Amazon.com

Solid entertainment from a new group of Disney animators. The storysource is a Chinese fable about a young girl who disguises herself as a man to help her family and her country. When the Huns attack China, a call to arms goes out to every village, and Mulan's father, being the only man in the family, accepts the call. Mulan (voiced by Ming-Na Wen, sung by Lea Salonga) has just made a disastrous appearance at the Matchmaker and decides to challenge society's expectations (being a bride). She steals her father's conscription notice, cuts her hair, and impersonates a man to join the army. She goes to boot camp, learning to fit in with the other soldiers with some help from her sidekick, Mushu, a wise-cracking dragon (voiced by Eddie Murphy). She trains, and soon faces the Huns eye-to-eye to protect her Emperor.

The film is gorgeous to look at, with a superior blend of classic and computer-generated animation. Directors Tony Bancroft and Barry Cook make the best of it: a battle in the snowy mountains is as thrilling as the best Hollywood action films. The menacing Huns are not cute but simple and bad. The wickedness is subtle, not disturbing. The film is not a full-fledged musical, as it has only five songs (the best, "Be a Man," is sung during boot camp). Eddie Murphy is an inspired choice for the comic-relief dragon, but his lines are not as clever as Robin Williams's in Aladdin. These are minor quibbles, though. The story is strong, and Mulan goes right to the top of Disney animated heroines; she has the right stuff. --Doug Thomas ... Read more

Reviews (374)

A Legend to Remember
Mulan is a character unlike any other Disney heroine. She lives for a purpose of bringing herself and her family, honor. She fights, not only the Huns, but also Chinese tradition. All that she does and says is powerful. Other characters present humor and irony, making the film cute and sending a strong inspiration to be yourself and strive for the best. The music, including "Reflection", is well performed and composed (voices of Lea Salonga, Donny Osmond, Ming-Na Wen, Eddie Murphy, etc.). Orchestrations from this movie were nominated for the Oscars. The animation combines typical Disney styles with touches of Chinese art. This is truly a moving story with some breathtaking animation thanks to computer technology.

Fantabulous!!!!!!!!
WHAT ARE YOU PEOPLE TALKING ABOUT?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!? Sorry but I read some discouraging reviews and I just wanted to ki-... Ok Mulan is a GREAT movie!!! Funny, Cool... All that. I think it was made very well. Now I don't know the original story or whatever but this was great! It could be for girls or boys. It doesn't have all that lovey dovey stuff. If your like... I don't know how old, but this is a very good movie! It's about a girl who was told by the matchmaker that she would never bring her family honor. So she dresses up as a boy to fight in the army in her father's place. Her father uses a cane so he wouldn't do so good in the army. You know fighting... Anyway there's Mushu(Voice of Eddie Murphy), Cri-kee,(her lucky cricket), her horse Kahn, Li Shang(Her captain), the bad guy Shan-Yu and her friends Chien-Po, Ling and this short guy but I forgot his name... Something with a 'Y'... But anyway Disney did good with this. Good for the whole family. You may want to hear stuff people say these days and stuff. Or stuff Eddie Murphy would say normally or whatever but I think you don't need that because It's still a cool show! So go out and BUY IT because it's cool, fun and just FANTABULOUS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
P.S(It WAS made in 1998 after all, then was... kind of different from now, right?) :-) >^,,^< (Trust me. All of this is the honest truth!!! I mean why would I lie?) ;-]

One of My Favorite Disney's
I love most of the Disney movies whether they are animated or acted. What impressed me most about this movie was not just the animation, voice acting, and music great, but the moral was super. Most good movies have a lesson to be learned. This one was incredibly simple and to the point. Value all people and learn what they have to offer no matter what their sex, believes, et cetera. I highly recommend this movie for the whole family. It is ashame Disney hasn't learned it shouldn't limit the sales of their movies yet. I think they are going to learn the hard way when someone buys them out and stops the stupid moratorium policy. I know if I could buy Disney the first thing I would do is fire the person or persons responsible for the moratorium and second I would immediately make all Disney movies available all the time. If you see negative votes here there is a good possibility they come from scalpers. They want to sell you used Disney movies for three or four times what they are worth. They don't want them to be available all the time. They want them to be unavailable for at least eight years.

Lessons for our Children....
I do not believe that I have EVER watched an animated film that taught more of the values that I would want our future generations to learn than MULAN.

The movie opens with Mulan getting ready to go to the "Matchmaker." Although, she is a beautiful girl, she lacks the grace to make a good impression. Devistated, she returns home. Her father tells her that "like the cherry blossoms, her season has not come."

When China is invaded by the Huns, there is one line in the movie that is uttered by the emperor and it is SO profound. The general in charge of the armies confidently announces that his men can handle this invasion. However, the emperor issues a proclamation calling all available men because, "sometimes a single grain of rice may be the deciding balance in tipping the scales." Or - "one man may make a difference between conquest and defeat."

In this case, it turns out to be a woman! I LOVE how Mulan interacts horribly with the men at first and how she is told to leave. Mulan has to prove herself and she doesn't give up.

Even after she is a hero, Mulan is disgraced when it is discovered that she is a woman. She is shunned and yet when she must come to the rescue of China again, her comrades are loyal to her and listen to her ideas.

Throughout the movie there are the different interactions of those who accept women for who they are and those who are stuck within stereotypes.

Mulan is a cute and VERY funny movie with adorable songs. What makes it a GREAT movie however, is the very powerful message that we should judge one another on our merits and character - whether we be men or women.

A fun movie, never boring to watch!
I first remember when this movie came out, and I wanted to see it SO bad! I loved it, and would continue to rent it over and over again, until I finally got it as a Christmas present. But, as time went on, you get kinda tired watching it over and over again, as with all movies.
The plot is exciting and adventurous, with a little bit of humor, from, of course, Eddie Murphy, who plays Mushu, her comical 'guardian' dragon. Fa Mulan is a girl trying to at least get a decent match and bring honor to her family, when she hears about the Hun Army's invasion on China, lead by their ruthless leader, Shan Yu. Her father is too weak to fight the whole Mongol army, so she puts matchmaking matters aside, and joins the army, pretending to be a boy. Action-packed and cute, this is a fun movie, and will keep your kids watching in eager anticipation. ... Read more

Reviews (374)

A Legend to Remember
Mulan is a character unlike any other Disney heroine. She lives for a purpose of bringing herself and her family, honor. She fights, not only the Huns, but also Chinese tradition. All that she does and says is powerful. Other characters present humor and irony, making the film cute and sending a strong inspiration to be yourself and strive for the best. The music, including "Reflection", is well performed and composed (voices of Lea Salonga, Donny Osmond, Ming-Na Wen, Eddie Murphy, etc.). Orchestrations from this movie were nominated for the Oscars. The animation combines typical Disney styles with touches of Chinese art. This is truly a moving story with some breathtaking animation thanks to computer technology.

Fantabulous!!!!!!!!
WHAT ARE YOU PEOPLE TALKING ABOUT?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!? Sorry but I read some discouraging reviews and I just wanted to ki-... Ok Mulan is a GREAT movie!!! Funny, Cool... All that. I think it was made very well. Now I don't know the original story or whatever but this was great! It could be for girls or boys. It doesn't have all that lovey dovey stuff. If your like... I don't know how old, but this is a very good movie! It's about a girl who was told by the matchmaker that she would never bring her family honor. So she dresses up as a boy to fight in the army in her father's place. Her father uses a cane so he wouldn't do so good in the army. You know fighting... Anyway there's Mushu(Voice of Eddie Murphy), Cri-kee,(her lucky cricket), her horse Kahn, Li Shang(Her captain), the bad guy Shan-Yu and her friends Chien-Po, Ling and this short guy but I forgot his name... Something with a 'Y'... But anyway Disney did good with this. Good for the whole family. You may want to hear stuff people say these days and stuff. Or stuff Eddie Murphy would say normally or whatever but I think you don't need that because It's still a cool show! So go out and BUY IT because it's cool, fun and just FANTABULOUS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
P.S(It WAS made in 1998 after all, then was... kind of different from now, right?) :-) >^,,^< (Trust me. All of this is the honest truth!!! I mean why would I lie?) ;-]

One of My Favorite Disney's
I love most of the Disney movies whether they are animated or acted. What impressed me most about this movie was not just the animation, voice acting, and music great, but the moral was super. Most good movies have a lesson to be learned. This one was incredibly simple and to the point. Value all people and learn what they have to offer no matter what their sex, believes, et cetera. I highly recommend this movie for the whole family. It is ashame Disney hasn't learned it shouldn't limit the sales of their movies yet. I think they are going to learn the hard way when someone buys them out and stops the stupid moratorium policy. I know if I could buy Disney the first thing I would do is fire the person or persons responsible for the moratorium and second I would immediately make all Disney movies available all the time. If you see negative votes here there is a good possibility they come from scalpers. They want to sell you used Disney movies for three or four times what they are worth. They don't want them to be available all the time. They want them to be unavailable for at least eight years.

Lessons for our Children....
I do not believe that I have EVER watched an animated film that taught more of the values that I would want our future generations to learn than MULAN.

The movie opens with Mulan getting ready to go to the "Matchmaker." Although, she is a beautiful girl, she lacks the grace to make a good impression. Devistated, she returns home. Her father tells her that "like the cherry blossoms, her season has not come."

When China is invaded by the Huns, there is one line in the movie that is uttered by the emperor and it is SO profound. The general in charge of the armies confidently announces that his men can handle this invasion. However, the emperor issues a proclamation calling all available men because, "sometimes a single grain of rice may be the deciding balance in tipping the scales." Or - "one man may make a difference between conquest and defeat."

In this case, it turns out to be a woman! I LOVE how Mulan interacts horribly with the men at first and how she is told to leave. Mulan has to prove herself and she doesn't give up.

Even after she is a hero, Mulan is disgraced when it is discovered that she is a woman. She is shunned and yet when she must come to the rescue of China again, her comrades are loyal to her and listen to her ideas.

Throughout the movie there are the different interactions of those who accept women for who they are and those who are stuck within stereotypes.

Mulan is a cute and VERY funny movie with adorable songs. What makes it a GREAT movie however, is the very powerful message that we should judge one another on our merits and character - whether we be men or women.

A fun movie, never boring to watch!
I first remember when this movie came out, and I wanted to see it SO bad! I loved it, and would continue to rent it over and over again, until I finally got it as a Christmas present. But, as time went on, you get kinda tired watching it over and over again, as with all movies.
The plot is exciting and adventurous, with a little bit of humor, from, of course, Eddie Murphy, who plays Mushu, her comical 'guardian' dragon. Fa Mulan is a girl trying to at least get a decent match and bring honor to her family, when she hears about the Hun Army's invasion on China, lead by their ruthless leader, Shan Yu. Her father is too weak to fight the whole Mongol army, so she puts matchmaking matters aside, and joins the army, pretending to be a boy. Action-packed and cute, this is a fun movie, and will keep your kids watching in eager anticipation. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Widely considered the best movie in the "classic Trek" series of feature films, Star Trek IV returns to one of the favorite themes of the original TV series--time travel--to bring Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Scotty, Sulu, Uhura, and Chekov from the 23rd century to present-day San Francisco. In their own time, the Starfleet heroes encounter an alien probe emitting a mysterious message--a message delivered in the song of the now-extinct Earth species of humpback whales. Failure to respond to the probe will result in Earth's destruction, so Kirk and company time-travel to 20th-century Earth--in their captured Klingon starship--to transport a humpback whale to the future in an effort to peacefully communicate with the alien probe. The plot sounds somewhat absurd in description, but as executed by returning director Leonard Nimoy, this turned out to be a crowd-pleasing adventure, filled with humor and lively interaction among the favorite Star Trek characters. Catherine Hicks (from TV's 7th Heaven) plays the 20th-century whale expert who is finally convinced of Kirk's and Spock's benevolent intentions. With ample comedy taken from the clash of future heroes with 20th-century urban realities, Star Trek IV was a box-office smash, satisfying mainstream audiences and hardcore Trek fans alike. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (168)

A socially conscious Trek movie
On the fourth installment in the Star Trek movie series, Kirk and company are flying their captured Klingon vessel back to Earth to face the punishment for their misdeeds. On the way though, fate intervenes in the form of an alien probe wreaking destruction upon Earth's oceans. With quick thinking, the crew figures out that it is attempting to speak to an extinct species of Whale, so they slingshot their crummy "Klingon fleatrap" around the sun and travel back in time to San Francisco circa 1986 to save the future.

The time travel cliche is done very well by the Star Trek crew, and although the movie is incredibly dated, it's still a very humerous film that takes a pressing social issue (mainly ecological conservation) and wraps it into an enjoyable sci-fi plot. One of the biggest strengths of the Star Trek series has always been its social conscious, and they deliver yet again with "The Voyage Home".

I'd like to stress again that this is a very lighthearted and humerous film that is saved by the fact that it doesn't take itself too seriously. If nothing else, where else do you get to watch Spock develop a penchant for profanity? Add to that the usual interplay between him, Kirk, and McCoy, and you've got a winning movie that hard core Trek fans and casual moviegoers can enjoy.

EXCELLENT!
After the often overshadowed Star Trek III, producer Harve Bennett and returning director Leonard Nimoy wanted to make a light-hearted adventure with no deaths. That was understandable because III had the destruction of the Enterprise, the death of Kirk's son, and an overall serious revival adventure for Mr. Spock. After a script by Steve Meerson and Peter Krikes (with Eddie Murphy originally supposed to have a role because he was a big Trek fan), Harve Bennett needed a rewrite. The man chosen: Nicholas Meyer, writer and director of Star Trek II.

What we have here is one of the magnum efforts in the series. Not only does it deliver solid laughs from start (ok, more so middle) to finish, it is also a grand adventure that Roddenberry probably loved. The relationships between the characters are fully exploited here and Nicholas Meyer even takes advantage of Spock's rebirth as humor. The laughs? Filled with classics like Scotty's "Hello computer" scene or the hospital chase scene, this film perfectly blends urban realities with the world of Star Trek in a similar way to Beverly Hills Cop's blending of action and comedy.

The only thing that flaws this film is Leonard Rosenman's somewhat lackluster score. The film manages to blend (or hide, depending on if you like the score or not) the music enough that you really don't notice it. I still would've preferred James Horner or Jerry Goldsmith, but I'm not complaining.

Hate Star Trek? Watch this film. Even if you hate Star Trek, this will keep you entertained. An excellent film in every sense of the word with great humor abounds. Some people may claim II or VI as the best, but this one's got its share of moments. If you're looking for great humor and a decent story (ok, it's corny... "save the whales", so what?), this one's for you.

classic star trek, with a twist
Another classic trek movie, this one from 1986, is awesome, and the most shocking thing about it is that it doesn't even take place in space, save for about 15 minutes! Instead it takes place in 1986, where the crew members go back in time to capture two whales to stop the destructive calls of an intergalactic whale species trying to contact the long-extinct whales. The whole plot sounds like it would suck beyond belief, but it comes close to being the best trek movie, and is one of my faves ever.

The awesomeness of the movie, unlike the rest of the series, comes not from suspense and action scenes, but the hilarious and often touching culture shock the crew faces in mid-80's San Fransisco. There is so much to laugh at: the crew earnestly walking along the SanFran streets, Sulu in his cape, Kirk in his red StarFleet uniform, and unforgettably, Spock in his monk robe with the belt tied around the tops of his pointy ears, making him look like an angry ninja master with a botched Botox job. Also hilarious is McCoy's disgust at how rudimentary 20th Century medical practices are/were. In a scene inside a hospital, he asks a woman what ails her, she responds she has kidney dialysis, and he's like, "What is this, the dark ages?! Swallow this, and call me if you have any problems." Several scenes later she is wheeled out claiming a miracle.

There is much more in the movie I won't spoil for you (or more like I'm too f*#&ing lazy to write any more), so turn the PC off and rent this great flick, also it's been on AMC recently, so try that too.

I agree with everybody.
I read a lot of these Amazon reviews on Star Trek IV, and oddly enough I can agree with almost all of them -- the 5 star as well as the 1 star.
I agree with the 5 star reviewers that this probably is the best Trek movie, that a lot of the humor is good, that the movie captures much of what was loved about the original series.
But I also agree with some of the 1 star reviews that the humor may be overdone and may wear thin on repeated viewings, that Catherine Hicks' character is overemphasized, that the environmental message is heavy-handed, that the aliens at Kirk's trial look ridiculous, etc.
But ultimately the question is this: If I stumble on this movie while channel-surfing, will I stop and watch it? Will I laugh, or at least smile, at the designated humorous moments? Answer to both questions: Yes. On balance, it remains an entertaining flick.

The Enterprise crew in the 1980's=AWSOME ADVENTURE!
O.K., first my one complaint-The plot where a mysterious, massive, invincible alien force that threatens the Earth was already done before. (Remember the first Star Trek film?) Otherwise, this is a wonderful addition to the Star Trek legacy. Just about everyone already knows the story, where the crew of the now destroyed Enterprise must pilot a captured Klingon Bird Of Prey back in time to the present day (well, 1986 WAS the present day when this came out,) to bring back some humpback whales. It seems to be a toss-up between which is the best Star Trek movie-this one, or part II. The second film, where Kirk and Khan have their last battle, has the most action, but this one has the most comedy, so they both have their strengths. Unless you absolutly hate Star Trek, check this one out. ... Read more

Description

A Jewish matron falls in love with a Japanese widower. ... Read more

Reviews (6)

After 43 years, I finally got to see the end
Back when I was 16 or 17 years old, I came home late one night after a date, and turned on the TV. A Majority of One was on, and I was soon wrapped up in the story. Believe it or not, as a teenager, I was totally enthralled by this story of a romance between two aging people of different cultures.

But, I came from a very strict family, and my parent's bedroom was in earshot of the TV. I knew if I woke them, I'd be in big trouble. So eventually, I got too nervous to enjoy the movie, and went to bed. But, I never forgot the movie, and always wanted to see the end.

Then one day recently, I suddenly thought about it, and realized I could probably buy it online. I couldn't remember the name of the movie offhand, but I did a search on Alec Guiness, and recognized the title when I saw it.

So, I finally got to see the end. I won't tell you the end, but I will say it was worth the wait. This is a sentimental movie, true, but it also has a number of ideas that work through it. (You remember ideas...) One of the themes, stated in other reviews, has to do with racism. Then there is main theme that, if you are right, and the rest of the world is wrong, then you form a majority of one. Great idea! And there's the idea that mature people should be respected because they have more experience in human relations than young people.

Funny thing is, my mother watched it with me, and loved it even more than I did. It was fun to watch it together as two adults, after my past history with the movie.

Okay, accepting Alec Guiness as a Japanese gentleman is a bit of a strech. But just the scene with Rosalind Russel standing pigeon-toed in a kimono is worth the price of the movie.

DON'T TOUCH MY MOUSTACHE
I love this movie! It is a tender and funny movie. Rosalind Russell (Mrs. Jacoby) shares her jewish traditions with a Japanese gentleman while in Japan. It is about how racism can be overcome by gentle understanding. How graceful times were. Truly a gem!

A Majority of One
This is one of the ultimate feel good movies of the 20th century. Watching the characters develope slowly and completely is so fulfilling. The relationships within the different families in different cultures is so encouraging. It is a little fantasy that proves that there can be exciting romance even though one has raised a family, and lost a beloved long term spouse.

If you like Rosalind Russel you must see this movie.
Rosalind Russel has a great character in this movie. It's definitely a feel good movie.

I Have seen the movie and I have ejoyed it very much.
I just wanted to let you know that an off-broadway show called a majority of one is opening on January 16th at the Jewish Repertory Theatre in Manhattan it is located at 316 East 91st Street. (212) 831-2000. Just in case any one is interested. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Movie critic Roger Ebert summed it up very succinctly: "Of all of the Star Trek movies, this is the worst." Subsequent films in the popular series have done nothing to disprove this opinion; we can be grateful that they've all been significantly better since this film was released in 1989. After Leonard Nimoy scored hits with Star Trek III and IV, William Shatner used his contractual clout (and bruised ego) to assume directorial duties on this mission, in which a rebellious Vulcan (Laurence Luckinbill) kidnaps Federation officials in his overzealous quest for the supreme source of creation. That's right, you heard it correctly: Star Trek V is about a crazy Vulcan's search for God. By the time Kirk, Spock, and their Federation cohorts are taken to the Great Barrier of the galaxy, this journey to "the final future" has gone from an embarrassing prologue to an absurd conclusion, with a lot of creaky plotting in between. Of course, die-hard Trekkies will still allow this movie into their video collections; but they'll only watch it when nobody else is looking. After this humbling experience, Shatner wisely relinquished the director's chair to Star Trek II's Nicholas Meyer. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (216)

Lighten Up!!
For the last 11 years, Star Trek V has been criticized mercilessly by critics, alleged Star Trek "fans" and even some Next Generation cast members.

Yes, there is sloppy editing in points and if you are obsessed with special effects, then I guess there are some slips here and there.

However, the film offers a good deal of interesting moments. We finally get to see Kirk, Spock and McCoy explore their friendship in a venue other than the ship!! Most importantly however, the much maligned Shatner, long criticized for hogging screen time, gives us more of ALL of the co-stars than we see the in the other Trek films. The Motion Picture offered virtually nothing for Uhura, Scotty, Chekov and Sulu to do. ST II gave Chekov a little more screen time but Uhura, Sulu and especially Scotty were hard to find. (Not to mention that the theatrical cut of II removes a fine scene with James Doohan in sick bay when his apprentice dies and Scotty asks Kirk why? A powerful scene left on the editing room floor.) III leaves Uhura in the dust somewhere, in IV Sulu might as well not be there and in VI, again Sulu gets short shrift as do the rest.

In V, everybody gets in on the action. Uhura is allowed to do more than just open hailing frequencies, she flies the shuttle, distracts the Nimubs III outpost guards etc. Chekov has some nice moments as the "Captain". Sulu is on the ground with Kirk as he was in the original series. Scotty is allowed to venture out of the engine room. The jail break scene is priceless!

More than any of the other films, V has the feel of the first two seasons of the original series where more attention was paid to the co-stars. In V you get the feeling that these characters are really something of a family and that they care about each other.

Particulary effective is the characterization of Spock. Nimoy does a nice turn playing a weaker, more unsure Spock which is how the character should be played given the events in III and IV. However, as the movie progresses, Spock gets stronger. His old nature slowly returns as the challenges mount and finally the Spock of old is back when he takes command of the Enterprise in an attempt to save Kirk. He says to the old Klingon General, "You will try" when the General hesitates to confront a hostile bird of prey. In those three words, Spock's ability to command is fully returned to him. Something he had lost after he died. I find in this movie that Spock is not only unsure of his actions regarding Sybok, but that the sub text is that he is questioning his ability to be an officer in Starfleet.

Five has various problems agreed, but the characters are never closer.

That closeness holds somewhat in VI only to be butchered yet again in the horrific Star Trek Generations. The only time that picture is at all intersting is when the old crew or in the later parts, Kirk, is on screen. Again, cut were made which reduced Koenig and Doohan's roles to virtually nothing and though the addition of Sulu's daughter is a nice touch, Kirk's apparent unfamiliarity with her is disturbing. Yes it is supposed to show that Kirk gave up a personal life blah blah blah. But why not have Kirk responsible for helping her through her career in Starfleet afterall, though Generations leads us to believe differently, Kirk's devotion was not just to the Captain's Chair and his duty, but also to his ship and crew.

I cherish V because it does effectively what ALL the original Trek movies should have done more of, give more story time to the co-stars and show the powerful connections between all seven of the characters.

Failure on the Final Frontier
From just about anyone's standpoint, this is not a good film. But the problem isn't the directing. William Shatner clearly knows how to handle a camera and draws fine performances from the cast (especially DeForest Kelley).

The problem with Star Trek V centers on the script. There is an old Broadway saying, "If it ain't on the page, it ain't on the stage." The failure of this movie proves the validity of that truism. Since Shatner is listed as one of the persons behind the story here, he must bear his fair share of the responsibility for the problems with this story. Creating a script about the search for a tangible God, even if it winds up being a false God, sets the viewer up for disappointment. No matter how spectacularly the Almighty is presented on film, it can't live up to the real thing. In this film, He comes across as a latter day Wizard of Oz. Compounded with that are the problems with continuity within the Trek "universe," and overall tone: introducing Sybok as Spock's half-brother, and the use of the cast for slapstick humor, do not help an already implausible story. Small wonder Gene Roddenberry did not consider this film to be canonical Trek.

The special effects, which are crude and amateurish, do not help matters. However, the special effects during the original series were often sub-par, yet the old shows continue to satisfy even in today's CGI era. (Anyone with any doubts about that should simply check how well the Original Series DVDs have been selling on Amazon.) The anemic visuals merely add to the problems here because they are coupled to a weak script.

About the most charitable thing one can say about this film is that it features a wonderful score from Trek veteran Jerry Goldsmith. But that is not enough to save this uninspiring quest.

No complaints about the sound & picture, although more extras would have been welcome.

Give the man a break!
I take it not everyone is well versed in Star Trek history or Hollywoods knack for messing things up. The truth is this: The Budget was cut, so William Shatner couldn't even use the Special Effects he intended to! Also, Shatner didn't have his hands on the reigns completely througout filming. What really happened is a lot of people in charge pretty much told him to cut some of the movie out (atleast an hours worth!), forget about the Special effects and NO! Sean Connery will not play Sarek, and etc., etc. Instead of knowing the truth, too many people assume the movie stinks because of Shatner. Perhaps if Shatner had gotten the chance to make the film like he wanted, it could have been one of the best. Needless to say, of ALL the ST films, this one gave the characters actual personalities. It showed they had lives and loves outside of the Federation. And it was hilarious! Like I said, don't knock the man, it really WASN'T his fault, but then again, if anyone cared to find out the truth, they would know all this already!

Uneven in the extreme.
Any Star Trek fan is well aware of the place Star Trek 5 has occupied in the film series. Most people avoid it and try not to look directly at it, for fear of turning into a pillar of salt. But is it really that bad?

Yes and no. If you watch some of the special features and watch the film, you'll see some of the aims were noble and even achieved. Shatner and Bennett mention trying to stay true to the original series by exploring the emotional core of Spock, Kirk and McCoy. They also try the tried-and-true formula of commenting on the human condition by asking a deeper question about humanity within the framework of science fiction.

That, of course, what makes this film so uneven. The moments focusing on Spock, Kirk & McCoy are the film's strongest -- informed with an easy sentimentality and nostalgia but underscoring the long-standing friendship of the characters and chemistry of the actors. McCoy's wit is at its sharpest in this film. These moments are worth the time.

But the larger question about God is where the movie stumbles. For many, the memory of this movie and plot is summed up in the line, "What does God need with a starship?" It's one of those cringe-inducing lines that even Laurence Olivier would have trouble lending any measure of credibility to. Shatner does the best he can within the constraints of character, time, budget, etc. and the result, unfortunately, doesn't work.

According to the special features, this movie was plagued by budget and time shortfalls as well as an effects house that might not have been up to the task. Shatner's commentary repeatedly mentions time and money shortfalls. Is it possible that this hurt the quality of the film? Most likely. The script called for so many new and huge sets that it seems to have put a crimp in the budget for the actual filming. Unfortunately for us, that's the part that we're going to notice.

If you're a die-hard Trek fan, you should pick this up. It is a better issue than the original, and the special features are fairly enlightening (the deleted "Rock Man" test footage and storyboards are interesting). However, for everyone else, this is a rental at most -- and if you're not a hardcore fan of the series, probably one to be avoided.

My major disappointment with this set was that it didn't probe deep enough into the question of "What went wrong?" It has the appearance of being a defense of the film while making some concessions, and not going deep enough. It's quite likely that asking these questions and pushing for answers would have burned bridges that the franchise can't afford to burn, which is understandable. However, it ends up suffering from the same syndrome as the movie itself: Well-intentioned but falling short in the execution.

The Final Frontier Special Edition
The Good Captain and his crew finally get some shore leave and we begin the movie in beautiful Yosemite National Park - a very uplifting idea from the start, that Yosemite Park will survive into the 23rd Century!
I'm dismayed that if one reviewer/critic (oh, let's say Roger Ebert) wants to boldly label this movie THE WORST that everyone else feels obligated to nit-pik it to death. Remember, this movie came out the same time as BATMAN and perhaps we were all turning to the dark side anyway. I do, however, remember seeing this movie in theatre and the audience enjoying it as much as the others in the series.
Yes, this movie IS sentimental. Yes, the money DID run short (if you listen to the commentaries of all the Star Trek movies, all the directors were forced by the studios to do much with little compared to Robert Wise!) and some production values suffered. Yet I much prefer it to Star Trek VI because so much of the enjoyment for me are the ACTORS interacting in character. The themes of brotherhood, blind loyalty, blind faith, facing your own fears and the question of just where GOD is are addressed on grand scale as well as gently. That's a huge undetaking. This is as introspective as I've seen the "brothers" Kirk, Spock & McCoy get. Toss in some sillinessand sweetness, and it makes for great entertainment. Lighten up, people. Go climb a rock! Then enjoy the Commentary by William & Liz Shatner when you watch it the second time! ... Read more

Description

Film adaptation of Edna Ferber's novel involving the friendship and eventual rivalry of two men whose lives parallel the development of Alaska. ... Read more

Reviews (3)

The best parts were left on the cutting room floor
I lived in Fairbanks when this was filmed. The population turned out to recreate the statehood parade down 2nd Ave, and the recreation parade was better than the original. But this was apparently cut out of the movie, and only about 30 seconds shows the real Fairbanks. They might as well have saved the cost of filming on location and used a sound stage.

Ice Palace
I liked this film because it goes through family generations and conflicts. Despite the fact the main characters fall out - the offsprings have other ideas and we can learn from this - if someone in your family "falls out with another" and you are not involved then carry on as normal I liked this film when I saw it many years ago and wish it were available in the UK or that some of the TV stations here would play it as it is a really good film.

"Giant" goes to Alaska
This is essentially the story line of "Giant" set in Alaska as it approaches statehood. Richard Burton stars as a chip on the shoulder, poor guy who rises to great riches. He enters into conflict with his benefactor and a multi-generational struggle ensues which plays out around the drama of Alaska's statehood. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Anyone who fought in Vietnam can tell you that the war bore little resemblance to this propagandistic action film starring and codirected by John Wayne. But the film itself is not nearly as bad as its reputation would suggest; critics roasted its gung-ho politics while ignoring its merits as an exciting (if rather conventional and idealistic) war movie. Some notorious mistakes were made--in the final shot, the sun sets in the east!--and it's an awkward attempt to graft WWII heroics onto the Vietnam experience. But as the Duke's attempt to acknowledge the men who were fighting and dying overseas, it's a rousing film in which Wayne commands a regiment on a mission to kidnap a Viet Cong general. David Janssen plays a journalist who learns to understand Wayne's commitment to battling Communism, and Jim Hutton (Timothy's dad) plays an ill-fated soldier who adopts a Vietnamese orphan. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (63)

Good, But Flawed
Although I have seen this picture well over a dozen times and although I think it's basically a good movie, I must be objective and admit that "The Green Berets" is basically a propaganda piece that at the time of its filming was an attempt to change public sentiment about our country's involvement in Vietnam. For this reason, as well as the healing period our country went through after Vietnam, the movie seems rather archaic and naive today. Those on the far left ridicule it. Those on the far right treat it with the reverence of a Biblical tale. The truth about "The Green Berets" is that it lies somewhere between these two extremes.

The Fort Benning, Georgia filmed training sequences appear to be as real as anything I ever saw while I was in uniform. The combat sequences, however, contained a fair share of errors, most notably the well-known "sun setting in the east" flub. The acting was rather wooden, especially from Wayne as well as Jack Soo, portraying the ARVN officer, and the plot meandered from being quite good in some parts to being downright silly in others.

The most important thing to remember about this movie is that it should be taken for what it is...a good war movie. To casually dismiss it as irrelevant or hopelessly out of step with the truth simply doesn't do it justice. In similar fashion, it's rather stupid to portray it as an homage to the American way of life and characterize those who point out this picture's many flaws as "un-American", as one previous review did. This picture is best enjoyed with the viewer's bias, be it liberal or conservative, turned off.

from a patriot who was not afraid.
if John Wayne had made something like this today he would be ostracized from all of Hollywood and from about 2% of this nation. he was a man, a patriot and he wanted to show the good of our struggle. vietnam was a war that was not unlike every other war, the only difference was our citizens. the baby boomers grew up spoiled (founding fathers of the modern left). they didnt understand hard work and what a country need's to do for freedom. the left will today say freedom is a slogan, that we will always be free, they will say bush's war is for oil or some uneducated and clichéd response, but freedom is not just about a war or occupation, it's the freedom to not be afraid to get on a airplane, the freedom to not fear going into tall buildings, the freedom not to fear gathering large groups in public. and for the arab world it means to not be afraid to have your wife drive your car, or wear a dress in public, or to question a religious authority. the whole idea of vietnam was to prevent the spread of communism, it was a war that transcended vietnam itself, it was a war to measure our country and our people's resolve. vietnam taught our enemies (and todays modern terrorists) that if they can scare us, horrify us or kill enough of us that we will cower and not fight. Stalin, Khrushchev, khadafi, Usama, and hussein thought this, and we taught them all a lesson through might.

just because liberal's think war is not the answer it does not mean that our enemies do also. we are not europe, if we do not spend money on our military, flex our muscles, set deadlines and take action no one ele will. we do not have anyone to protect us like europe and the world have us. terrorist do not seek peace, they do not hate us because we are us they hate us because of hollywood, because of our freedom from starvation, our comfort in life and from our belief that we can live life any way we want without regard.

John wayne in his portrayal of vietnam was not "propaganda" it was to boost moral for the country, to support our efforts in defeating communism. i read before someone said john wayne was no patriot, what is a patriot if not to support the united states and to keep it's moral up? john wayne did that, ask any soldier from WWII to the present day. i feel bad for the liberal's they hate everyone, stand for everything while believing in nothing and really do not know anything of history or of humanity.

THE DUKE HAS THE LEFT TIED IN KNOTS
In 1969, John Wayne infuriated the Left with "The Green Berets", a film that made no apologies in its all-out support of America's effort in Vietnam. It was lambasted by critics, but in a very interesting sign, sold out at the box office. It plays today and while it is heavy-handed, there is little about it that rings untrue. The soldiers do not swear, complain or bastardize their uniforms like the actual guys did, but their patriotism and military professionalism was the real deal. The Communists they fight in the film are shifty little pissants. This does not deviate from the essential truth.

STEVEN TRAVERS
AUTHOR OF "BARRY BONDS: BASEBALL'S SUPERMAN"
STWRITES@AOL.COM

bad propoganda but a couple of gem performances
the performances of david jansaan and jim hutton stand out in this really blatant propoganda piece.
wayne the director and producer is not someone i empathize with but i do believe wayne the actor was vastly underrated.
too many people, myslef included, often let waynes politcs get in the way of acknowledging his acting powers.
this film is that in a nutshull.
his politics are unavoidable but the scen in which he wells up, on the verge of tears, trying to tell the young boy of huttons death is powerhouse acting pure and simple.
try to appreciate it.

A solid, well-made film
John Wayne like any other American had the right to promote his opinion. Period. ...

Now, the film is as accurate as any other Vietnam film made in that last 30 years because films are created to promote an opinion. (I've known Vietnam Vets who were not dope smoking, gun-totting genocidists.)

As far as action and commitment, the Green Berets succeeds as a solid "war film." No one who cares about good film making can argue that, unless they believe in censorship. The film is panoramic and energetic in cinematic quality. The characters are strong male types (like Vets I've known.) The film chose its side and promoted it. There is one strong element that the film brings home. The US military was better at killing, and it had to be. Most US detachments were generally outnumbered, fighting an opposition armed by numerous totalitarian countries from Europe to Asia. That is a historical fact, which interestingly enough, was introduced into a film over 35 years old.

The Green Berets, again, is a solid war-film and interestingly enough, is less fancifully than Platoon. The Green Berets is worth the time to see. ... Read more

Reviews (5)

Excellent war story, not so great love story
Never So Few is an excellent WWII adventure that deals with a part of the war that very few other movies even go near. Captain Tom Reynolds is the leader of a force of Americans and Kachins, Burmese natives, who wreak havoc on Japanese forces in the Burmese jungle in whichever way they can. During an ordered vacation, Reynolds falls in love as well as picking up a doctor, a driver, and much needed medical supplies. This is a very good movie that suffers because of an unneccesary love story. I know this part was inserted to draw people in, but the movie is much better when it deals with Reynolds and his unit. The action scenes are very well done at the beginning and the end while most of the middle portion is occupied by the relationship between Reynolds and Carla. Even with the love story, this is still a very enjoyable film.

Never So Few boasts an impressive cast that works well together. Frank Sinatra in the role of Capt. Tom Reynolds is very good as the leader of the Americans and Kachins harassing the Japanese. Gina Lollobrigida is decent as Carla, but as I said I think the love story was not needed. Reynolds' men include Richard Johnson as right-hand man Lt. Demortimer, Steve McQueen in an excellent supporting role as Cpl. Bill Ringa, Peter Lawford as doctor Captain Travis, Dean Jones as radioman Sergeant Norby, Charles Bronson as Navajo Indian Sergeant Danforth, and Philip Ahn as Nautang, the leader of the Kachins. The film also stars Brian Donlevy in a great supporting role, Paul Henreid, and Robert Bray. I really do hope that Never So Few gets released on DVD. I watched the letterbox version of this movie on TCM so I can't answer for the VHS, but if you like Sinatra and WWII action movies then you'll love Never So Few.

Frank Sinatra and his guerrillas take on a Chinese warlord
Captains Tom Reynolds (Frank Sinatra) and Danny DeMortimer (Richard Johnson) are fighting the Japanese in Burma during World War II. Ordered to take a "holiday" to Calcutta to find a doctor and get medical supplies for their group of guerrillas, they find Dr. Grey Travis (Peter Lawford) and a driver named Bill Ringa (Steve McQueen). But the two officers also meet war profiteer Nikko Regas (Paul Henried) and his mistress, Carla Vesari (Gina Lollobrigida). Although she is not responsive to Reynold's initial overtures, when she warms up to the captain when he is in the hospital after being wounded. When Reynolds returns to the field he has to put up with not only the Japanese, but a Chinese warlord who is stealing American supplies to sell to the Japanese. The main problem with "Never So Few" is the romance between Sinatra and Lollobrigida, which gets in the way of what is a more than decent story of O.S.S. operatives in the Burma theater. I know this is sacrilegious, but every time Gina came on screen, I went to make popcorn or get something to drink. There is really no chemistry between the two. Only when Sinatra is with his troops out in the jungle is "Never So Few" on the right track. This 1959 film, directed by John Sturges (who later directed McQueen in "The Great Escape"), is based on the novel by Tom T. Chamales.

Never so Few: A Visonary War Movie of Things To Come
In 1959,no one heard of Vietnam or the struggles with the Indo-China question,or at least the American public did not know much about the Far East and its complicated politics. The Excellent "Never So Few" really comes out of nowhere to become a topnotch war film and predicts the Vietnam War in some of its implications.The director John Sturges has always been a great action director, for this is the director that gave us the wonderful classic, "The Great Escape," among many very good action films and the action sequences in this movie are vibrant, real, and startling. The cast is excellent. Frank Sinatra has never been better save "The Manchurian Candidate," probably his best role and of course Maggio in "From Here to Eternity," which he won an Academy Award for.He is totally convincing here as the guerilla officer leader of the native forces in Burma with some "advisors" and the similarities are many to Vietnam, when the sides blurr and decisions are made out of necessities over military orders.Other standouts in the cast went on to become superstars. Steve McQueen steals many scenes he is in and gives portents of stardom to come. John Sturges uses him beautifully here and of course again in "The Great Escape." Others include Charles Bronson before he got the Death Wish, Dean Jones, Richard Johnson( One of Kim Novak's husbands for a short time but here and excellent actor), and Gina Lollobrigida, who brings the action to a stop and the romantic scenes don't ring as true as the rest of the film. But overall, "Never So Few" is an action film that holds up fairly well, telegraphs future movie stars, and has an epic stature it really earns. Sturges was one of our best action directors and "Never So Few" is one of his better efforts. Re-dicover it. A great movie of action and substance.

Never So Few
This is much more than a war movie. Made years before Viet Nam became a quagmire, it examines how politics plays a dirty hand in war. When Sinatra & Co. fight the "wrong" bad guys it leads to a confrontation with the brass that is so topical it should be required viewing for any politician considering sending our troops into conflict. On another level it entertains as a great action movie and the romance between Sinatra and Lollabrigida really rocks. This movie also has one of the deepest casts of sixties star power ever assembled. Check it out!

Very Good
The movie was very good, Steven McQueen gave one of his best performances. Some little details could have been changed but all in all it was worth the money and time to watch it. ... Read more

Amazon.com

You didn't think Mr. Spock was really dead, did you? When Spock's casket landed on the surface of the Genesis planet at the end of Star Trek II, we had already been told that Genesis had the power to bring "life from lifelessness." So it's no surprise that this energetic but somewhat hokey sequel gives Spock a new lease on life, beginning with his rebirth and rapid growth as the Genesis planet literally shakes itself apart in a series of tumultuous geological spasms. As Kirk is getting to know his estranged son (Merritt Butrick), he must also do battle with the fiendish Klingon Kruge (Christopher Lloyd), who is determined to seize the power of Genesis from the Federation. Meanwhile, the regenerated Spock returns to his home planet, and Star Trek III gains considerable interest by exploring the ceremonial (and, of course, highly logical) traditions of Vulcan society. The movie's a minor disappointment compared to Star Trek II, but it's a--well, logical--sequel that successfully restores Spock (and first-time film director Leonard Nimoy) to the phenomenal Trek franchise...as if he were ever really gone. With Kirk's willful destruction of the U.S.S. Enterprise and Robin Curtis replacing the departing Kirstie Alley as Vulcan Lt. Saavik, this was clearly a transitional film in the series, clearing the way for the highly popular Star Trek IV. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (141)

Another fine "Special Edition"
Once again, a fine special edition has been released for these venerable Star Trek movies. In this film, the crew heads off to the newly-formed Genesis planet in the stolen Enterprise. They meet up with Klingons newly arrived to try and steal the secret of the Genesis Device, which they call the "Greatest weapon ever invented." This film is clearly more light-hearted than TMP or TWOK, the previous two films in the franchise, and introduced the plot device of sending each crewmember off on their own mission before pulling them back together. As such, we see more of Sulu, Uhura, and Scotty than we are used to, which adds rather than detracts from the story. Another highlight is the scene-chewing performance of Christopher Lloyd as the Klingon commander, in perfect opposition to William Shatner.

Unfortunately, the film tends to be repetative. It starts off with a flashback to Wrath of Khan to bring the audience up-to-date. That's fine, but these moments are relived again when Sarek visits Kirk 20 minutes in, and YET AGAIN at the end of the film. Thus, this 100-minute movie only contains 80 minutes of new material, and repeated watchings tend to leave you fidgiting. In addition, the sound-stage sets of the Genesis Planet (and Vulcan) are impressive, but not the same as actual location footage. However, it's a worthy addition to the Star Trek family, it simply suffers in comparison to the two movies on either side of it.

Likewise, this special edition is good, but not as good as those for TMP and TWOK. The highlights are the text commentary by the Okudas, a featurette (25 minutes) on the development of the Klingon language, and the ILM featurette on the effects. The general making-of feature is interesting (Shatner is amusing in a faux-pompous way), but is mostly a repitition of the audio commentary. The print is curiously grainy, in contrast to the obviously cleaned-up DVD versions of the previous 2 films.

What Odd Numbered Curse?
Despite the holes in the plot and the need to willingly suspend disbelief at times, Star Trek III is among my favorite of the original cast films. I even like it better than Star Trek IV.

The special effects in this film are really good and I love James Horner's score enough to have bought it on cassette. There are many dramatic visual moments, including when the Enterprise approaches the giant space station orbiting Earth and the destruction of the Genesis planet, and of course, the destruction of the Enterprise.

The cast is in their usual fine form. Uhurua gets a smaller role in this movie because she stays behind, but she does get one really good scene giving a young Starfleet cadet his comeuppance. Scottie gets to shine as temporary engineering officer and vandalizer of the new starship Excelsior. McCoy is funny, occasionally slipping into his Spock mode. One of his best lines, upon hearing that he is carrying Spock's "katra" inside him is "It's [Spock's] revenge for losing all of those arguments!" William Shatner has a really good dramatic scene when Kirk learns that his son has been killed by the Klingons. Christopher Lloyd is good as the Klingon commander Kruge. Unrecognizable as one of his subordinates, Maltz, is the guy who played Dan Fielding in the Nightcourt sitcom on NBC.

Merrit Butrick and Robin Curtis are not particularly memorable as David and Saavik, but accomplish what is expected of them. Another reviewer observed that the film barely hints that Saavik sleeps with the young Spock as he experiences Pon Faar. I read the novelization of Star Trek III, and not only does it make it clear that she is "intimate" with him, if indeed Vulcans can be intimate, but that she also sleeps with Kirk's son David as well before they go to the Genesis planet. Had it been included in the film, it really would have added another element to it, though in the end it might have been distracting too.

It is a bit of a coincidence that Kirk gets Spock off the Genesis planet at just the right age, and the way in which Spock is brought back is a bit hard to swallow, after all, even the Vulcan high priestess declared that the process had not been done in ages, and then only in myth. Why would Spock then be confident that it would work? Then again, since all of us Trekkies wanted Spock back, we won't quibble. Star Trek III is a good combination of action, humor and drama. If there is an off numbered curse in the Star Trek movies, it clearly does not apply to this one.

Kirk and Co. have the balls that no one else in ST ever had
Another classic trek movie, this one taking place directly after the famous Spock death scene in Wrath of Khan. But Spock was just so hip and cool in his stiff, emotionless, Spock-ish(??) way that they had to bring him back. And Kirk and the boys do it in style.

The story is basically this: Ambassador Sarek (Spock's father) comes up to Kirk and makes it known to him that his essence may be living within a crew member of the Enterprise. They discover it is McCoy (which is hilarious, considering Spock and McCoy's quirky friendship), which explains why many in StarFleet thought he had been driven insane, and locked him up for it. Kirk and the boys spring McCoy out of the cell, steal the Enterprise, and head into space on "personal matters."

Even if this movie lacked in action, which is does not at all, it would have plenty in hilarious dialogue. There are many examples, such as when McCoy tries to hire a mercenary at a bar (very reminiscent of the Star Wars cantina, clientele et al). McCoy tells him, "Place I name, money I go." And the perterbed alien (eerily reminiscent of George C. Scott and Dr. Evil) fires back, "Place you name, money I name or else bargainnnnnnno." It hilarious the way he says it. Another funny part comes when Sulu jokingly prods a bored Federation security guard, "Keeping you busy?", the guard slowly, menacingly stands up from his chair, towering over the short Sulu and says, "Don't get smart, tiny." It isn't so much what they say that's funny, it's the body language and the intonations, brought out in full by first-rate directing by Leonard Nimoy.

There are tons of great action scenes, and even a stabbing death which is implied, but not shown, making it action-packed but still accessible for the whole family. A memorable performance by Christopher LLloyd as a Klingon renegade is also within this fine film. It's not as good as The Undiscovered Country, but it stands firm not only as a great Trek movie, but just as a great movie overall.

one for all, and all for one
Leonard Nimoy spent most of his time behind the camera directing this film, and though I miss his presence as Spock, it's one of my favorite of the Star Trek series; it's more subdued and introspective than the others, and the overall theme is friendship, and risking one's life for a friend.
The year is 8210, and the plot centers around "The Genesis Effect", an experimental device that can be placed on a "lifeless space body", like a dead moon, and make it flourish with life, but because one of the scientists used risky methods, "life" is happening at a fast clip.
The evil Klingons of course, in their constant lust for power, want the "Genesis" secret, and Admiral Kirk must stop them.

William Shatner is fabulous as Kirk; I've always found him to be a unique, immensely watchable actor, and all the original ensemble cast is wonderful: DeForest Kelley ~ McCoy, James Doohan ~ Scotty, George Takei ~ Sulu, Walter Koenig ~ Chekov, Nichele Nichols ~ Uhura. Added are Mark Lenard as Spock's father Sarek, Robin Curtis as Lt. Saavik, Merritt Butnick as Kirk's son David, and Christopher Lloyd as the Klingon Kruge. Dame Judith Anderson plays the Vulcan priestess TLar, in a scene that is high camp, and quite marvelous.
There are some nifty special effects on the Planet Genesis, and some nice cinematography by Charles Correll, as well as an exceptionally lovely score by James Horner. Leonard Nimoy gave this film a moody, thoughtful atmosphere, and it works for me, and I find the ending quite touching, no matter how many times I see it.
Total running time is 105 minutes.

20 Years of "The Search For Spock"
"How many fingers am I holding up?"
"Thats not very damn funny."
- Kirk gives the Vulcan Salute to Dr. McCoy as they both escape a trip from The Federation Funny Farm, and look for a lost pointed ear friend in "Star Trek III: The Search For Spock"

Its been 20 years to the day since the search began in this third and underated entry in the "Star Trek" saga. "The Search For Spock" is an adventurous (if corny) film that teaches a lesson in the loyalties, & importance of friendship, no matter the consequence.

Picking up where "Star Trek II: The Wrath Of Khan" left off, with the death & funeral of Captain Spock & the birth of the Genesis Planet, "The Search For Spock" begins with the crew of The Enterprise limping home after the battle wrath with Khan, only to find out that the Federation has decided to decommission the legendary starship & reassign most of its crew. Whats worse is the fact that Dr. "Bones" McCoy is having a sort of nervous breakdown, breaking in to Captain Spock's sealed quarters and giving Admiral Kirk an errie message from the grave.
When Spock's father, Ambassador Saarik, arrives informing Kirk that Spock isn't dead, but, is in a state where mind & body are in seperate forms, its up to both, Kirk & Saarik to find who has Spock's marbles (McCoy has them) & where Spock's body rests (on The Genisis Planet). Once both are retrieved, and thru an ancient Vulcan ritual, only then can Spock become his old self again. With the arrival of the Kilngons, looking for the secret to Genesis, its a race against time as the planet becomes unstable and starts to deteriate at an alarmingly fast rate. The search isn't without sacrfice & Kirk loses the two things he holds dearest to him in order get his friend back.

"Star Trek III" is one of those films thats pretty much written for fans of the series (if this film was your introduction to "Star Trek", I'm pretty positive your reaction was more of a "Huh!?" with a shrug of the shoulders). I hold this as the fifth best in the series tieing it with "Star Trek: Generations" ("II" & "First Contact" are the two best in the series).

The Klingons finally get some much needed screen time in this film. Since they were the main nemesis in the television series, it was only a matter of time before they would show up (the Klingons make a cameo in "Star Trek: The Motion Picture"). A year before he went "Back To The Future", Christopher Lloyd gives a great performance as Commander Kruge, the greedy, power hungry Klingon commander. Kruge is much better than the two Klingons in "Star Trek V". Those two reminded me of the Wonder Twins from the "Super Friends", for some reason. The Klingons in "Star Trek VI" came across as more regal and honorable than threatening and coldblooded, like Kruge is. As for Shatner and the rest of the cast, all are also great & age gracefully in their respective roles.
James Horner's score to "III", like "II", is one of the better scores in the series (acutally, I think, its a lot of reused score material from the previous film, but, I just get so tired of hearing Jerry Goldsmith's opening theme from "The Motion Picture". Its been used in at least half of the the ten films, as well, as the opening theme to "The Next Generation" series). Leonard Nimoy directs his first of two "Trek" films ("III" is his directorial debut) and gets a lot out of his actors and does a good job overall.

The 2 disc DVD edition to "Star Trek III: The Search For Spock" is worth owning and is better than "Star Trek V" on any given Sunday. Join the Search. ... Read more

Reviews (3)

An ideally paired offering from the Saturday morning series
This entry in the much-maligned animated series features a set of above average episodes, one of them concentrating solely on Kirk and Spock and the other involving the entire crew. Each of the stories is not without flaws though. The first show, "The Jihad", is one of the more ambitious efforts that tells the story of a gathering of members of alien species working together to find an esteemed religious sculpture. The sculpture is inscribed with the brain patterns of a centuries dead religious leader of the alien species, the Skoor, and if it is discovered missing it will trigger a Jihad that will have galactic repercussions. This episode makes good use of the animated form as it has four completely different alien species working together with Kirk and Spock on the surface of a mysterious planet that reconfigures both its landscape and weather at random - complete with erupting volcanoes. If they had attempted to produce such a show on the regular series it would have superceded the make-up and special effects budgets for an entire season. Additionally the story is well constructed keeping the identity of the thief concealed until the climax. The major flaw present here takes place when they find the sculpture. One of the party's members offers to lasso the object that is out of reach of everyone; Kirk explains to her that it will be impossible to lasso because of the force field surrounding it. Moments later Kirk is perfectly positioned above the sculpture and easily slides his foot through one of its loops and calls for transport!

"The Terratin Incident" is equally intriguing presenting a fair mystery despite dealing with one of the most apathetic of science fiction premises, shrinking people. While investigating an ages old supernova the Enterprise communications detect an ancient S.O.S. signal used by early Earth exploration vessels. Tracing the source to a previously unexplored planet they are unable to determine if anyone is on the surface. The Enterprise is suddenly struck by a beam of unknown technology that is emanating from the planet's surface; the bombardment has disastrous consequences for the dylithium crystals reducing them to a pile of useless strips. Within a short while the crew begins to shrink slowly in size that begins to inhibit their ability to operate the starship's controls. In a desperate effort to find a way to reverse or stop the problem Kirk beams down to the planet and finds that he has resumed his normal size. Returning to the ship he discovers that the bridge crew has been beamed down to a doomed city on the planet and is being held hostage. With time running out for the starship, the city and the chances for the Enterprise crew to return to normal size Kirk negotiates with the ruler of the city. Though many of the routines seen here have been spotlighted in other similarly themed movies like "Dr. Cyclops" and "The Incredible Shrinking Man" they work to good effect here as well. And the twist dealing with the origin of the city's inhabitants is also handled satisfactorily even though it is a bit predictable. The major problem here: why did the city's ruler feel it necessary to shrink the crew of the Enterprise (or beam the entire bridge crew to the surface) when he was able to communicate with the starship - as he does with Kirk in the climax of the show? The clear reason for this is that it would have made for a short episode, but it is a glaringly obvious story flaw.

The cartoon crew of the Enterprise get small...
Another pair of episodes from the first season of "Star Trek - The Animated Series" are offered up on Volume 7. In "The Jihad" (Episode #16, January 13, 1974), Kirk and Spock join a party of aliens searching for a stolen artifact. If this sacred relic is not recovered then there will be a holy war, but one of the party is determined to sabotage the mission. Written by Stephen Kandel, this episode features David Gerrold (author of "The Trouble With Tribbles") doing the Voice of EM/3/Green. In "The Terratin Incident" (Episode #11, November 17, 1973), the Enterprise is checking out a burnt-out supernova when they discover a miniature city called Terratin. The city is a long lost Earth colony that shrank because of the radiation from the supernova and now the same thing starts happening to the Enterprise. This episode, written by Paul Schneider, is the better of the two. Hearing Spock and McCoy argue about shrinking makes the whole thing worthwhile.

Great stories of Star Trek in animation.
The Jihad; Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock join other experts from the Federation to recover of sacred artifact before the galaxy erupts in a full scale war. and the Terratin Incident finds the starship being struck by a strange ray that gradually shrinks the crew down to microsopic size, and the Captain is the only one who can stop it befoe it's too late.These are well written episodes and the animation is quite faithful to the live action Star Trek series.Episodes written by Stephen Kandel and Paul Schneider. Directed by Hal Sutherland. Excutive Consultent; Gene Roddenberry. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Although Star Trek: The Motion Picture had been a box-office hit, it was by no means a unanimous success with Star Trek fans, who responded much more favorably to the "classic Trek" scenario of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. Inspired by the "Space Seed" episode of the original TV series, the film reunites newly promoted Admiral Kirk with his nemesis from the earlier episode--the genetically superior Khan (Ricardo Montalban)--who is now seeking revenge upon Kirk for having been imprisoned on a desolated planet. Their battle ensues over control of the Genesis device, a top-secret Starfleet project enabling entire planets to be transformed into life-supporting worlds, pioneered by the mother (Bibi Besch) of Kirk's estranged and now-adult son. While Mr. Spock mentors the young Vulcan Lt. Saavik (then-newcomer Kirstie Alley), Kirk must battle Khan to the bitter end, through a climactic starship chase and an unexpected crisis that will cost the life of Kirk's closest friend. This was the kind of character-based Trek that fans were waiting for, boosted by spectacular special effects, a great villain (thanks to Montalban's splendidly melodramatic performance), and a deft combination of humor, excitement, and wondrous imagination. Director Nicholas Meyer (who would play a substantial role in the success of future Trek features) handles the film as a combination of Moby Dick, Shakespearean tragedy, World War II submarine thriller, and dazzling science fiction, setting the successful tone for the Trek films that followed. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (323)

At the End of the Universe, Lies the Beginning of Vengeance
Star Trek II The Wrath of Khan succeeds because it strikes the perfect balance of drama, action, humor, pathos, and depth. After the critical failure of the first Star Trek movie (which hit movie theaters before being properly completed), the producers took the trouble to view every episode of the original series to figure out what made it enduring. They replicated it successfully in The Wrath of Khan. Unlike the first film, the plot is driven by the actions and motivations of the characters. This is not a story about spatial anomalies or an excuse for technobabble and flashy special effects. This story is about the classic themes which have served drama well since ancient Greek theater: the quest for vengeance; lost loves; the alienation, anger and reconciliation of fathers and sons; and the realization of mortality. Of the many science fiction films I have seen, few have tugged at the heartstrings as deeply as The Wrath of Khan. The most powerful moments are the bittersweet reunion between Kirk and Carol Marcus, the death of Spock and Kirk's eulogy, and the long delayed embrace between Kirk and his estranged son David. These moments are so universal that any "science fiction" label for this film seems limiting.

The script is helped by what is undoubtedly William Shatner's finest performance as James T. Kirk. Shatner brings the perfect balance of bluster, brio, and vulnerability to the aging Admiral. Toward the end of the movie, Kirk, shattered by Spock's death, tears down his defenses and allows us to see the human being behind the uniform. Ricardo Montalban, in a blood thirsty, Ahab-like performance, proves that there is much more to his acting than what was seen on Fantasy Island.

The special effects, which are entirely at the service of the story, for the most part hold up remarkably well--two exceptions are the Ceti Eels and the Genesis Cave Waterfall, which look rather primitive by today's CGI standards. James Horner's crisp, vibrant score hints at the great things which were to follow from him--it's a pity he has not been used in more recent Star Trek fare.

This Director's Edition contains some additional footage which was not in the theatrical release. Among this are scenes which reveal why Scotty was so upset over the death of the Cadet in Engineering, as well as some minor additions. Unlike the DVD release of the first Star Trek movie, there have been no enhancements to the few dated visual effects, such as the Genesis Cave Waterfall. The bonus material features interviews with Shatner, Nimoy, Montalban, and Bennett, as well as several behind the scenes looks at the visual effects (this was the first film to make use of computer graphics) and production design. Less interesting is an extended look at the Trek universe as seen through various novelizations (which, as every Trekker knows, are not considered "canon.")

The picture and sound quality are identical to the earlier DVD release, a definite improvement over VHS and laserdisc, but not spectacular by DVD standards.

DVD is superior to all previous video releases of the movie
This is the first Star Trek movie I have purchased on DVD. And I was quite impressed.

As far as I can tell, the entire movie panarama is restored within the 2.35 letterbox. Apparently this was *not* the case with the laserdisc and VHS widescreen versions, as this DVD has more material in the frame. Even the closing titles are authentic letterbox (not the vertically cropped, horizontally-compressed pan-and-scan version titles that were coppied onto the laserdisc).

Picture quality is also improved. Starfields are actually black this time instead of grey. Images are cleaner and sharper. The spaceships are more intense-looking than ever before, and I finally understand what's in the Genesis cave. The video transfer is darker, hiding some of the now-familiar film artifacts but also revealing a few new ones. Then again, even the cleaned-up special edition of Star Wars still had its film artifacts.

Sound is improved. I noticed some background effects I had never heard before.

Extras on this disc are limited to the theatrical trailer, which is letterboxed in 1.85. Personally, I would have liked to have seen the extended scenes from the ABC broadcast version of Star Trek II -assuming those can be restored in widescreen. The main menu looks like the menus for the TV episodes and does not capture the personality of the film.

Overall, a good disc. Buy it.

One for the ages
Back when "The Wrath of Khan" first hit the theaters, I remember thinking that Khan now ranks with the best movie bad guys of all time. I think Ricardo Montalban may have turned out the best performance of his career by bringing complexity, passion, pathos, and humanity all at once to the role of Khan. I'll never be able to read Moby Dick the same way ever again - "He tasks me, and I shall have him... I'll chase him 'round the moons of Nibia and 'round the Antares Maelstrom, and 'round perdition's flames before I give him up!" Sure, I'm an avowed lifelong trek fan, but I don't think I'm exagggerating this by much.

On a more objective note, the movie works very well at multiple levels...

The soundtrack itself is exceptional and, at the time, somewhat ground-breaking for the movie industry. This is evidenced by the fact that subsequent soundtracks in the sci-fi genre seem to have borrowed from Horner's original score. I think it was a shame that "Khan" was not nominated for an Oscar in the original score category.

The visual effects, which were state of the art at the time, still hold up over twenty years later. It serves as a good example and reminder that movies used to have good special effects even in the pre-computer era.

The acting was also superior. I already mentioned that Montalban may have given the performance of his life as "Khan", but I don't think it ends there. William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, and DeForest Kelley also recaptured the feel of the cameraderie from the original series. I am aware that Shatner is often criticized for being overly-dramatic, but my opinion is that this may also rank among the top two or three performance of Shatner's career as well (including the TV show). One of the more memorable moments came following Khan's failed attempt to have Chekov and Terrell kill Kirk: [Kirk to Khan] "You've managed to kill just about everyone else, but like a poor marksman you keep missing the mark.", which was, of course, followed by Kirk's timeless "KHAAAANNNN!!!" exclamatory. The acting was so good, IMHO, that the audience doesn't really notice that Kirk and Khan never really meet face-to-face, and the movie doesn't suffer because of it.

The Director's Edition DVD comes with a well-produced disc of supplementary material (interviews, commentaries, etc.) as well. I particularly liked the recent interviews with the actors on their recollections from when the movie was being produced. My favorite interview was Ricardo Montalban telling how horrified he was upon realizing how much he sounded like Mr. Roarke from Fantasy Island when he started reading his lines for the first time - "This is going to be a disaster! The audience is going to laugh at me!" He then tells of how he fixed the problem by requesting a copy of the original TV show "Space Seed" where the crew of the Enterprise first encountered Khan, and watching it over and over again until he began to recall his original work with the character. Shatner also delivers a pretty good interview as he describes how he'll one day make Nimoy and Harve Bennett pay for not letting him in on the secret that by the time the movie had been shot that they already had plans to bring Spock back. Whether or not Shatner really knew is irrelevant - the interview is delivered w/ a deadpan that leaves the viewer in stitches. There is also a good piece about how the visual effects were accomplished.

Overall, I rate "The Wrath of Khan" as the best movie in the entire series of Star Trek theatrical releases, and on