi powers out of nowhere for no reason - they work for it in a cycle of failure and redemption.

Phantom Menace is NOT irrelevant to the Star Wars saga storyline.  Phantom Menace produced expansions of the Star Wars universe - an entire book series on Quigon Jinn and Darth Maul.  It also gave the foundational element to Jedi masters giving up their lives to the living force to become luminescent characters.  It gave a background to Darth Sidious leading to the special relationship between Sidious and Anakin and Padme and Anakin and a foundational element that is Anakin's relationship to his mother that is integral to the Anakin-to-Vader story arc.  These foundational elements have universe-wide impact.  Rogue One, on the other hand (the last 5 minutes of R1 made the entire movie great) exists just to explain away how the Death Star can be blown up from one spot and how Vader ended up chasing Leia.

The Last Jedi, on the other hand, maintained no continuity from The Force Awakens and made major characters unrecognizable showing zero reverence to the story arc that made Luke and Leia near and dear to the fandom.  They gave us new characters that we can't really care much about (Holdo, Rose Tico, among others) unlike the introduction and short stints of Quigon Jinn and Darth Maul in the Phantom Menace.  It doesn't develop characters introduced in TFA (Snoke and Rey and Poe didn't develop and even became dead ends).  But yes, I like Kylo Ren.  And I like that TLJ veered off of TFA by switching the relationship from Rey and Finn to Rey and Kylo.  And that's the only thing that keeps me interested in Episode IX.

Edited June 14, 2018 by anatess2

[NeuroTypical]

32 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

It gave a background to Darth Sidious leading to the special relationship between Sidious and Anakin and Padme and Anakin and a foundational element that is Anakin's relationship to his mother that is integral to the Anakin-to-Vader story arc.

So, is this like, you on Saturday night?