Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Movies Media

Ricardo Montalban Recalls Khan 241

Posted by chrisd from the herve-villechaize-was-in-a-bond-movie dept.
phyy-nx writes "Scifi.com, in referring to the directors cut of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Kahn (coming out on DVD Aug 6), has quoted clips from an interview with Ricardo Montalban. Montalban portrayed the vengeful Kahn in one of the best perfomances in one of the best of the (almost ten) Star Trek films. He mentions how difficult it was to portray Khan after six years of Mr. Roarke of Fantasy Island and how he overcame that mold to masterfully portray his new character's controlled insanity." Or, as Kirk would say: Khaaaaaaaaaaannnnnnnnnnnnnnnn!
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Ricardo Montalban Recalls Khan More

Ricardo Montalban Recalls Khan

Comments Filter:

  • first post (Score:4, Funny)

    by Gizzmonic ( 412910 ) on Saturday August 03, 2002 @05:30PM (#4005930) Homepage Journal
    made of Rich corinthian leather

  • Little Known Fact (Score:5, Funny)

    by teamhasnoi ( 554944 ) <teamhasnoi@yahoo. c o m> on Saturday August 03, 2002 @05:31PM (#4005937) Journal
    The producers had to recover the chair on the bridge of the Klingon Warbird in Corinthian Leather before he would sit in it.

    Really!

    • Khan never sat in a Klingon ship; it was a Federation ship he hijacked... the Reliant, as I recall. And they had to cover the captain's seat with rich Corinthian leather!

      --Jim
    • "The producers had to recover the chair on the bridge of the Klingon Warbird in Corinthian Leather before he would sit in it."

      And they had to name his ship (USS Reliant)after a model of Chrysler too ;)

      Fine Corinthian Leather ;) I still remember those commercials.

    • [note to the younger Slashdotter... Montalban used to do rather infamous car commercials]

      Hey, say what you want about the ol' Volare, but I had a friend who bought a used one way back when for $1000. He drove that thing another 3 years and 80K miles before it just wouldn't run anymore. He sold it again for $800. Best. Deal. Ever.

      As a bonus, when you drive, you get to sing "Voooolaaaaaaareeeeeee Whoooooo--- ooooaaaa"

      • He sold it again for $800. Best. Deal. Ever.

        Nope - I've got you beat. In 1985 or so, a guy walked into my dad's storefront office and said that he needed money, and would Dad buy his 1970 Chevy Custom pickup with a 350cid V8 engine. Dad asked how much he wanted, and the guy said he needed $200. Dad wrote a check.

        Now, this is possibly one of the world's ugliest vehicles. It's two-tone white and gold, with liberal sprinklings of rust to go around. Still, 17 years later, the thing runs like a top. We still use it for those occassional hauling needs, like buying a new mattress, or moving a friend, etc.

        My dad's other car is a 2001 Cadillac STS. You wouldn't believe the looks we get when we drop his car off at the dealer for servicing, then leave in this loud (Dad replaced the stock mufflers with Glass Packs) POS that's dropping rust crumbs and bits of mulch on their pavement. I love it.

    • I think you're confusing him with Christopher Lloyd. Montalban was never on a Klingon ship - it was Corinthian leather on the Reliant. Lloyd demanded one of those beaded seat covers on his chair...

  • Hardest Part of Being Khan (Score:3, Funny)

    by echucker ( 570962 ) on Saturday August 03, 2002 @05:34PM (#4005946) Homepage
    No little sidekick to holler out "Da Kirk, Bahss, da Kirk!"

  • I hope the DVD includes the original (Score:5, Interesting)

    by GCP ( 122438 ) on Saturday August 03, 2002 @05:34PM (#4005947)
    I hope the Wrath of Khan DVD includes the original episode of Star Trek that it was the sequel to. That would make a great set, and the movie isn't nearly as interesting if you don't have that TV episode in memory.

    • Great idea! That episode was called Space Seed, I think. Wrath of Khan is still my favorite of all the Star Trek movies. It has everything that made the original series great: action, drama, plot twists, and three dimensional characters. I believe the movie stands on its own very well, but if you've seen Space Seed then it certainly helps establish the context of the movie and explain Khan's obsession with Kirk. Space Seed and Wrath of Khan on the same DVD would be a cool combination.

      --Jim
      • I liked it too. But I have some beefs with it. In Space Seed Khan was merely the smartest or strongest of the genetically enhanced refugees. His compatriots should also have been supermen. But in the film they were all non-entities.

        The brain eating worms were a low point too.

        Kirk jr was irritating.

        And while I am at it the McGuffin, the "genesis machine" was pretty bogus.

        Wait a second, did I say I liked this film :-)?

      • > It has everything that made the original series great: action, drama, plot twists,

        so far, so good . . .

        > and three dimensional characters

        huh? Did we watch the same series?

        One of the amazing things was being compelling with all those 2d and 1d characters (unless, of course, your recognize Kirk, Spock, and McCoy as a single character).

        One of the things that has made the sequels to Star Trek annoying is thier pathetic insistence on "character development," rather than using the characters as just different aspects of general humanity.

        hawk

    • the episode you are refering to is titled "space seed". FYI Richardo also played Khan Nunien Singh in that episode. It is worth mentioning that in the last scene Spock literaly warns Kirk that some day Khan might escape from seti alpha 5. see http://www.thelogbook.com/log/toslog1.html#tos23 [thelogbook.com]
      • Here's a question for the trekkies and trekkers. In Star Trek II The Wrath of Khan, Khan says, "Any you.. .I never forget a face... Mister Checkov!" but Checkov did not appear in Space Seed. How did Khan remember him?
        • Walter Koenig (the actor that played Chekov) has stated that he realised this as well, but that he kept his yap shut so that he wouldn't lose screen time to George Takei (Sulu) through a rewrite.

          Otherwise, as far as nitpicks go, this one is rather minor. Chekov was on the ship (no crew transfers back then, as they wanted to keep the "far from all other ships" feeling), and the meeting was simply off-screen. The end effect is that Khan's memory is even better if he can remember a name mentioned in passing.

          The Wrath of Kahn is a classic collection of things to pick apart (the overly long "sixty seconds", the wandering bloodstain on Kirk's jacket, and many more), but the movie is still the best Star Trek movie made.
  • Slashdot must have quite a backlog of article submissions.

    I mean, one article about a 1961 wristwatch, now an article about a 1982 movie.

    I just submitted an article about this awsome new kind of game called Castle Wolfenstein 3D [mac-archive.com], it's like the old Castle Wolfenstein game on the Apple IIe , but from the FIRST PERSON PERSPECTIVE. It's really damn cool, but it doesn't work with my 8-bit Adlib Soundcard.
  • That's the thing I remember most about that movie. Mr. Roarke had become a professional wrestler, or a romance novel clutch hero.
  • Comic Book Guy voice: Best. Trek. Ever.

  • My favorite Trek movie (Score:3, Insightful)

    by mwarps ( 2650 ) on Saturday August 03, 2002 @05:36PM (#4005954) Journal
    I'm so happy this is coming out on DVD in Director's Cut form. Way too cool.

    One of the best Treks ever. More action in one movie than there was in the whole original series, at least believable action. All I can think of is Capt Kirk in one of those badly rehearsed street fights. He falls over the way he speaks. Slow and Delayed. Shatner put on his Acting cap for this movie though. Great stuff.

  • Question! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Kwikymart ( 90332 ) on Saturday August 03, 2002 @05:37PM (#4005956)
    Was there any real explanation for why they switched the look of the Klingons in either the Star Trek universe or the real universe (the explanation)? I remember the DS9 episode "Trials and Tribbulations" where they go back to the TOS tribble episode and that topic came up, and Worf just said something of the like "it's a complicated matter". Any ST experts have an answer?

    • Re:Question! (Score:2, Informative)

      by vofka ( 572268 )
      If memory serves, Worf said "We don't talk about it.", implying some sort of catastrophe or somesuch. From what I recall, the change in appearance was either due to some kind of virus, or a failed genetic experiment - not 100% sure however.

      The odd thing is, if you watch the pilot from Enterprise, the Klingons have the 'new look', with the brow ridges, even though at that time (100 years before Kirk), the event causing the ridges had yet to happen! (At least according to established Trek History.)
      • From what I recall, the change in appearance was either due to some kind of virus, or a failed genetic experiment

        No, that's just Dr. Bazir's speculation when he asks Worf about it ("Was it ...?"). That speculation is never verified.
      • There is no established Trek History.

        It's SCIENCE FICTION.
      • My personal guess is that Klingons are allergic to tribbles.
      • The low brows and cranial ridge is likely inspired by early humans... the cranial ridge works great for eating by securing the muscles for the jaw....

    • The "usual" explanation is that there are several Klingon races, perhaps living on different planets in the Klingon homeworld system. In TOS, it was just coincidental that the Enterprise crew happened to always be interacting with the "smooth head and chainmail" Klingons. This has never been directly stated in any episode or movie however... it's just something that Star Trek fans pass around.

      Note though that more recently the Klingon look has been "humanified" for certain Klingons... General Chang in ST6 is a good example... this was done to make it easier to related to the character, but he could almost pass for one of the TOS-style Klingons. Other Klingons (in DS9 and Enterprise) have also had this look.

      But no, I don't think "they'll" ever explain it. :)

      • Re:Question! (Score:3, Interesting)

        by writermike ( 57327 )
        I remember reading a fan-produced publication on this matter. This publication was made to look like an "official" Starfleet report.

        It stated that the reason for the different looks is because there are two distinct races which are often at war with each other. For a time, the more human-looking ones were in power. This booklet showed the various land masses each race controlled. Lots of background.

        But, as someone else pointed out, it doesn't easily explain why Enterprise's Klingons are ridged.

        It would be interesting to see an upcoming Enterprise episode that plays with this theory. Maybe the Klingon Empire collapses for a time, shuttling some human-looking Klingons into the series.

        Yeah, I do agree with others that think Worf was expressing some sort of disgust in the DS9 episode. If Enterprise were to play with some of these theories, they could _easily_ bring in the larger issue, race!

        Other theories I've heard:
        The Klingons attempted to make a human-klingon hybrid in order inject spies into the Federation.

        The Romulans and Klingons collaborated on a human-klingon hybrid in order to inject spies into the Federation.

        The human-looking Klingons are a Romulan invention that went awry.

        The Klingons from the original series aren't Klingons at all, but rather humans who like dark clothes and don't take baths.

        Kirk and Spock were lovers. (Oh, wait, that has nothing to do with the Klingons, huh?)

        m
    • For that matter, any explanations for what happened to Kirk's hair?
    • Get a life you dork!
      Thank You.

      Respectfully,
      The rest of the planet.

    • Re:Question! (Score:3, Interesting)

      by AJWM ( 19027 )
      I got the special two-video set of both the original and DS9 tribble episodes. It's great watching them back to back, and seeing how and where DS9 characters were cleverly inserted into original footage.

      What Worf actually says when asked about it is "We don't talk about it", and obviously views the original series' more human-looking Klingons with some disgust.

      The real reason is that they just did it because they could (higher budget) in the first movie, then were stuck with it for all the other movies, and never came up with a good backstory.

      I suppose they could have come up with something like the Kdaptists of Larry Niven's Kzinti (who wear human masks -- of human skin -- when worshipping because, having had their butts kicked by humans in a couple of interstellar wars, they're convinced that God/Kdapt must favor humans -- see Ringworld), but that'd be derivative. Besides, there weren't really any Human/Klingon wars, the first one barely got started when it was ended by the Organians, and the Klingons already looked human then. (Original series episode).

      • Re:Question! (Score:3, Interesting)

        by the gnat ( 153162 )
        The real reason is that they just did it because they could (higher budget) in the first movie, then were stuck with it for all the other movies, and never came up with a good backstory.

        And Worf's comment is probably as much a tongue-in-cheek response from the producers as anything else. I'll bet it was actually directed at all the geeks who keep asking about this. It's amazing how much this gets discussed, because it's really a non-issue.

        I once saw some Trek documentary where one of the makeup people said he preferred Klingon episodes to Romulan/Vulcan episodes because of "all those damn ears". However, by the time of the movies they could afford to make the races actually look a little different. So they sacrificed continuity for production values. Simple, no?

        I always thought part of the genius of Star Wars is how in the cantina scene, so many of the aliens are totally non-humanoid. But it doesn't matter- they're sitting there playing poker, and Luke doesn't seem to notice that some of these things don't have arms. Alien races actually have a true diversity of forms, even if the humans are running things. It's a far cry from ST, where nearly everything is either humanoid or something amorphous.

        While I'm at it, Vernor Vinge's books are some of the best depictions I've ever seen of non-humanoid races in human terms.
        • "I always thought part of the genius of Star Wars is how in the cantina scene, so many of the aliens are totally non-humanoid. But it doesn't matter- they're sitting there playing poker, and Luke doesn't seem to notice that some of these things don't have arms. Alien races actually have a true diversity of forms, even if the humans are running things. It's a far cry from ST, where nearly everything is either humanoid or something amorphous."

          I think the thing that bothers me the most about ST and the proliferation of the humanoid form-factor is that all these disparate "alien" races interbreed rather freely. Not being a trekkie, I'm not up on whatever bizarre explaination has been cooked up for that one...
      • They are also a purely budgetary issue--they couldn't afford the special effects to land the ship each week . . .

        The change in the makeup budget is trivial. THe bigger change is that the Klingons changed from Nazi's to Norsemen along the way . . .

        hawk

    • Well yes and no. The real reason, as stated before, is they just didn't have the money for the makeup. There are a couple of competing theories as to why:

      1.) Different race of the klingon empire which held power at that time OR the only one the enterprise ran into. Makes sense, after all klingon space is roughly 3,000 light-years across or so.

      2.) Genetic Manipulation. This one was proposed somewhere and holds the most weight. The klingons might have genetically altered themselves so as to look more humanlike allowing to inflitrate human worlds more easily or to confuse them, etc. Of course, this isn't very honorable which is why worf says"doesn't discuss it with outsiders". Plausable.

      Any other explanations are probably bunk. It is established that Khaless (the orignal klingon leader-god-guy) looked like the 'modern' klingons so we know that it wasn't a plague, or some sort of genetic reversal, etc, etc ad nausem.

      Wait a second. I'm a total geek. I just wrote like 4 paragraphs on star trek. Oh boy.
    • It was just a joke, dudes. Star Trek writers are capable of explaining anything, even if it means inventing words. It's meant to irritate all the Star Trek fans out there who nitpick the shit out of the show.

      I think it's their way of saying "Just repeat to yourself it's just a show, you should really just replax."
      • My theory is that there was a ritual back then where Klingon children were punished by having their brow ridges bashed in. It soon became a sign of wimp-hood to have "unpunished" brow ridges, so kids made sure they got into enough trouble to have them totally flattened.

        After a while, the fad fell out of style, especially as different punishment tactics were used, such as pain sticks.

    • The explanation I remember, is the one I think I got out of 'The Final Reflection [amazon.com]' by John Ford, which is considered by many to be one of the best Star Trek books written.

      The explanation is that the Klingons have an Imperial (pure) race (like Whorf) which at the time of the original series was never seen by Aliens, and mixed breed races who were lower caste but allowed to 'mingle' with other races. The Klingons in the old series were Klingon/Human hybrids.

      This book had a lot more than that too, and it was the main inspiration for the whole Klingon language, culture, etc. craze, being as it was the first look at Klingons from the 'inside'. If you ever decide to read one Star Trek Book, then make this the one. In fact, I haven't read it in years, and now I'm feeling the urge to go dig it up again...

      -Chris
      • But if the Imperial race wasn't allowed to interact with aliens, how did the "mixed-breed" subraces come to be? I mean, some Imperial Klingon must have gone against Imperial law to produce the first Klingon-Human hybrid; are we supposed to believe that the Imperials entrusted the diplomatic well-being of their race to this illegal bastard?
    • In TOS, they had no real budget for makeup effects. In TNG, DS9, et al, they did. They never considered that the fans would ask why the Klingon appearance changed, and the writers of Enterprise may not have taken even a moment to consider the inconsistency. Don't hold your breath waiting for an official answer. Gene Roddenberry isn't here any more to write one.
    • It was, of course, the makeup budget changing that made the change happen in the real world. But as far as the Trek Universe goes, the following items have to be explained:

      1) In Enterprise, a century before TOS, Klingons were fully brow-ridged.

      2) In TOS, Klingons looked like humans

      3) TNG Klingons had full brow ridges

      4) In DS9, we met some Klingons who had encountered Kirk. While looking like humans during TOS, they now had full ridges.

      5) Trials & Tribble-ations [DS9] established that the TOS Klingons do not resemble TNG klingons.

      In short, the phenotype of the Klingon race changed between 2160 and 2260; it changed back shortly after 2269 -- and this second change (at least) affected specific, individual Klingons whose appearances changed from the TOS appearance to the TNG one.

      Most STU theories do not explain all five points . The hybrid and faction theories are completely refuted by #4. The argument that we're supposed to pretend that Klingons always looked like TNG Klingons is crushed by #5 making a point of it instead of ignoring it.

      Alternative explanations are, of course, possible, (A Q or other superbeing making a joke/inflicting a punishment? A body-altering biological agent of some sort?) but none has been officially established.
      • This is probably the easiest explaination, especially based on how often the various races disguised themselves in almost all series ("The Enterprise Incident" and "The Journey to Babel" come to mind). The TOS Klingons were attemting to better interact with the other races, and giving up in disgust.

        This has the advantage of the fact that the Klingons did this to themselves, and why the cosmetic changes were reversed. It's also why the Klingons don't like talking about it, as they see the whole effort as an embarassment ("How could we have been so naive?" some of the older captains say to themselves...).
    • There is no "explanation" - they were always supposed to look like that, but they didn't have the makeup ability (or budget) when the original series was made. When they made the movie they had budget and ability and so did it.

      Its doubtfull you could retcon this in any sensible and plausible way
  • I was never a big Star Trek fan, but I saw many of the movies as a kid. I only really remember two of the movies.

    Without a doubt, the best one was "Kahn". Ricardo Montalban did an amazing job, and the details of his performance are still with me 20 years later.

    I remember one other Star Trek movie - the one with the whales. Now I like whales and all, but that movie totally sucked ... it went from Science Fiction to Freakin' Stupid Fiction.

    It sucked so bad that I remember it. It would have been better if they had a role for Tattoo in there.

    • > the one with the whales
      That would be Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home.

      > It would have been better if they had a role for Tattoo in there.
      Who?
    • "Now I like whales and all, but that movie totally sucked ... it went from Science Fiction to Freakin' Stupid Fiction."

      I disagree, for these reasons:

      Spock: Your use of language has altered since our arrival. It is currently laced with, shall we say, more colorful metaphors, "double dumb-ass on you" and so forth.
      James Kirk: Oh, you mean the profanity?
      Spock: Yes.
      James Kirk: Well that's simply the way they talk here. Nobody pays any attention to you unless you swear every other word.

      Spock: They like you very much, but they are not the hell "your" whales.
      Gillian: I suppose they told you that.
      Spock: The hell they did.

      Kirk: Spock, where the hell's the power you promised?
      Spock: One damn minute, Admiral.

  • Was Khan malfunctioning?
  • Weeird, I just got it yesterday from the local 7-11.

    Proof?
    http://www3.telus.net/adamonline/StarTre k2.jpg

    Of course, I got LOTR then too.
    http://www3.telus.net/adamonline/LOTR.jpg
    h ttp://www3.telus.net/adamonline/LOTR2.jpg

    I'm thinking someone ****ed up in my favor..like Monopoly banks except better :)

  • Khaaaaaannnn! (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 03, 2002 @05:44PM (#4005974)
    Khaaaaaannnnnn! [speakeasy.net]

    • Great PIC! (Score:3, Funny)

      by ImaLamer ( 260199 )
      This has to be the greatest!

      I know it's a bad one but it's true:

      About two weeks ago in the grocery store my girlfriend and I were in the store, she was looking to get some hotdogs to grill and she was shouting down the isle which to get... so I shouted back to her:

      KAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHNNNNSSSSS!

      Needless to say it made my day... everyone thought I was a moron.

  • "best of the"... wha?!? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    There is no best of the when it comes to ST. There is one best film and it is Wrath of Khan. In fact, just about every other ST movie made (except maybe the original) has UTTERLY sucked.

    The only reason people keep going is in the HOPE that the one they are about to see will finally return to Khan type levels.

    Let's see, we've had cosmetic surgery narcisistic aliens... old dudes with toupees beating up guys 1/3 their age... shakespear quoting bad guys from other planets... a magic "ribbon" that flies through space... a trip back in time to pick up a whale... a battle with the Doc from back to the future...

    I'm hard pressed to find any that don't suck save Khan. This is probably because all the ones after it have generally been written or sponsored by cast members who wouldn't know dialoge and plot from a warp coil.

    -rt
    • "I'm hard pressed to find any that don't suck save Khan. This is probably because all the ones after it have generally been written or sponsored by cast members who wouldn't know dialoge and plot from a warp coil."

      It's a pity that some people just don't know how to enjoy movies. It's more of a challenge to find something you like in a movie tahn it is to criticize it to the point you can't enjoy it.
  • Supposibly ST:X Nemisis will try capture the excitment of Wrath of Kahn. A good thing too because the next gen movies blew, though First contact was the best of the three.

    So heres my list from best to worse

    II - best action, outrageuos over acting, plus started the 3 movie 'Genisis' arc
    IV
    VI
    First contact
    III Search for spock - the best of the odds
    IX - ooh an extended episode, and then the joystick scene, come on.....
    I - too long, and too boring
    Generations, would be the worst, if it wasn't for V
    V - definately the worse, all time.
    • Heh anybody remember the Sci-Fi Channel running the 'Even Numbered Trek Movie Marathon'? It was a bunch of clips from the various Trek movies followed by the announcer (with the coolest voice ever) saying "Even numbered Trek movies DON'T SUCK." Hehe
    • So heres my list from best to worse

      II - best action, outrageuos over acting, plus started the 3 movie 'Genisis' arc
      IV
      VI

      Star Treks 2, 4, and 6 were all written by Nicholas Meyer [imdb.com]. Star Treks 2 and 6 were both directed by Nicholas Meyer.

  • Did it take anyone else as long as it did for me to figure out that it wasn't a recall of the DVD, but rather Ricardo Montalban remembering the film?
    Good lord.
    I spent close to twenty minutes on that one.
    • "Did it take anyone else as long as it did for me to figure out that it wasn't a recall of the DVD, but rather Ricardo Montalban remembering the film? "

      The first image that popped in my mind was that they were going to 'fix' the movie by replacing Khan with somebody the director originally wanted. Thankfully, common sense kicked in and reminded me that George Lucas was not the director.
  • Shatner wrote(!?) two fairly amusing books, 1 about making the series and one about the movies. They have lots about the politics and arguments that were part of the process of making the movies and TV series. Lots of quotes and interviews as well as, somewhat self-serving. explininations, reasons why the movies weren't what they should have been.
    • (* explininations, reasons why the movies weren't what they should have been. *)

      At a Trek convention, Shatner told the audience that Final Frontier cooincided with a union strike of some sort, and so they couldn't get the special effects they wanted. He suggested that there was an internal battle as wether to wait for the better effects team, or release it by a given deadline.

  • The first Star Trek movie: "Star Trek: the Motionless Picture" cost [imdb.com] $35,000,000. This was expensive for films back then. My understanding was that it was a financial disaster. So Star Trek 2 was made on the cheap. My recollection was that, at the time ST:TMP was said to have cost $48,000,000, and that ST:TWOK cost just $6,000,000. But the imdb says $11,000,000.

    I am going to put a spoiler in a followup article...

    • spoilers!

      I liked that Spock died. I saw the film at a Saturday Matinee, in a theatre filled with teenage boys. I heard a moan of distress as the kids figured out Spock was really going to die. I heard a murmur sweep through the theatre. "Spock can't die! Spock can't die!"

      I chortled. "Grow up kids. Live with it. It is like real life." I honoured the film for flouting the convention that a major character couldn't die.

      Well, it turns out the kids were right, and I was wrong. It turned out Spock couldn't die.

      • I have it from a reliable source that Darth Vader is Luke's father.
      • I chortled. "Grow up kids. Live with it. It is like real life." I honoured the film for flouting the convention that a major character couldn't die.

        And they un-flouted it by bringing him back to life using odd sci-fi excuses (cloning and then a vulcan re-upload meld, as if restoring a replacement hard-drive from a backup.)
      • Yeah, I remember chanting "Spock is dead, deal with it!" in college...

        My favourite production note is that they could only get Nimoy to commit if they killed Spock. He hated the make-up. It was painful. He wanted out, so they wrote the script around this.

        As soon as the death scene was done, and everybody was happy to be done with the movie, Nimoy said something like "That was fun. I can't wait until the next one!"

        You can imagine the panicked reaction in the production team one they realised he wasn't kidding! They quickly added the "Remember" mini-scene, and sat down trying to puzzle out a screenplay that would let them bring back Spock...
    • That surprises me a lot. I'll have to look into that. Personally I think that WOC had the best ship-scene special-effects of any of the Star Trek movies. Look at the ship in WOC and then look at it in TMP. It is hard to beleive that the former was cheaper.

      For that matter I like the special effects in WOC better then even the latest Star Wars movies. Somthing about the CGI that always makes everything look like round molded plastic which feels so cheap and fake. Miniturized models still look the most realistic to me.

      I agree with one of the previos posters. Wrath of Khan was an awesome movie and the best of all the Trek movies and like many others, I continue to go to Trek movies *hoping* that they do somthing close to WOC. I don't think it will ever happen again, though :(.

  • Give Nicholas Meyer his job back (Score:3, Informative)

    by dswensen ( 252552 ) on Saturday August 03, 2002 @09:10PM (#4006455) Homepage
    It's my personal opinion that Nicholas Meyer is almost single-handedly responsible for the "even numbered Trek movies = good" trend.

    Nicholas Meyer [imdb.com] wrote and directed Trek II [imdb.com], (co)wrote Trek IV [imdb.com], and directed Trek VI [imdb.com]. People who go on about the Moby Dick allegory in First Contact seem to forget that that was first ripped off in II, with Khan as Ahab and Captain Kirk as the great white whale -- a fitting role for Shatner if there ever was one, right? (Oh, come on, what's a Trek post without a mean jab at Shatner?) I think Meyer is half the reason that Trek movies are still getting made at all.

    This is the man they should have given the reins of the badly ailing Trek franchise to. Not, for God's sake, John "The Time Machine / Gladiator / BATS!" Logan [imdb.com]. Oh yeah, and the Nemesis director's hasn't got a great pedigree [imdb.com], either.

    Free Nicholas Meyer!

  • I read through this whole page and there is not one link to a soundbite of Kirk yelling Khaaaaannnnnn.

    For shame. http://www.stinsv.com/MOv/St2/khankhan.wav
    • Visual effects: There were several places in STII where the visual effects were done very cheaply and very badly. Most notable was the blatant re-use of spacecraft shots from Star Trek I - I mean, not only is a not-under-repair Enterprise in the 'Fleet Yards instead of at Spacedock, but the travel pod was supposed to dock at the torpedo bay, not the cargo/shuttlebay!
      I would honestly prefer to see these shots redone.
    • Dropped scenes: There were several scenes dropped in the theatrical release (but, oddly enough, returned to the film for the small screen) which actually help to move forward the plot. For example, Scotty's grief over Cadet Preston's death only fully makes sense after the revelation earlier in Engineering explaining that Scotty's his uncle. Maybe parts of those scenes should be restored to the movie; I don't know.

    I have no clue what was done with the Director's Release - I haven't seen it yet - but these are the problems I had noticed with the original.

Slashdot Top Deals

The truth of a proposition has nothing to do with its credibility. And vice versa.

Close