the leading man is my tpye

Most undeservingly overhyped movie of all time??

Entertaining from beginning to end, it maintains the spirit of the franchise while establishing it's own seal with a fun cast

it is the rare 'crazy' movie that actually has something to say.

Movie Review: "Star Trek: The Undiscovered Country" (1991)Paramount Pictures presents the exclusive as epic conclusion with mind-blowing one-time-engaging opening credits score to set the tone from underrated score composer Cliff Eidelman in favors of the original "Enterprise NCC-1701" crew starring William Shatner as James T. Kirk, Leonard Nimoy (1931-2015) as Mr. Spock and DeForest Kelley (1920-1999) as Doctor Leonard "Bones" McCoy imaginative-conceived by writer/producer Gene Roddenberry (1921-1991), who created the visionary television series "Star Trek" running in first reception on NBC (National Broadcasting Company).The screenplay also-written by reprising director Nicholas Meyer, who brought the ultra-philosphical first motion picture "Star Trek" directed by Robert Wise, releasing on December 7th 1979, out of its galactic corner into science-fiction-thriller splendors with "Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan" in splendid movie summer of 1982; here the director is even able to exceed its predecessors in a suspense-striking "Whodunit" storyline, when the crew of the "Enterprise" invites "Klingon" delegates, alongside fulminate playing Kirk-challenging actor Christopher Plummer as Supreme Officer Chang, who like no other brings "The Undiscovered Country" to one of the most receivable motion picture splendors for any science-fiction favoring spectator, when the film wins big in favor in high-contrast, ultra-stark concrete-pit environment, captured in exceptionally-striking cinematography by Hiro Sarita after a Starfleet committed murder of the peace-talking Klingon chancellor.In this "Star Trek" movie comes everything together from high-scale costumes as production design by legacy-knowledgable Herman F. Zimmerman, when every single member from the original crew outgoing from James Doohan (1920-2005) as Warp-engineer Montgomery "Scotty" Scott, Walter Koenig and George Takei as Spaceship Navigators Chekov and Sulu and the unmissable communication specialist Uhura, portrayed by Nichelle Nichols, when further supporting character perfmored by Kim Cattrall as newly-introduced "Enterprise" officer Lieutenant Valeris, when the plot thickens under constant suspense-accelerations to a fulfilling finish.© 2018 Felix Alexander Dausend (Cinemajesty Entertainments LLC)

None of the Star Trek feature films have been what one would call great art, even though they were entertaining at times. They had the disadvantage of needing to appeal to not just Star Trek fans, but also to a larger audience who did not know what Star Trek is all about.But ST VI breaks that mold some, and gives us an actual ST episode that looks at Star Fleet itself. Star Trek has always had a kind of law and order bent to it, and so it is that we have a mystery driving the plot and story forward. And we also a slightly more classic feel of ST as we know it in terms of story and characters.Here the characters act as their characters in the TV series of old. We don't necessarily see the total dynamic of how they interacted during times of crisis in the TV series, but we do see them in their roles as they progress through the adventure.The story itself comes close to skidding into Spockanian "illogic", because both Kirk and McCoy aren't really given much to do in terms of the overall story. In fact one wonders where this story element came from, and one wishes that perhaps a veteran on the writing team had given the Captain and the ship's Chief Surgeon something a bit more compelling to do, or with perhaps a different set of plot and story points during act II.The powers that be, in my not so humble opinion, probably had six films scheduled until the new TV series could take hold, and then the feature films would focus on the defunct and tragically crippled "Star Trek the Next Generation".As far as the minutiae of Trek-details go, well, there's lots for the fans to argue about in terms of the setting, props and general zeitgeist. Me, as a die-hard "dyed in the wool" fan, I don't have too many bones to pick with this film, other than wonder why this amount of script doctoring and film doctoring could not have been given to the previous films. I think both fans and general movie goers deserved it.So why wasn't it done? Simply put the Kirk-Spock era, at the time, was probably seen as working overtime, and the Trek powers that were probably thought that Picard and crew would take hold in the hearts and minds of classic and neo-Trek fans alike. But, as time and criticism has shown, this is not so, and the fault lies on the deliberate sociological and social-psychologists who tried to rework the general setting of Star Trek until it was broken.And now, at the time of this writing, the last of the three JJ Abrams "Trek" films is in the theatre, where the characters are played somewhat as caricatures of the original crew. One should note that these films are making a kind of over-the-top "hearkening back" to what mister Abrams believes classic Trek fans think of Star Trek.This fan says he's got it wrong, and should have watched ST VI, but this classic Trek fan also realizes that mister Abrams is making a film for a younger generation. Which is even more curious given the directing style and overall thrust, feel and look of the films.But getting back to ST VI, it is a film for the fans, and a kind of tribute to both show and the fans who supported it. In a sense ST 1 to ST VI were the missing infamous 4th season. And having the entire crew on the bridge with classic Sound FX and the classic tune humming in the background, was a good send off and tribute to both show and the fans who were there from the beginning with the family and friends manually hand cranking a cathode ray tube TV dial to see what Kirk and the crew of the starship Enterprise were up to every week.But again, all in all, ST VI, even though it's meant more for the fans than the general public, feels a little weak and marginally off kilter in execution. The space sequences could have been sharper. The location sequences could have been shot differently with a different story, but, that's neither here nor there. The creative team picked a certain script, shot it, and we're given what they produced.Not a bad film, but for a series finale, it could have been "bigger" without over-blowing the story to another "save the galaxy / universe" kind of tripe so frequent in other sci-fi shows and films.All in all a decent watch. I would have shot it differently, but that's another post for another time.

The Final Frontier is meant to be The Age of Peace.This one is a fitting send-off to the original crew, some of who have aged badly. Even newcomer Kim Cattrall looks chunky. Christopher Plummer is totally annoying as the Shakespeare-quoting Klingon. His "brilliant" prosecution of Kirk and Dr. McCoy is both spellbinding and sleep inducing. Random comments by "Bones" include: "He (Chang) never shuts up" and "What is it with you" (and alien women)? The bloody assassination on The Klington Bird of Prey in zero gravity. Well done! Alien blood is usually red. Right? It's a funny color and their anatomy is different,so the good doctor can't save the Klingon Chancellor. It's all a huge conspiracy plot against peace with The Federation of Planets and the Klingons. (War is highly profitable and pleasurable?) After a long trial and prosecution by Chang, our "boys" end up on a frozen, poisonous penal-colony planet with life at hard labor. The exteriors shot in Alaska "white out" on the small screen and can't be fully appreciated. Kirk meets up with a shapeshifting "sexy beast" alien (Inman), who smokes cigars and then morphs into a big "Wookiee-like" thing. (Kirk shudders!) Enough plot holes to sink a spaceship. The missing anti-grav suits and boots are found way too easily. The future's security is so inept they can't detect a primitive rifle-in-a suitcase? Nice stunt doubles, as the real actors can hardly waddle. Still, a great ending to the first part of the Star-Trek legacy. Star Trek v was unbelievably bad.

Not awful, just pedestrian. It was simply a longer talky TV episode - at least that was how it felt. William Shatner was just the same as ever -how could he be any different? The most convincing of all is the ever-reliable Leonard Nimoy. Most of the sets looked cheap and nasty, particularly the rocky caves that Bones, Kirk and Iman crawled through. The creatures and costumes were far from convincing and the makeup of some of the characters was amateur to say the least. it was 1991 when released so probably could not have benefited from the use of CGI then but overall the effects were pathetic. Action sequences needed better direction and execution and would the have involved the viewer. The new Star Trek movies were much better in execution, action and storyline and benefited from actors who could really carry their parts - I have affection for the classic ST series and some of the movies but this one was only just about watchable.