Star Trek V - Am Rande des Universums

I've never figured out why ST V gets so much criticism. It's really not that bad, if you're a true trekkie. First off, sure the effects are a little low-fi...but so were the TOS episodes. I don't know about you, but I care more about story than effects. The main reason that I like this film because it's very episodic in nature. If you are a fan of the original Star Trek series, sit down and watch this movie as if you were watching one of the original episodes and it will be much more enjoyable. For one, it starts out like an episode with a prologue before the opening credits start. Secondly, the theme music for the movie is similar to that of the original series. Third, there are some lines from the film that sound like they would be right out of one of the older episodes. Lastly, this movie is loosely based on the storyline of an original episode. Ironically, the episode that it's based on is one of the TOS worst episodes: The Way the Eden. If you've seen The Way to Eden, the actual plot of the episode is not bad, it's just the hippie stuff that makes it so awful. This film kildly leaves out the awful hippie music of the original episode and focuses solely on the plot instead. I often wonder if Shatner wrote this film to make up for how bad The Way to Eden was. So, to sum up, watch this movie as you would watch an old episode and you'll enjoy it much more.

Having recently purchased the box set of all 10 Star Trek films (including Next Generation), I watched Star Trek V, not having seen it since it was released, hoping that it would improve on a second watching.

Watching it now, I can see that here was a story that could have been very, very powerful, and the film could have been an equal to Star Trek: The Motion Picture, which is also underrated by non-Star Trek fans.

The overwhelming sense I got in this film was that everything proceeded so quickly, as if the producers/director felt that a successful film was trim, with no excess fat. Those people who really enjoy a good steak, enjoy that little bit of fat on the edge, or marbled through the meat. It makes it all so much more tasty, even if it has little nutritional value. To remove myself from the metaphor, Star Trek fans enjoy the taking of time over certain elements - seeing the ship, seeing it travel, dialogue en route, etc.

If there was a director's cut, or another cut, that wasn't so very lean, I think the new pace would work to the film's advantage. Of course the worst element of pacing is the finale. When we finally arrive at the centre of the galaxy, Kirk & Co. march straight in without much ado. Think to the Enterprise venturing into the cloud that surrounded V-GER. We were given time to savour the beautiful visuals set to a engaging score.

To my mind this doesn't happen in Star Trek V, and this is its weakness. I think it is still a reasonable film. The scene where Spock and McCoy are shown there heart's deepest wound is quite moving. With a little more breadth, this could have been incredible. It's frustrating that the film will not get the best treatment the story deserves. When watching the special features, it seems that the production was not smooth sailing, the finale weakened due to poor response (according to Shatner) from special effects teams. As a Star Trek fan, I can't give this film less than a 5. I hope that's not out of sentimentality.

Well, I loved STAR TREK IV: it was just so different, so fresh, that it's my favourite of the original cast movies. Unfortunately, THE FINAL FRONTIER is everything that film isn't. It tries to get to grips with an equally heavy (or heavier) subject matter, but the resultant film is ponderous, devoid of action, dated, cheesy and, even worse, boring.

The film sees Spock's long-lost brother (who he?) coming out of the woodwork and commandeering the Enterprise in search of God. Unfortunately, there's no action to speak of, and the special effects used to detail the almost magical scenario are pretty shoddy. Shatner directs as well as stars, but his direction leaves plenty to be desired.

Sure, there's still fun to be had from watching the original cast going through the paces, but they really are going through the paces here and that's all they're doing. Some of them seem a little bored. The best supporting actors the movie can manage are B-movie veterans David Warner and Michael Berryman. THE FINAL FRONTIER has a philosophical tone and some of the scenes are quite sentimental - the campfire bit in particular - but you'd have to be a huge Trekkie to get much joy out of this dull instalment.

Having been one of the shows that was part of my childhood and growing up, the original 'Star Trek' still holds up as great and ground-breaking, even if not perfect.

The fifth film of the franchise, 'The Final Frontier', is often considered the worst of the films, and one can understand why. To me, it is nowhere near as bad as its reputation, and feel in some way that the film was doomed even before it was released. Whether it is the worst overall 'Star Trek' film is up for debate, it's a worthy contender. Is it the worst of the films based of the original series? Yes.

It is not a bad film by all means. The cinematography is neat and very nicely done in the quieter scenes, and William Shatner's direction works well in these moments.

Jerry Goldsmith's score is awesome personified, there is no bias intended as Goldsmith has always been one of my favourite composers, but the score here really rouses the spirits while touching the heart also.

'Star Trek V: The Final Frontier' does have some good scenes, namely the camping fire scene, the inner/greater pain scene (very intense and moving) and Scotty knocking himself out (the one bit of humour that works).

The chemistry between Kirk, Spock and McCoy is the film's driving force, and the interaction and interplay between them is the asset that comes off strongest.

A few of the performances are good. Leonard Nimoy and DeForest Kelley are very good, and Laurence Luckinbill does very well with what he's given, a villain that's both menacing and sympathetic. The rest of the crew mostly are very competently played.

Unfortunately, they are underused and what they are given falls flat completely mostly, turning them into cartoonish parodies. The erotic dance was completely out of place and the getting lost stuff feels like filler to pad out a story that doesn't have an awful lot to it. Plus we have the most embarrassing rendition of "Row, Row, Row Your Boat" you'll find anywhere.

Generally the humour is as flat as a pancake, really overdone and juvenile. 'The Voyage Home' had humour too but it was actually entertaining and even when poking fun felt more like 'Star Trek'. Shatner's direction is incredibly chaotic in the action scenes, which sees production values that look unforgivably cheap even for the budget, with haphazard cinematography and editing and the worst of the uniformly shockingly shoddy special effects.

Just for the record, as much as people would say that Shatner's ego has a lot to do with the problematic nature of the film (and yes having him trying to take on more than he could chew was excessive and most likely was not going to work from the start), the failure is much more at the door of budget limitations and studio interference, Shatner's original vision would have made for a much better and actually a fascinating film.

On top of that, 'The Final Frontier' is filled with overripe dialogue with too much emphasis on the humour, which as said doesn't work, and less on heartfelt moments and thought-provoking conflicts. While there are a few good performances, the supporting cast are too underused to shine properly and Shatner's performance has more ham than the world's biggest pig farm.

A big failure here is the story, which is dull and takes too long to get going with a plot too thin to sustain the running time. The whole stuff about god just confused the story and that for Sybok was a thrown in and unnecessary plot device done to presumably give more development to a character who was actually interesting and well developed already. The ending is convoluted and anti-climactic.

Overall, hugely problematic but not without obvious merits. 5/10 Bethany Cox

This is often said to be the worst of the Star Trek films. After watching it I can see why a lot of people would think that. It is a very flawed film but I by no means hated it. In fact, I liked it more than Star Trek: The Motion Picture. Star Trek V: The Final Frontier opens with the crew of the Enterprise enjoying some well deserved shore leave. Kirk, Spock, and Bones enjoy their time off together by going camping in Yosemite park and this makes for some amusingly cheesy moments. Their vacation is interrupted when they must respond to a hostage situation concerning a renegade Vulcan who happens to be Spock's half brother. This Vulcan's name is Sybok and he is on a desperate search for God and the end of the universe. There are also some Klingons in pursuit of Kirk and the Enterprise, but they don't seem to serve much of a purpose in the end. The Final Frontier is all kinds of weird and doesn't have much of a structure, but I can't say I didn't have fun with this movie.

Remember how The Voyage Home added this element of comedy to Star Trek? Well The Final Frontier saw that and thought to itself, 'Hey! I can do that too!' Unfortunately, it was wrong. Any and all comedy in this film is completely unnecessary and either makes you cringe or roll your eyes in embarrassment. There are moments in the film where I was left wondering, 'Why in the hell did the writers think that line was a good idea?' The movie tries way too hard with its ridiculous punchlines and awkward moments that are supposed to be hilarious. A lot of the humor comes around when the friendship between Kirk, Spock, and Bones is being developed. This was always an important aspect of Star Trek, but The Final Frontier almost makes a mockery of it. Never, under any circumstances do I need to watch Shatner, Nimoy, and Kelley sit around a campfire singing Row Row Row Your Boat. But I guess these were the days when Shatner and Nimoy were building their "singing" careers so they thought they needed those "careers" to carry over into Star Trek.

This movie had the potential to be incredible. Sybok's search for God could have gone much deeper and been much more intellectual than what it was. This aspect of the film had spiritual and existential overtones, but they were buried by silly nonsensical scenes that do nothing for the plot. There is a lot to strip away if you want to get down to the more intellectual meaning of this film. It is something that was so obscured by the amount of crap this film throws together that in the end it was a completely lost meaning.

But if you move past that, The Final Frontier can be pretty fun. If you enjoy it for its cheese than you can have a moderately good time. Especially towards the end, the film becomes completely over-the-top and loaded with cheese. It isn't like The Motion Picture, which tried way to hard to be something it wasn't and painfully dragged on for over two hours. The Final Frontier clocks in at only an hour and 45 minutes and just stays lively and fun the whole time. It isn't high quality fun, but its fun nevertheless. This definitely is not a Star Trek film I would watch again, but its a necessary watch if you are a fan of Star Trek like me and have made it your duty to see all of the films.

Star Trek: The Final Frontier is not a good movie. But its not a bad movie either. It isn't one of those that I just hated by the end, but I knew for sure that what I had just seen was not a very well made film. I love Star Trek so watching Kirk, Spock, and Bones boldly go where no man has gone before, even if they go to a realm of such cringe worthy cheese as this, still puts a smile on my face.