I like Wrath of Khan, but I've never considered it a classic like a lot of people do(I actually like Search for Spock better). Of course this is all inherently subjective, and I'm not trying to start an argument over the film's quality, but I was curious if any posters who love TWOK could explain why.
Why do people love Wrath of Khan so much?
- Thread starter TalkieToaster
- Start date
I think it has great pacing and great emotional depth, dealing with getting old, past mistakes, present mistakes, and loss. I love the mounting tension in that final scene where they desperately limp away. Spock's death is one of the best death scenes of movie history IMO.
However, I do think some of the other movies have better character moments for the supporting cast. They should have tried harder to give each one a decent scene like in the newer movies. There are also some very large plot holes.
In many ways I prefer TMP but none of the movies are perfect. If you could mix the more space age feel of TMP with the pacing and depth of TWoK and the character moments from TSfS and TVH then you're about right.
However, I do think some of the other movies have better character moments for the supporting cast. They should have tried harder to give each one a decent scene like in the newer movies. There are also some very large plot holes.
In many ways I prefer TMP but none of the movies are perfect. If you could mix the more space age feel of TMP with the pacing and depth of TWoK and the character moments from TSfS and TVH then you're about right.
The irony is that, while TWOK felt fast-paced by comparison to TMP before it, compared to much of modern cinema the action in TWOK feels glacial in itself. But maybe in a good way. 
TWOK's strengths are in it's character development, most particularly in making it feel like these people really exist and have a genuine history beyond the confides of this one movie. The reason Carol Marcus is so compelling is because she adds a lot to Kirk as a character -- hinted at with people like Ruth and Janet Wallace, but given more emotional impetus by the revelation of an adult-age son, at a time when Kirk is questioning his own maturing years.
On the other hand, another thing working in it's favor (despite the obvious call-backs and sequel-hooks) is that taken on it's own, it stands up as a fully self-contained story. One doesn't need to have seen TOS, nor even to watch TSFS or TVH after it, to enjoy TWOK on it's own merits as a 'closed circle'. Which is much to it's benefit in terms of hooking in the casual non-Trekkie audience. One doesn't even necessarily need to have seen "Space Seed" in order to follow Khan's hatred of Kirk (although obviously it works as a primer.)
TWOK's strengths are in it's character development, most particularly in making it feel like these people really exist and have a genuine history beyond the confides of this one movie. The reason Carol Marcus is so compelling is because she adds a lot to Kirk as a character -- hinted at with people like Ruth and Janet Wallace, but given more emotional impetus by the revelation of an adult-age son, at a time when Kirk is questioning his own maturing years.On the other hand, another thing working in it's favor (despite the obvious call-backs and sequel-hooks) is that taken on it's own, it stands up as a fully self-contained story. One doesn't need to have seen TOS, nor even to watch TSFS or TVH after it, to enjoy TWOK on it's own merits as a 'closed circle'. Which is much to it's benefit in terms of hooking in the casual non-Trekkie audience. One doesn't even necessarily need to have seen "Space Seed" in order to follow Khan's hatred of Kirk (although obviously it works as a primer.)
I was 16 when TMP premiered in theatres and 18 when TWoK released and had been watching TOS since age 6 in 1969.
For me - I felt TMP did NOT do a good job with the characterizations and relationships of the main characters, and was devoid of the 'chemistry' between the characters that was clearly evidenced to me in the TV episodes.
TWoK OTOH gave an exciting revenge driven storyline and all the main character characterization and chemistry from the TV show was BACK (IMO because of the script) and of all of the six TOS era feature films, TWoK was the one that boought that back to the screen first, and best for me.
^^^
IDK if I'm alone in that assessment among Star trek fans who saw the films on first run release; but again in analyzing why I like TWoK so much, that stands out - because let's face it in that the other parts of the TWoK script have NUMEROUS canon/continuity violations; and either Chekov is 100% incompetent; or late 23rd century Starship sensors LOST functionality as how can you not on approach to the Ceti Alpha system notice:
1 - There's a Planet missing and an extra debris field in the system that didn't exist the last time you were there
2 - The orbital path of one (perhaps more) of the Planets in the system have shifted
^^^^
And that just in the first few minutes of the film
I'm not going to echo many of the good points made here and instead I will come at it from a differernt angle, in an attempt to add to the discussion:
TWoK is so beloved because it is beautifully simple. It is a story about a bad guy and a good guy fighting that results in the good guy prevailing. It doesn't rely on a hundred different, overly-complex plot threads [hi Nemesis, with Shinzon, his motivations, the introduction of Remans, mind-rape, marriage, the scimitar...] and it doesnt tangle itself up in grand ideas wrapped in nonsense[ hi Insurrection with your innocent people who are sooooo nice who wont share a planet with your secret actualy relatives, evil admirals, tech hating people who use tech...arghhhh] so in turn the film becomes really rather simple.
If one reads reviews [both on official sites and from film-goers] you will see the repeated point that TWoK is the one Trek movie [aside First Contact] that can actually be watched by non-trekkies without befuddlement and boredom setting in. Why?
Because, as I said, it is at heart a story about a good guy and a bad guy knocking lumps out of each other and it is thus, very, very entertaining.
TWoK is so beloved because it is beautifully simple. It is a story about a bad guy and a good guy fighting that results in the good guy prevailing. It doesn't rely on a hundred different, overly-complex plot threads [hi Nemesis, with Shinzon, his motivations, the introduction of Remans, mind-rape, marriage, the scimitar...] and it doesnt tangle itself up in grand ideas wrapped in nonsense[ hi Insurrection with your innocent people who are sooooo nice who wont share a planet with your secret actualy relatives, evil admirals, tech hating people who use tech...arghhhh] so in turn the film becomes really rather simple.
If one reads reviews [both on official sites and from film-goers] you will see the repeated point that TWoK is the one Trek movie [aside First Contact] that can actually be watched by non-trekkies without befuddlement and boredom setting in. Why?
Because, as I said, it is at heart a story about a good guy and a bad guy knocking lumps out of each other and it is thus, very, very entertaining.
And yet "the one with the whales" was their biggest hit.
WOK has that magical "it" factor. It's inexplicable and works just because... Under any kind of scrutiny, it really stands-out as a haphazardly made film. There are huge plot holes and gaffes. But I think it was almost saved by the low budget and lack of resources (and little amount of time he had to rewrite the script). Meyer had to keep things moving at a snappy pace out of necessity. This doesn't leave a lot of time for things to fester, so the audience can then stay in the moment--and each moment is a lot of fun on its own.
Take the prefix code for example. Think about it for two seconds, and one finds it's a pretty ridiculous concept and total travesty of a DXM. Yet all that gets lost in the drama of the moment. Same goes with Genesis's creation. How many people realized that it totally contradicted the premise stated earlier in the film on their first viewing? I'm sure there were a few, but most people were probably still teary-eyed and reeling form the shock of the previous five minutes and couldn't be bothered.
Also, a lot of the dialog is rather trite, but Shatner and Montalban's performances transcend it. In fact, I think either performance makes for a great microcosm. By any critical standards, neither is very good on the whole. (Each has a great moment or two.) They're both over-cooked ham. Yet there's just something about them that's fucking awesome and memorable.
Take Montalban's reading of "I'll chase him..." for example. Meyer just took a famous line of classic literature, altered it a little to fit the scope of the film, and pasted it in. It's a cheap shortcut--the kind of thing one does on a paper his freshman year. And taken out of context, Monty's reading is way over the top. Yet it just works.
Compare that to Chang. Meyer did the same thing. And, by any other standard, I think most people would agree Plummer is the better actor. (The guy is one of the best ever.) But all of those lines of Shakespeare just feel dead, and the gag quickly gets annoying. Because that it factor isn't there.
Take the prefix code for example. Think about it for two seconds, and one finds it's a pretty ridiculous concept and total travesty of a DXM. Yet all that gets lost in the drama of the moment. Same goes with Genesis's creation. How many people realized that it totally contradicted the premise stated earlier in the film on their first viewing? I'm sure there were a few, but most people were probably still teary-eyed and reeling form the shock of the previous five minutes and couldn't be bothered.
Also, a lot of the dialog is rather trite, but Shatner and Montalban's performances transcend it. In fact, I think either performance makes for a great microcosm. By any critical standards, neither is very good on the whole. (Each has a great moment or two.) They're both over-cooked ham. Yet there's just something about them that's fucking awesome and memorable.
Take Montalban's reading of "I'll chase him..." for example. Meyer just took a famous line of classic literature, altered it a little to fit the scope of the film, and pasted it in. It's a cheap shortcut--the kind of thing one does on a paper his freshman year. And taken out of context, Monty's reading is way over the top. Yet it just works.
Compare that to Chang. Meyer did the same thing. And, by any other standard, I think most people would agree Plummer is the better actor. (The guy is one of the best ever.) But all of those lines of Shakespeare just feel dead, and the gag quickly gets annoying. Because that it factor isn't there.
@CorporalClegg is right on all counts.
I'd add that the themes of TWOK are age-old and universal: life, death, sacrifice, coming of age, growing useless, love, friendship, anger, revenge. The sweeping and epic setting is largely simply a backdrop to enhance the drama, but at its core the film is not about anything to do with science fiction. It's a story of Kirk under pressure at the end of his career. The film's strength comes from the emotions it evokes. We share in Kirk's reinvigoration, and we feel his loss.
I'd add that the themes of TWOK are age-old and universal: life, death, sacrifice, coming of age, growing useless, love, friendship, anger, revenge. The sweeping and epic setting is largely simply a backdrop to enhance the drama, but at its core the film is not about anything to do with science fiction. It's a story of Kirk under pressure at the end of his career. The film's strength comes from the emotions it evokes. We share in Kirk's reinvigoration, and we feel his loss.
To Talkie Toaster,
It's the film where Kirk is going through a mid-life crisis, struggling to accept his age, and finding a common ground. His peers sees he's hurting and knows his deep regrets of ever accepting a promotion. When he returns to the Starship Enterprise, and is offered to command the ship again, Kirk springs into action. Its like old times again and then has to face a familiar foe-when they were young.
I liked the themes of the story where Kirk never faced a death as personal as Spock and couldn't save him because he was behind a transparent wall. Like the book The Tale of two Cities, "It was the best of times, and the worst of times." all wrapped up into 1 movie. There were lots of scenes which covers the movie's themes and delivers in spades. Spock having a protege who has a large ego, and was put in her place, and then as she gets a chance to be around Kirk; she learns something very important: the good of the many out ways the needs of few. Something the Captain's simulation test was made to do.
Montelban's performance was Oscar worthy and is the most memorable performance in cinema history IMO. He wanted to hurt Kirk physically and mentally, and if he had his way he would do it forever until Kirk dies. It was Captain Ahab in outer space and Kirk and the Enterprise was his Moby Dick. When the Enterprise appears to be badly hurt I can see his glee, and eternal pain at the same time when the Reliant attacked. It was a very interesting movie.
The best part of the film I thought was cinema gold was Khan dying, starting up the Genesis weapon, watching the Enterprise slowly trying to get away and dies thinking he defeated Kirk. It was brilliant, and masterly craft film. To me, it's the best Star Trek film ever made.
I prefer the Nicholas Meyer's cut for ABC television which later transferred to DvD because I can see full performances from other characters who couldn't make the cut from the theatrical version. You are right these topics are definitely subjective and I love the fact we have a place where I can express them. Like it or not.
From
STEPh
It's the film where Kirk is going through a mid-life crisis, struggling to accept his age, and finding a common ground. His peers sees he's hurting and knows his deep regrets of ever accepting a promotion. When he returns to the Starship Enterprise, and is offered to command the ship again, Kirk springs into action. Its like old times again and then has to face a familiar foe-when they were young.
I liked the themes of the story where Kirk never faced a death as personal as Spock and couldn't save him because he was behind a transparent wall. Like the book The Tale of two Cities, "It was the best of times, and the worst of times." all wrapped up into 1 movie. There were lots of scenes which covers the movie's themes and delivers in spades. Spock having a protege who has a large ego, and was put in her place, and then as she gets a chance to be around Kirk; she learns something very important: the good of the many out ways the needs of few. Something the Captain's simulation test was made to do.
Montelban's performance was Oscar worthy and is the most memorable performance in cinema history IMO. He wanted to hurt Kirk physically and mentally, and if he had his way he would do it forever until Kirk dies. It was Captain Ahab in outer space and Kirk and the Enterprise was his Moby Dick. When the Enterprise appears to be badly hurt I can see his glee, and eternal pain at the same time when the Reliant attacked. It was a very interesting movie.
The best part of the film I thought was cinema gold was Khan dying, starting up the Genesis weapon, watching the Enterprise slowly trying to get away and dies thinking he defeated Kirk. It was brilliant, and masterly craft film. To me, it's the best Star Trek film ever made.
I prefer the Nicholas Meyer's cut for ABC television which later transferred to DvD because I can see full performances from other characters who couldn't make the cut from the theatrical version. You are right these topics are definitely subjective and I love the fact we have a place where I can express them. Like it or not.
From
STEPh
It's an 80s sci fi film through and through. It shares bits of itself with films of that era, and got a lot of love on the new home video scene.
It has a bit of post apocalypse thrown in (Khan and his followers with their rock star hair and mad max clothes, the nuclear threat that is Genesis)
A bit of body horror (the eels)
The overall colour palette sits happily with tons of stuff, as does the pacing (Android, battle beyond the stars...burnt red colours were in, 70s orange having evolved, while whites and blues with grey were on the way out)
As does the afore mentioned hair (by the time IV rolls around, you start wondering where Steve Gutenberg is in these films)
And it has more boom than any other films in the series (I think it's the only time we even see ship based phaser fire in all 6 original cast films) as well as introducing the first 'new' starship (Reliant)
It carries some of the detailed aesthetics found in Alien (a big influence on the next 10 years of filmed sci fi. I also suspect Yaphet Kotto 's look in that film influenced the casting of Terrel) and of course James Horner recycles his Khan soundtrack heavily in Aliens, which this would have sat next to in Video Rental stores.
It's also the film that us who were younger kids would have been slightly scared of watching, if we were allowed to, because of the gore, and the killing, and the eels. Even the edited version on UK TV was more late night fare than mid afternoon.
These things give it a shine that has built its legend. It's also probably the gateway for people who otherwise aren't into Trek. It's practically the only film entry that stands alone, woth others more dependent on knowledge gained outside whichever film you are watching than this, despite it being a sequel to an episode. First Contact also manages this, like Khan it tells you everything you need to know from the episode then proceeds to blow shit up and have people glare at each other. Unlike Khan, they actually stand in the same room to do so.
It gets held up as being made for less than TMP but being better, which is unfair as a HUGE chunk of Khan's budget was saved by using bits of TMP effects footage, not to mention sets and props. (if you then allow for the budget of TMP being inflated by absorbing the aborted Phase 2, and the locked in release date....well, TMP looks more like a miracle all the time)
Because of its popularity with fans, it also becomes the template for all future movies either in terms of the afore mentioned revised future tech (how stupid is manually lifting grates to fire the suddenly entirely physical torpedoes? Why does the federation need to eliminate food shortages and want with the Genesis project, when it's already done that?) or in terms of needing big villains and doomsday devices chewing up scenery or planetary bodies.
I am extremely glad the 'son of Khan' was dropped at some point in filming and editing, or I suspect I would be harsher in my reappraisal of it as an adult. (add depth! Add a child casualty! A modern affliction this film almost brought into being about 20 years early.)
So...I see why it is popular, it had legendary status that grew to the point it's sacrilege to knock it. Some of its negatives are not really things it can help (can't blame it for introducing big villains) but some of its positives don't really belong to it either.
As part of the 80s sf video revolution though, it's fine. It and V are about the only bits of fleshing out we get for the characters, even if both films occasionally have to bludgeon them with the idiot stick to do it (chekhov not being thrown out of starfleet for the beginning of this film probably only happened because the people that witnessed his ineptitude died before making a report. And one of their planets is missing.)
It has a bit of post apocalypse thrown in (Khan and his followers with their rock star hair and mad max clothes, the nuclear threat that is Genesis)
A bit of body horror (the eels)
The overall colour palette sits happily with tons of stuff, as does the pacing (Android, battle beyond the stars...burnt red colours were in, 70s orange having evolved, while whites and blues with grey were on the way out)
As does the afore mentioned hair (by the time IV rolls around, you start wondering where Steve Gutenberg is in these films)
And it has more boom than any other films in the series (I think it's the only time we even see ship based phaser fire in all 6 original cast films) as well as introducing the first 'new' starship (Reliant)
It carries some of the detailed aesthetics found in Alien (a big influence on the next 10 years of filmed sci fi. I also suspect Yaphet Kotto 's look in that film influenced the casting of Terrel) and of course James Horner recycles his Khan soundtrack heavily in Aliens, which this would have sat next to in Video Rental stores.
It's also the film that us who were younger kids would have been slightly scared of watching, if we were allowed to, because of the gore, and the killing, and the eels. Even the edited version on UK TV was more late night fare than mid afternoon.
These things give it a shine that has built its legend. It's also probably the gateway for people who otherwise aren't into Trek. It's practically the only film entry that stands alone, woth others more dependent on knowledge gained outside whichever film you are watching than this, despite it being a sequel to an episode. First Contact also manages this, like Khan it tells you everything you need to know from the episode then proceeds to blow shit up and have people glare at each other. Unlike Khan, they actually stand in the same room to do so.
It gets held up as being made for less than TMP but being better, which is unfair as a HUGE chunk of Khan's budget was saved by using bits of TMP effects footage, not to mention sets and props. (if you then allow for the budget of TMP being inflated by absorbing the aborted Phase 2, and the locked in release date....well, TMP looks more like a miracle all the time)
Because of its popularity with fans, it also becomes the template for all future movies either in terms of the afore mentioned revised future tech (how stupid is manually lifting grates to fire the suddenly entirely physical torpedoes? Why does the federation need to eliminate food shortages and want with the Genesis project, when it's already done that?) or in terms of needing big villains and doomsday devices chewing up scenery or planetary bodies.
I am extremely glad the 'son of Khan' was dropped at some point in filming and editing, or I suspect I would be harsher in my reappraisal of it as an adult. (add depth! Add a child casualty! A modern affliction this film almost brought into being about 20 years early.)
So...I see why it is popular, it had legendary status that grew to the point it's sacrilege to knock it. Some of its negatives are not really things it can help (can't blame it for introducing big villains) but some of its positives don't really belong to it either.
As part of the 80s sf video revolution though, it's fine. It and V are about the only bits of fleshing out we get for the characters, even if both films occasionally have to bludgeon them with the idiot stick to do it (chekhov not being thrown out of starfleet for the beginning of this film probably only happened because the people that witnessed his ineptitude died before making a report. And one of their planets is missing.)
What I find so compelling about TWOK is the character interactions.
It really felt like Kirk, Spock, and McCoy -- particularly during the Genesis discussion in Kirk's quarters. "We're talking about universal Armageddon, you green-blooded, inhuman..."
I also adore the fluid coded talk between two long-time friends and colleagues, as if they're in each other's heads (which any good command team ought to be). "Kirk to Spock. It's two hours. Are you about ready?"
Giving the very emotional Kirk an estranged son and the very unemotional Spock a doe-eyed protégé was just a beautiful juxtaposition that helped both the story and evolved the characters. "You lied." "I exaggerated."
I think this was the one film out of all twelve that used a story to tell us about these wonderful characters -- and which got the portrayals exactly right -- rather than using the characters as mere vehicles to tell a story. For me, that's what makes TWOK a classic.
It really felt like Kirk, Spock, and McCoy -- particularly during the Genesis discussion in Kirk's quarters. "We're talking about universal Armageddon, you green-blooded, inhuman..."
I also adore the fluid coded talk between two long-time friends and colleagues, as if they're in each other's heads (which any good command team ought to be). "Kirk to Spock. It's two hours. Are you about ready?"
Giving the very emotional Kirk an estranged son and the very unemotional Spock a doe-eyed protégé was just a beautiful juxtaposition that helped both the story and evolved the characters. "You lied." "I exaggerated."
I think this was the one film out of all twelve that used a story to tell us about these wonderful characters -- and which got the portrayals exactly right -- rather than using the characters as mere vehicles to tell a story. For me, that's what makes TWOK a classic.
Arguably, because it too appeals to non-Trekkies with the comedy and pacing. It was a TOS comedy as much as A Piece of the Action or Trouble with Tribbles. It didn't have the stick up its ass seriousness like so much of Trek does which bores general audiences of TV and movies.
I would echo most of what has been said here, with my own personal caveat-I think Meyers did an impressive job pulling that film together. If you read the BTS of how it was before Meyers came in you'll realize that he had a lot of work to do. Between 8 different drafts, slashed budget and breaking guild rules, he did a lot of things that many directors would not have done to make the film. This includes not being a Star Trek fan and watching all of TOS as part of rewriting efforts.
The film is, as others have said, a tightly woven piece, completely stand alone, with universal themes such as aging, revenge, life and death. As broad as those strokes are, they are easily identifiable, even if they are not particularly deep. They are great, understandable themes, that may people can identify with regardless of their familiarity with TOS. Add in the elements of classical literature (Moby Dick, Paradise Lost) and you have a rich tapestry of theme for the characters to work with. Plus all of the cast deliver fantastic performances, save for Khan's crew who are just ok.
All that said, and with all that amazing work, I personally do not like the film either, as far as a film watching experience goes. It's well paced and interesting, but there are moments that are just off putting to me that kind of ruin sitting down and watching it. So, I'm weird in that I love reading the BTS, seeing how they made it, and the Mutara Nebula sequence is great, tightly edited and very tense-ok, that last part isn't so weird.
tl: dr-TWOK is a well made film, tightly written with identifiable themes for a lot of different audiences, and I like how it is made. I just can't sit down and watch it all the way through.
The film is, as others have said, a tightly woven piece, completely stand alone, with universal themes such as aging, revenge, life and death. As broad as those strokes are, they are easily identifiable, even if they are not particularly deep. They are great, understandable themes, that may people can identify with regardless of their familiarity with TOS. Add in the elements of classical literature (Moby Dick, Paradise Lost) and you have a rich tapestry of theme for the characters to work with. Plus all of the cast deliver fantastic performances, save for Khan's crew who are just ok.
All that said, and with all that amazing work, I personally do not like the film either, as far as a film watching experience goes. It's well paced and interesting, but there are moments that are just off putting to me that kind of ruin sitting down and watching it. So, I'm weird in that I love reading the BTS, seeing how they made it, and the Mutara Nebula sequence is great, tightly edited and very tense-ok, that last part isn't so weird.
tl: dr-TWOK is a well made film, tightly written with identifiable themes for a lot of different audiences, and I like how it is made. I just can't sit down and watch it all the way through.
Sums it up nicely, I agree. Except for me part of the reason it's not always enjoyable is because parts of it are not very trek. It may be one of the finest films about the age of sail ever put to film though. The mutara effects sit alongside Blade Runner and The Motion Picture as some of the finest examples of model work in the era, possibly any.
Ha ha noooo - the code was so obvious it's one of the parts that really makes me cringe. I wish they had made it a bit more subtle. Even if Spock had said, "With all the inexperienced trainees going by the book, it will take days instead of hours to fix the Enterprise." Kirk would look cleverer for deducing the clue while Saavik and Khan would look less than unbelievably stupid.
Spock's line to Saavik is pure gold though.
Carol (and David) were originally scripted as Janet (and David) Wallace, but that would have suggested that Kirk's relationship was with a married woman.
As a newbie fan whose first Trek experience was TMP in 1979 (and random TAS and TOS), I was one of those who sat through ST II thinking, "It's not enough like TMP" while the rest of the audience was seeminly cheering as one: "Now this is more like it!"
Where were all the aliens?
Some really good thoughts above. I do like TWOK, in fact it and TMP are the only movies I like.
Personally I think of TWOK as an example of "if it feels right, it is right." Meyer was of a generation (which I got in on at the tail end) that was so exposed to old movies through television that it almost became part of their creative DNA. And it was similar for viewers; those images were embedded, even for a 12 year old kid like me, whether we were conscious of it or not. The movie puts Kirk and co. in a spacified update of an Errol Flynn swashbuckler. They clear decks for action, they fire broadsides, the sides get blown in and yards and tackle fall from overhead. It was a kind of shorthand that worked, but it was not meant to hold up to scrutiny any more than The Sea Hawk was meant to meet standards of academic history. There are a number of DUMB things in TWOK, and I have pointed a finger at them as much as anybody. But in the end, it doesn't change my enjoyment of the movie. It was all in the feel.
And maybe that's because there's an extra facet: Meyer had been thoroughly exposed to the more "human" cinema that came out of the '60s, and had written a novel and a movie that gave a more personal, psychological dimension to a famous literary character. And he takes his man-of-action lead's aging and place in the world and confronts it head-on. He gives him something to lose, something to let go of, something to live for, and does it very effectively and pretty efficiently, with a few scenes and some dialogue that really doesn't slow the pace.
TWOK is in its best light as a standalone movie. It's not an ensemble piece, it's Kirk's story, and its impact is heaviest when his loss is real and permanent.
Absolutely. And I would say, it's because it's Melville by way of John Huston and Gregory Peck.
Personally I think of TWOK as an example of "if it feels right, it is right." Meyer was of a generation (which I got in on at the tail end) that was so exposed to old movies through television that it almost became part of their creative DNA. And it was similar for viewers; those images were embedded, even for a 12 year old kid like me, whether we were conscious of it or not. The movie puts Kirk and co. in a spacified update of an Errol Flynn swashbuckler. They clear decks for action, they fire broadsides, the sides get blown in and yards and tackle fall from overhead. It was a kind of shorthand that worked, but it was not meant to hold up to scrutiny any more than The Sea Hawk was meant to meet standards of academic history. There are a number of DUMB things in TWOK, and I have pointed a finger at them as much as anybody. But in the end, it doesn't change my enjoyment of the movie. It was all in the feel.
And maybe that's because there's an extra facet: Meyer had been thoroughly exposed to the more "human" cinema that came out of the '60s, and had written a novel and a movie that gave a more personal, psychological dimension to a famous literary character. And he takes his man-of-action lead's aging and place in the world and confronts it head-on. He gives him something to lose, something to let go of, something to live for, and does it very effectively and pretty efficiently, with a few scenes and some dialogue that really doesn't slow the pace.
TWOK is in its best light as a standalone movie. It's not an ensemble piece, it's Kirk's story, and its impact is heaviest when his loss is real and permanent.
Absolutely. And I would say, it's because it's Melville by way of John Huston and Gregory Peck.
Similar threads
- Poll
