|
|
Post by Limity (BLM) on Jan 18, 2020 22:19:24 GMT -5
The Wrath of Khan is probably the most well known Star Trek movie. People that have never even see it know, "KHAAAAAAAAAANNNNNNNNN!"
And of course for the longest time I was no different. However as I've gotten older, it seems I've gravitated more towards Star Trek III, and I'm not quite sure why. The villain, the space battles are obviously superior in II. Yet here I sit, on my millionth rewatch of the Enterprise escaping spacedock. Which is the equivalent of a car going five miles an hour in reverse out of a parking garage.
Anyone else in the same boat? On subsequent viewings, you lean more towards III than II?
|
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Jan 18, 2020 22:22:12 GMT -5
II is better, but III is very underrated.
|
|
|
|
Post by MC Blowfish on Jan 19, 2020 8:48:50 GMT -5
I watched 3 over the summer and really enjoyed it. 2 is still my favorite of the two. for some reason 4 is my favorite and I love watching that movie.
|
|
|
|
Post by BorneAgain on Jan 19, 2020 9:10:10 GMT -5
Its interesting to watch the Wrath of Khan and Search for Spock back to back, as II seems to deconstruct elements of the original series, while III overtly celebrates them.
WOK has a villain born out of the hero's mistake, young captain Kirk reduced to an old admiral at a desk, the peaceful Federation seeming more militarized, the great Enterprise as a training vessel, an operatic tone, a major character like Spock having to sacrifice himself without an easy way out, and a bittersweet ending that could have reasonably been the conclusion for the crew.
SFS on the other hand though seems like a big TOS tribute. A devious Klingon villain with a nefarious plot, Kirk breaking the rules, big ensemble moments with the crew, wacky aliens, Pon Farr scene, a tribble cameo, Sarek's return (complete with mind meld), a self destruct sequence code right out of "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield", an old fashioned Kirk fist fight in the climax, a Spock eyebrow raise to conclude the film, and a promise that the adventure will continue.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mr PONYMANIA Mr Jenzie on Jan 19, 2020 10:39:21 GMT -5
well both are considered to be the more actiony side of trek, two is a bona fide classic born from the original series, while three is the second part of the unofficial trilogy of movies. perhaps trying to mimic the success of WOK but with yer old klingon adversary, and christopher lloyd being a louche enemy to content with, but three has some shocking moments that turns it into true personal battle of life AND death! both are great movies though now having an argument between ONE and TWO would be far more interesting and one sided .....  |
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Jan 19, 2020 16:58:41 GMT -5
As time as gone by, my admiration for the first six Trek movies has vastly grown.
Even Star Trek V.
|
|
y4j1981
Dennis Stamp
Rowsdower
Posts: 4,645 
|
Post by y4j1981 on Jan 19, 2020 17:23:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Cyno on Jan 19, 2020 17:27:47 GMT -5
I've always liked Search For Spock. It's in the lower half of the OG Trek movies for me simply because of math as I liked II, IV, and VI even more. But it's a really good movie. Plus Christopher Lloyd is a fantastic villain.
|
|
Push R Truth
Patti Mayonnaise
Unique and Special Snowflake, and a pants-less heathen.
Perpetually Constipated
Posts: 39,290
|
Post by Push R Truth on Jan 19, 2020 23:18:43 GMT -5
I just love the fact that there is a solid story tying the first 6 movies together. Makes even the weaker movies better.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ryushinku on Jan 20, 2020 4:29:18 GMT -5
I like III a whole bunch, always did but I appreciate it more now (the II-III-IV trilogy really links nicely). Particularly Kruge and having such a spiritual finale to the film rather than ending with the Genesis fight.
But, Wrath is Wrath. Still think that one is better.
|
|
|
|
Post by Duke Cameron on Jan 20, 2020 4:31:24 GMT -5
I prefer The Voyage Home to both.
|
|
CMWaters
Ozymandius
Rolled a Seven, Beat the Ads.
Bald and busy
Posts: 63,073
Member is Online
|
Post by CMWaters on Jan 20, 2020 8:17:56 GMT -5
One thing that I find unique is that, while in III we get Kirk vs. Kruge (who is an underrated Trek villain), II Kirk and Khan never actually share a scene together in person. Closest we get is the viewscreen after the first curb-stomp the Reliant gives the Enterprise. Also, Excelsior's bridge in III always seems a bit weird to me compared to the other bridge sets we see:  It kinda looks like a high-end TV set rather than a movie one. Especially compared to the one they used in VI.  |
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Jan 20, 2020 22:00:28 GMT -5
Excelsior is beautiful in VI.
Even the teacup is sublime.
|
|
|
|
Post by Limity (BLM) on Jan 21, 2020 4:55:45 GMT -5
One thing that I find unique is that, while in III we get Kirk vs. Kruge (who is an underrated Trek villain), II Kirk and Khan never actually share a scene together in person. Closest we get is the viewscreen after the first curb-stomp the Reliant gives the Enterprise. Also, Excelsior's bridge in III always seems a bit weird to me compared to the other bridge sets we see: It kinda looks like a high-end TV set rather than a movie one. Especially compared to the one they used in VI. The first iteration of the Excelsior bridge was definitely a head scratcher. Were they going for a bizarre look to match the sleek new prototype Excelsior-class? I can't believe they would intentionally make it look so cheap. Then again, the bird of prey bridge was pretty cheap too, just disguised very well. The infamous painted plastic sandwich containers that lined the captain's chair perch. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2020 7:57:07 GMT -5
II is better, but III is very underrated. Yeah, it took a long while to get out of the "all the even numbered Trek movies were the best" (thx for ruining that streak, Nemesis) so 3 suffered from........not being 2 and not as different/interesting as 4. It's a fine part 2 to a 3-part "trilogy" and I've come to respect it greatly over the years since. |
|
