Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site decwrl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!floyd!harpo!decvax!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-orac!butenhof
From: butenhof@orac.DEC (Dave Butenhof, VAX-11 RSX AME)
Newsgroups: net.startrek
Subject: STIII
Message-ID: <1473@decwrl.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 13-Jun-84 20:35:11 EDT
Article-I.D.: decwrl.1473
Posted: Wed Jun 13 20:35:11 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 21-Jun-84 02:53:10 EDT
Organization: DEC Engineering Network
Lines: 64

> 3. How can Spock remember his last words to Kirk, if he
>    memory-dumped to McCoy *before* then?

	(this is actually an excerpt from sf-lovers, not net.startrek,
	but the same objection has been raised here)

Easy  -- I was visiting my parents over the past weekend and watched STII on
my  father's RCA videodisk player. I noted with interest that the EXACT same
conversation  ("The  needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the
one;  I  have  been  and  always  will  be,  your friend") took place at the
beginning  of  the  movie!  Therefore,  Spock  was not remembering the final
conversation in the engine room, but rather, the EARLIER conversation.

Oh,  and in line with the now well-known "Remember" line before Spock killed
himself  (one  wonders why they didn't just have him take the time to find a
radiation  suit  before  going  inside,  and  save themselves the trouble of
resurrecting  him,  by  the  way), I noticed after that, as Kirk, McCoy, and
others  watch the Genesis nebula from the bridge, McCoy comments "Spock will
never  be  dead,  as  long  as we remember him ..." or words closely to that
effect.

All  in  all,  I  liked  the  movie.  I  came  out  of  the  theatre feeling
disappointed, but not quite certain of why. On reflection, and after reading
all  the  messages over the net, I've decided that I liked it: I'd even like
to see it again. I think it was a simpler plot line than STII. It was, after
all, really only an epilogue to STII -- it simply tied up the remaining plot
thread  (Spock).  There  was  less of the bold sense of adventure; they were
rehashing   old   things,   rather   than   doing   new   things.   But  the
characterisations  were  good,  particularly the primary ones, and more like
the  TV  characters  than in the other movies. In STII, after the horrendous
STI, I felt that we could see our old friends again. With STIII, I feel that
they once again walk among us.

The  old  Saavik  was  indeed  better (even though I think the difference is
mostly  attributable  to  writing  and directing, rather than to the actress
herself).  I guess we all pay the price of Kirstie's greed.

I  think Chris Lloyd did well as a Klingon. Indeed, there were uncomfortable
shades  of  Taxi  drifting throught the theatre. The problem is not with the
actor,  but  with  the audience, however. We've let ourselves type-cast him;
not  his fault. I think it's too bad they killed him off. On the other hand,
maybe  he'll  be  replaced  by  a Klingon who's had his forehead cleaned and
pressed recently ...

As  for the mess they all should be in at the end, it looks bad. STIV should
be  interesting.  There are some good sides, however -- they prevented a war
with  the Klingons (had they succeeded in getting Genesis, they would surely
have  gone  to  war:  that's  quite a weapon). They saved the Federation the
expense  of  dismantling  (or whatever) an obsolete starship, etc. Someone's
suggestion  that  Kirk would be demoted to Captain and sent out on a mission
was  pure brilliance ... slightly too "pat," but far better than most of the
other likely resolutions.

I have mixed emotions about the Excelsior class ship ... it looks funny, and
certainly  is not as sleek as the Enterprise; but I'll reserve judgement for
now.  We'll see, we'll see ...  December 85 or bust!

	/dave

orac::butenhof  		(enet)
decwrl!rhea!orac!butenhof	(the cold and cruel world outside)

(no  company  name or address 'cause we've been tolded not to! so who really
cares, anyway?)