• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

ST6: Why didn't they offer Robin Curtis the part of Saavik?

Capt_Pickirk

Fleet Captain
Fleet Captain
I've heard that Kristie Alley was unavailable to play Saavik in Star Trek: TUC, so why didn't they give Robin Curtis the job??

Was she busy to act in it too? Did they forget about her?
 
I thought it had nothing to do with the actresses, only the character.

Yeah it was gonna be Saavik. But as the TUC character ended up betraying Spock and being a traitor and conspirator and all that, well, somebody didn't want Saavik to end on that bitter note.

So they changed the character to Valeris. I wish they'd change the character even MORE. Too much too like Saavik for my tastes. Another Vulcan protege of Spock's, another helm officer, another top SFA recent graduate, and so on.
 
From the movie's Wikipedia page:

Initially, the character of Saavik, who appeared in the second through fourth Star Trek films, was intended to be the traitor, but Gene Roddenberry objected to making a character loved by fans into a villain. Cattrall was unwilling to be the third actress to play Saavik (a part she had originally auditioned for), but accepted the role when it became a different character.[11] Cattrall chose the Eris element of the character's name, for the Greek goddess of strife, which was Vulcanised by the addition of the "Val" at the behest of director Nicholas Meyer

That pretty much jives with what I've read elsewhere, that Roddenberry flipped his shit over it. Meyer apparently didn't give much of a crap, arguing that he'd invented the character and could therefore do whatever he wanted with her, but somehow he got overridden.
 
I imagine that Meyer probably wasn’t a big fan of Curtis’s version of the character, and when Alley was unavailable he gave in to Roddenberry on the issue because Curtis wasn’t worth fighting for.

In my own personal canon, Alley’s Saavik and Curtis’s Saavik are two different characters who happen to share a name. Other than name, rank, and pointed ears, they have nothing in common.
 
Here...
Nick Meyer said:
Originally we had hoped to lure Kirstie Alley back to reprise her character as Saavik--her backstory from the other films would have made this especially poignant--but once again she declined.
Nick Meyer said:
As I have noted, in an ideal world Valeris should have been the stalwart Saavik, a character we had already come to love. And trust. This would have sharpened the pain of her betrayal, but absent Kirstie Alley, we decided it would be better to introduce a new character.
 
Curtis would have been fine in the role. As Janeway said, logic can be used to justify anything. If Saavik, in her quest to be more logical and unemotional abandoned her conscience and any sense of guilt that would have been very powerful indeed. I can see her standing up to Spock in the mind rape scene defiant without a hint of emotion as she tells him it was his teachings that let her overcome her Romulan heritage and embrace the true logic of Kholinahr (whereas Spock failed in TMP) right up until he melds with her. While I wasn't a fan of Curtis unemotional performance (at Nimoy's request) compared to Alley's, I think it would have been chillingly powerful in STVI. Catrall displayed far too much impish emotion as a Vulcan for my taste. Curtis would have really sold it for me.
 
Curtis would have been fine in the role. As Janeway said, logic can be used to justify anything. If Saavik, in her quest to be more logical and unemotional abandoned her conscience and any sense of guilt that would have been very powerful indeed. I can see her standing up to Spock in the mind rape scene defiant without a hint of emotion as she tells him it was his teachings that let her overcome her Romulan heritage and embrace the true logic of Kholinahr (whereas Spock failed in TMP) right up until he melds with her. While I wasn't a fan of Curtis unemotional performance (at Nimoy's request) compared to Alley's, I think it would have been chillingly powerful in STVI. Catrall displayed far too much impish emotion as a Vulcan for my taste. Curtis would have really sold it for me.

I agree with this analysis 100%. And, it was a missed opportunity.

As much as I think Kim Cattrall is the hottest thing since the discovery of fire, she was wrong for the part, and I found her delivery to be off, more often than not.

Here...
Nick Meyer said:
Originally we had hoped to lure Kirstie Alley back to reprise her character as Saavik--her backstory from the other films would have made this especially poignant--but once again she declined.
Nick Meyer said:
As I have noted, in an ideal world Valeris should have been the stalwart Saavik, a character we had already come to love. And trust. This would have sharpened the pain of her betrayal, but absent Kirstie Alley, we decided it would be better to introduce a new character.

So, these passages would seem to contradict the idea that Roddenberry held any sway, even if he did object. No?
 
And couple the confrontation with Saavik reminding Spock bluntly that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Saavik could have thrown Spock's teachings back in his face with devastating effect.
 
I still don't know why they recast Saavik in the first place. The first time you see her she's on the Grissom so it could just as easily have been a different character.
 
That pretty much jives with what I've read elsewhere, that Roddenberry flipped his shit over it. Meyer apparently didn't give much of a crap, arguing that he'd invented the character and could therefore do whatever he wanted with her, but somehow he got overridden.

Meyer didn't get overridden at all. Cattrall did not wish to be Actress #3 to play Saavik and insisted on creating a new character.

So, these passages would seem to contradict the idea that Roddenberry held any sway, even if he did object. No?

Roddenberry hadn't "held sway" since ST:TMP. He was "Creative Consultant" on films II-VI, meaning he had to be sent every version of every script, and made copious notes in memos, but no one had to listen to him.

His comment about Saavik being revealed as a traitor was that she seemed to be "a beloved character", and that fans might find it hard to cope with such a revelation. (And I would agree that this would be true, only it would certainly have made the movie more compelling!) This bemused Meyer a lot, since GR had supposedly objected strenuously to the addition of a young, female Spock protege in the lead-up to the filming of ST II. But they didn't have to listen to him then, nor for ST VI.

Mind you, "From the Bridge" does have some factual errors. Meyer's accounts are incorrect in several instances throughout the book.

I've heard that Kristie Alley was unavailable to play Saavik in Star Trek: TUC, so why didn't they give Robin Curtis the job??

Was she busy to act in it too? Did they forget about her?

In a "Starlog" interview, Robin Curtis said she and her agent were never approached. When Kirstie Alley turned down the offer of ST VI, Meyer went straight to Kim Cattrall, his original choice for Saavik for ST II.

He had not cared for Curtis's performance in ST III and IV and wasn't interested in pursuing her. Cattrall only agreed if she could play a new Vulcan character, and had a hand in naming her (she suggested "Eris" and Meyer added the "Val'-" prefix to make it sound more Vulcan), designing the severe no-sideburns look of her hair, and the metal headband. The revised script actually calls her "Val'eris", although the apostrophe was removed by the time of the credits and publicity materials.

I still don't know why they recast Saavik in the first place.

It's my personal speculation that Nimoy didn't care for Alley's interpretation. (Was he also threatened by her popularity, I wonder? Fanzines of the day often seemed to be saying that, if Spock was really dead, "at least we have Saavik".) Supposedly there was lots of friction between Alley and Shatner on set (according to my interview with Paul Winfield), and Director Nimoy probably wanted to ensure that ST III was a happier set. Alley and Butrick had both mentioned that the main cast weren't going out of their way to be friendly to them, seeing them as potential caretakers of a new series of ST telemovies. He also took the chance to refine the character as all-Vulcan, not the feisty Romulan/Vulcan hybrid described in the script of ST II.

Alley wanted more money and they didn'r want to pay it, I think. It's a shame.

Actually, the "more money" was the ST III problem, although Paramount offered her less than ST II for that, knowing her agent would make a counter offer, but that then freed Paramount to recast.

Alley simply turned down ST VI, AFAIK.

The only reason Alley was thin enough to win Saavik for ST II was that she was grieving for her parents, who'd just been in a horrific car accident, resulting in the death of one of them. The story is told in her otherwise rather hilarious autobiography.
 
Last edited:
Alley simply turned down ST VI, AFAIK.

What a shame. Having her back, and revealing Saavik as the traitor just would have been the icing on the cake for this film.

Still, given the circumstances of its production (miniscule budget, racing against the clock to get it made), I'm amazed it turned out as well as it did.
 
So, these passages would seem to contradict the idea that Roddenberry held any sway, even if he did object. No?

Like Therin said, he was powerless. However his "suggestions" seem to crop up a lot in fandom, so it's probably just PR from Roddenberry's people to make it appear he was involved with the films. Maybe to legitimise them for some fans, which is essentially why he was even given the "creative consultant" credit.

Valeris is fine as is, and Catrall is fantastic. There wasn't much point having her play the third Saavik, so I can understand her reasoning.
 
So, these passages would seem to contradict the idea that Roddenberry held any sway, even if he did object. No?
Roddenberry objected, but Meyer didn't have to listen to Roddenberry, so he didn't. :)

Meyer's retort, as I recall, was along these lines -- "I created Saavik, and when you pay me the money you've earned from the character over the years, then I might care what you have to say on the matter." But with a lot more profanity.
 
Meyer mentioned at the L.A. screening of Star Trek VI a few weeks ago that he regretted his behavior at the final meeting he had with Gene Roddenberry, although he didn't go into detail.
 
If bringing back Saavik would mean Alley instead of Curtis, then bleh, nothing of value was lost. Though I'm also on Gene's side on this one; it WOULD have been kind of a downer to see Saavik's final appearance be a fall from grace.
 
I can understand why Cattrall didn't want to be Saavik #3, but it was a shame that they couldn't stick with Saavik.

Having her turn out to be the traitor would have been much more powerful and dramatic.
 
Alley wanted more money and they didn'r want to pay it, I think. It's a shame.
No, I mean, I know WHY they recast, but when you look at the actual story of Star Trek III, Saavik could just as easily have been any old Vulcan because you don't see her on the Enrerprise.
 
I still don't know why they recast Saavik in the first place. The first time you see her she's on the Grissom so it could just as easily have been a different character.

Continuity. Having a brand new vulcan with David at Genesis would have been more weird than the recasting. Then fans would have said "jeez why not just call her Saavik anyway?" Go figure. Anyway, Saavik had the connection with Kirk and David (and Spock) that a new character would not have had. Recasting in this case was necessary and preferable to creating a whole new character to get to know.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top