FULL DISCUSSION - Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country

STVI isn't a favorite movie of mine. It's a fine movie, it's not actively bad, but it doesn't have that Trek way where it grabs you and pulls you in. "Guess who's coming to dinner?" Whew that drags the movie down. 1:19:00 I love that you guys love Star Trek III as much as I do. I watch Star Trek II to get to Star Trek III.

If you're curious to see how General Chang lost his eye, watch the intro cutscene for the videogame Star Trek: Klingon Academy, it's pretty cool and adds another layer to the character (live action cutscene).

So what is their favorite TOS movie and I wonder how they gonna like Generations which I actually like.

It wasn’t my favorite but I did like it. I the special edition version a little better. Did u guys watch that version

Ok. Im late to the game, only because I had to digest this reaction. I took your reaction, and just re-watched it now. That “magic” as you call it isn’t there. You’re right. I think we all thought you’d love it because we know you guys love murder mysteries (If I remember correctly). Its purely a political “who done it” story. But there is no exploration of any kind. Maybe that was it? They were really hindered by the budget, and wanted it to be big, but Paramount was stingy because of ST V. Its a good movie. Personally Star Trek 2 and 4 are my favs. Could they somehow have done an actual exploration story with the Klingon/Khitomer link? Im not sure how you’d do it. I was a little rough on you guys at first, the first act is excellent. The 2nd act slows down, and I see that. Then, at least with the battle in the end, it ramps back up a little. But this was the only film that was political, and that isn’t very “Star Treky” in nature, so that could been the problem. Well, good job. Time to move on, but there’s more Trek to enjoy moving forward!

It had been 20 years since I'd seen this. TNG is my home base. So this time when I re-watchec it with you both, one admittedly tiny little thing that jumped out at me is that the Klingons didn't do the death howl when one of them died. It felt like that was a bit of an oversight, or at least a missed opportunity. I'm just curious if anyone else caught that.

Two observations not really about the story or the reaction: I watched on paramount+, and the color correction on my TV and the extremely caked-on makeup made everyone look like our former/future orange overlord. The sync scenes sometimes lined up with Klingon dialogue and the fraction of a second timing offset made for some hilarious echoes that were too enjoyable for me to sync it. Bokh-bokh cha-cha mekh-mekh and so forth. 🙃

I don't have much to add except to say this film is actually rather soberingly accurate, in my experience, in showing how some progressive 20/30-somethings can become biased judgmental 60/70-somethings as the years pass. "Okay boomer" didn't become a thing for no reason. The film would be even more real to life if the crew *didn't* own up their prejudices at the end of the film.

They probably named him Worf so that people KNOW he's related to TNG Worf, because if they named him something like Klunk most people would think it's just a cameo. Plus we have enough info to know that it couldn't be TNG Worf.

Love the back and forth between you two, especially about the "racism".

the "to be or not to be" harkens back to when he said that earlier. From his point of view he sees a treaty with the federation as the end of the klingon empire, so the quote is emphasizing what he thinks the stakes are here to try and give him a bit more characterization then a mustache twirling villian. I get why you think its corny, but its not just a random quote with no meaning

But "vulcans never lie" was shown as BS in the episode its introduced, where Spock uses the legend to stage an elaborate intelligence operation to steal the Romulan cloak. So it's clearly not an actual thing, and while i get its a value of logic, there are times when its logical and ethical to lie.

I think Valaris was supposed to be above suspicion because she was a Vulcan. I feel like this movie does start an overused trope of "evil vulcans" where it goes from "oh, this is surprising" to "actually, vulcans are kind of dicks other then Spock" making you think it was the combination of human and vulcan that made Spock so unique. A problem with Vulcans seems to be there arrogance, where once they are convinced they have arrived at the logical path they will undertake extreme measures along that path, which does sort of make sense with how vulcans used to be before logic and even the romulans.

I feel different about O'Brian hating the Cardassians. I feel that's more... understandable.

with the crew disgusted, yes, it seems out of character, but you have the death of kirk's son and their less human appearance maybe as factors, plus they've presumably never seen a klingon meal

I watched this reaction, never having seen any of the TOS movies or show.

As much as I would've loved to see Saavik again, I can't see her betraying The Federation. It certainly would've been more impactful, though. 6 is right next to 5 for me, which isn't a bad thing. I give it a C+.🖖

Its wild that they think TNG era comes off as MORE militaristic

I really appreciate the lengthy, passionate discussion. I follow you guys (and pay you guys) because you all strike me as legit, authentic, and dedicated to the reaction. I would much rather prefer that you do NOT put on a "face" and fake it. That's what makes it so enjoyable to see y'all's take on the different phases of Trek as a sort of litmus test. That being said, I still maintain my opinion that Star Trek VI is my favorite of the core Trek movies, but--for sure--the plotline does stuff "FOR THE MOVIE" more than for the characters or for the lore. The most obvious bastardization for the sake of storytelling is how extremely prejudicial the main characters have been made after an entire series established them as open-minded. As someone who actually digested the movies BEFORE indulging in TOS, I accepted it at surface value and I like how it makes for compelling drama. Funnily enough, I don't place this film on the same shelf as Wrath of Khan, because I feel both movies have extremely different plotlines. Granted, there are cool-ass space battles in both, but VI is a great deal more forward-moving while II is more slow-paced and contemplative, imo. As for the apparent allergic reaction being had to the Cold War symbolism, you gotta remember when this film came out (1991). The Fall of the Soviet Union was still prevalent in the minds of Western pop culture, and Trek--being a show that began in the 60s when the Cold War was taking shape--probably felt it was their duty to make some commentary on the matter... albeit a tad bit on the nose, I suppose. Anyways, I'm truly glad you both have seen the first six films and I am curious (albeit with a certain degree of schadenfreude) how you'll react to the Next Generation films. Good friggin' luck~

Aww, you didn't like it. :( I loved the Cold War parallels. I do think the weakest parts of the movie were on the Rura Penthe Prison, and General Chang was underutilized.

In the episode The Drumhead, Picard comments to Worf about the importance of vigilance. In that case it was a reference to how easy it really is for an otherwise enlightened society to revert back to a witch hunt mentality. No matter how far you have progressed, that progress is fragile. The difference is in that case Picard remains the voice of reason, whereas in this movie Spock is the only one initially filing that role. It's a bit of a dilemma cause it does make for a compelling character arc for Kirk, but it does go against his traditional role as the voice of reason in TOS. Normally it's an admiral that fills the morally flawed leader role. For the record I support Kirk wrestling with those feelings. I do think him fully embracing them at the beginning is a bit much.

I'm not sure if Alex and Josh are aware yet, but at the time there was a general consensus that only the even numbered Star Trek movies were good. It's fascinating to see how much their ranking differs. I think a lot of the reason why fans forgive the bad writing in these movies really comes down to just being happy to get more time with the characters. The attitude basically comes down to "I still love the universe, so it's fine". Historically I've been quite guilty of that myself. It's really just in the last few years that I've grown skeptical of shows/movies that I grew up loving. It took me hating a Star Wars movie enough to drop the franchise for me to realize how forgiving I had been until then. Some people will get very defensive when it comes to analyzing something they grew up loving. At this point I find it fascinating. It's exactly the reason I'm here.

Star Trek 5 was when the fan narrative developed that “odd-numbered films are bad.” But I’ve always loved 1 and 3.

We've learned our lesson. You will hate DS9, you will hate the rest of TNG, everything sucks from now on. It's all season 1 from here on out. Have no expectations.

Gentlemen, we've come home. Finally, the 2025 equivalent of Siskel and Ebert. I say that with the upmost compliment..Siskel and Ebert were HUGE in their day reviewing movies. This relaxed, inviting format you have and comfortability with each other, able to politely disagree, and this much engagement. I know there are a lot of full-time movie reviewers out there, but-You bring a little more edge.. I feel you could go far beyond Trek reviews and observations. Let's get you national. About the discussion: I am 59. I remember going to see STTMP with my mom who passed away this year when I was 14 years old. So I get the excitement when young like Josh, did with Willy Wonka. I stood in line outside the theater for 2,3 and 4..and remember that excitement for the next movie. I remember 6 feeling like such a good movie when I saw it. But as we age and watch these things back-I feel embarrassed and a little ticked NOW on how they treated my favorite characters. Just like you have shown me with TOS and a few episodes I hated as a kid but now think are something special. With Alex and Josh growing up in the social media age, so much TV, movies saturating everything-you have the advantage of catching everything, the good and the ugly your first run through and see it with different eyes than we did. The movie really missed the mark on some levels-I understand Nimoy got the feather in his cap for the environmental IV and now the Cold War story making peace but..I am sorry but when i grew up my dad was a dick-so Kirk was my hero-that's why I loved the show so early on-but to make him just as racist as my dad..ugh..why do that to my Shat? Now the bad: You have now come to the point where I think you are noticing that the dreaded Corporation that control everything Star Trek are making some Trek that doesn't align with what the fans want or expect or want. It's like my room of Trek stuff - I enjoy collecting things that make no sense. Like Star Trek Bubblegum or Romulan bottled water. Just because it has the Name Star Trek on it....well..doesn't make it Star Trek.. No spoilers or even tainting you on a future movie or series, but obviously there are more movies coming and different series down the road. Some of them adored by the fans and some not so much. This is going to be such an interesting journey with you because maybe some of the movies or series coming up that were disappointing to me - were just my point of view at the time. Just don't pop the bubble on the ones I love Alex and everything will be gravy. I am so kidding! That's half the fun! Thanks Guys!

I actually like almost all TOS movies. I think they are great. Of course I think fifth movie is weakest. I think it is about me liking these movies when I was small kid. So I am not so impartial about these movies.

DS9 is going to be interesting. Without spoiling anything, you will have to either evolve/reevaluate what Star Trek means to you, or you will find it the biggest insult to Roddenberrys vision. I have a feeling that you will despise it at first (esp the first season), but as you get comfortable with the characters, plots, and tone, I DO still think it will be your favorite Trek. I think itll be a slow getting-used-to, but I still hold out hope! Either way, I will be watching your reactions. :)

A lot of good points. I think you both may have slapped the rose colored glasses off of my face for this movie. I never loved it, but I've always liked it pretty well without thinking through a lot of its shortcomings. I will say I still easily prefer it over 5 and I'd rather 6 be their sendoff than that one. Before rewatching all six, I thought of 6 as one of my favorites. As of now, I think the first 3 are my favorites. 1 has grown on me, and I think the newer director's cut / remaster helped with that. 3 has also grown on me, and I'm less into 4 than I used to be. I agree that Trek just doesn't work as well as a movie. TV Trek is best Trek.

TOS was born of the Cold War. Star Trek was always a cold war situation...it wasn't until the TNG era that this changed. The Klingon situation was simply the 1960s on screen. It was born of the 1960s. Cold War parallels aren't some sort of fluke that was only introduced in this movie. It was there from the very beginning. I mean, you guys noticed that the hideously ugly and cartoonishly greedy ferengi were created specifically to be capitalist contrasts to the relatively socialist federation do gooders, right? This stuff was always there. It was never particularly subtle.

OK. Guys. Starfleet is ABSOLUTELY the Federation's Navy. It has a military command structure. A military tradititon. It operates a massive fleet of heavily armed ships that can stand toe to toe with Klingon or Romulan warships. You really need to come to terms with this moving forward....its not going to change... A gigantic space faring civilization with dozens, if not hundreds of worlds and hundreds of billions of citizens, surrounded by expansionist enemies, MUST have a military. It must be able to defend itself. Or it ceases to exist.

I should say, personally when I try to offer up potential reasons for you guys not liking something, I'm more trying to examine factors that may play a role in those feelings in you and others. What difference in perspective lead to the difference in general opinion. It's never been an accusation of "well, you OBVIOUSLY didn't take X, Y & Z into account." But more "I wonder if they did or didn't know or have feelings about X, Y & Z, and if that impacted their viewing?" It's all just my curiosity about differing opinions, which I am glad you are honest in giving, showing and digging into. To be honest, I feel like this sort of divide between what you like and "the fandom" likes is going to happen more often in your journey. Star Trek 6 really is a sign post of fan opinion divisivness. The further you go in, the more contentious the feelings of fans liking or hating entries will be. DS9 was in general largely disregarded by huge swathes of fan when it aired. The series after is loved or hated, depending on how one feels about its potential, and the one after that got a lot of complaints online. And then the modern iterations hit and opinions got even MORE contentuous. It's going to be a facinating, unpredictable journey. And I am. Here. For. It.

Guys. I gripe a lot. But I really appreciate your honest reactions, and your in depth analysis and reasoning for your takes. As for the parallels with the Cold War...the point isn't that these parallels make the movie good... It's that they make it *interesting* ... Make it topical, etc. Making it "good" or not, isn't really the point. That is not what was being said. Good is just subjective. All those parallels are objective. Good is just a matter of whether or not you enjoyed the movie. Drawing those parallels with the real world, though, is extremely central to star trek. Dismissing the value of it to the movie doesn't make a lot of sense in the star trek context.

Having not watched the video yet, but just thinking about my views on the TOS movies: I've long been of the opinion that the top three are 2, 6, and 3, in that order. After rewatching them with you two, I've changed that to 3, 2, and 6.

Can I just say how much I've loved the discussion on this movie, both in the video and in the comments. It is, to coin a phrase, fascinating to hear all the different perspectives on it. As someone who's never liked the movie but is aware of what a great reputation it has, I've found it very enlightening to hear what people do and don't like about it. I'm in some ways surprised and some ways not surprised to discover that it's a much more divisive movie than I ever realised.

😐

You lack a connection to times when the primary evil in the world was governmental/ whole country. Most younger idealists struggle with that. Have been too isolated from the reality. Culturally, the USSR pushed propoganda to hate everything that "The West" stood for. Same with cultures like WWII Germany and Japan. And all the Cold War Communists. Most of the wars we've seen in the last 20-30 years have been splinter extremist factions. In the Trek Universe, Humans and Klingons have been in conflict for hundreds of years. The Klingons are an Empire seeking conquest. So, people who have lived their lives at threat of war would see that as what most/ all members of the opposite represent. Same situation as which Israeli Jews and Muslims view each other, on the primary level. Its about not trusting a radically different culture.

Wait, do Alex and Josh know yet that Kligon foreheads are a genetic trait and that different families have different forehead crests? That not all Klingons are supposed to have the same foreheads?

Oh, the Director's cut does add back in an additional layer or two to the conspiracy, even a whole cut minor character. And I think it adds a bit more in-depth talk about the torpedos. But it also adds some "are you paying attention audience?!" things, though frankly in my late teens early 20s I needed them.

I think initially I WAS leery about your reception to this film given the response to Wrath of Khan. But then "The Wounded" and "Ensign Ro" hit and elements of those are in VI, so I think that got people thinking you'd like this. So I assume that's why no one said anything. NOW I've gone from thinking you'd love DS9 to thinking there's a VERY good chance you won't like it. There's stuff in there you guys have said you don't like. So who knows? As for THE COLD WAR... that was Nimoy's idea for the film. Because he saw that Starfleet and the Klingons were in a Cold War (Cause it's both that specific event, but also a type of war, which isn't confusing at all) and thought it'd be a good way to explore society's feelings on current events through analogy. Much as BSG was emotional catharsis for 9/11. And it raises questions on the validity of media like that when the history isn't so raw as when it was released. Nimoy's whole pitch for the film was "What if the Wall fell in Space?" And at the time that was SUCH an Earth shattering event. 40 years people spent under the threat of 2 superpowers pushing the "End the planet" button with a clear "Those guys are the enemy. Fear them and their ideological differences." Media struggled to cope a bit after that ended. James Bond, other political thriller stories and even the news media suddenly had to find new threats to face, the safety net of familiar fears was gone. Just like how 9/11 kinda changed how mass media was made and watched. Now I work with Russian and Ukrainian immigrants. I think THAT is what gives this film it's feeling of finality to fans. It's not just the end of an era of history in the real world and fictional history in the franchise, it's our heroes ushering in that era, ensure it gets born, and then bowing out, flying into the sunset now that all those cold war narratives that had been the cornerstone of mass media for decades, and a large portion of what Trek was commenting on, was over. The TOS crew were heroes of the Cold War era, and now that war was over, and so was their time. And unlike Bond and the rest, they didn't fight it. They gracefully bowed out knowing their time was done. Knowing the Next Generation would take up the mantle.

FYI, regarding Lawrence Konner and Mark Rosenthal - all of their ideas were so terrible that every single thing they came up with was removed before filming. The studio forced those two on the team, and those two sued successfully to get credit even though everything they came up with was tossed.

You've just created a safe space for all the Star Trek fans who don't actually like 6 at all. That's cool lol. I actually did not grow up during the Cold War, I have no particularly magical memory of seeing this movie. I don't even remember when I first watched it. It's been a while since I saw all the movies. I sat down and rewatched all these films with some friends who had never seen them and I still think it's the best Trek movie and I wasn't alone. So I'm just a tad frustrated at how many comments I'm seeing about how it's good if you grew up during the Cold War. I just think it's good lmao

Ever since you started Star Trek I have always loved the discussion aspects. Most of us have seen Star Trek so many times and have discussed it with our friends/family to the point that there is no more discussion to be had for it (at least for classic trek). So no matter how much you like or dislike an episode or movie, I will always appreciate and enjoy your nuanced discussions and your honest opinions whether they align with the majority or not (Star Trek 4 is my fav ToS movie which is def not up there amongst most fans).

Many flaws in this film. Why did they just sit there and wait for the Klingon cloaked ship to hit them? Maybe fire phasers and torpedoes in a spread to try and hit them.

I appreciate the in depth discussion immensely everything that was said was true. It was a two year pair I believe from Star Trek V to Star Trek VI in that time I believe they could have gone with Nimoy instead of Meyer and arrived at a far better conclusion with him at the helm as he did (as director) Star Trek III and IV. Star Trek III and IV I view as book ends of Star Trek II TWOK. And those movies elevate the gravity of that movie and place redeeming elements of hope, exploration, adventure and enduring friendship in place of sorrow, loss, revenge and combat. Star Trek VI is dark and angst as the 90s was sometimes prone to being and so is it both a product of the times and a lesser writing effort ? Both can be true Star Trek is not a sacred cow..we love something that much that's why it can fall short and we care enough to critique it.

One interesting aside from all of the film reactions/discussions from you two is that you harp on the uniforms, and even though you prefer the original colorful shirts from the series you do seem to enjoy the TMP suits. And I don't remember hearing this from any of the videos, maybe I missed it somewhere, but 2-6 uniforms are just the TMP hero jackets dyed red. Jumping in to drop some OFFICIAL POWER RANKINGS I guess: I. 1 == 6: The alpha and omega. TMP has fantastic model wankery and some pretty sweet music (main suite was even lifted and sped up to be TNG's opening theme obviously) and just seeing the cast again, on the big screen no less, forgives all other sins in my mind. The 25th and 30th anniversary edition cuts have elevated this film in my mind, as it was middling with the original theatrical cut. Undiscovered Country was just enough of a send off for me to forgive any real major mistakes, and the minor stuff like recasts without proper rewrites were just par for the course at the time. Fully driven by nostalgia and the whole thing ending. Anyone who has a problem with a rose tinted take can quite frankly get fucked. II. Wrath of Khan was the second chance the franchise needed on film and the direct continuation of an episode model is completely fine for me. Good music, good stunt gags, great showdown, and the whole thing had a western showdown vibe to it while they screamed the classics at each other. III. Search for Spock was a bit of a cop out for me narratively, but I understand that the franchise would not have survived without Spock and that ignoring the Genesis project's tech was not an option with this fanbase. Would've been better if they toned down the scope of the project in II, but what are you going to do? Lloyd's Klingon performance was a mixed bag for me at the time just because of his harsh accent but especially after rewatching it after seeing BTTF/Buckaroo Bonzai (and Postman/Cuckoo later on). It was fine, the original version, but the remaster definitely elevates this like TMP. IV. Final Frontier had some...interesting stuff, I guess. Wasn't as bad as the critics said at the time, but also wasn't a cohesive vision. Only reason it's not last is because the one with the fucking whales exists. V. Voyage Home has some excellent shots of the bird of prey and that's it. Lazy horseshit written for the everyman to hopefully get more butts in seats. This is the peak of cynicism in this run of films for me, even worse than the Assignment: Earth in my mind. Time travel gimmick, particularly in TOS and its flicks, is awful. Nuke the whales.

I don’t know if you’ll see this, but I appreciate your honesty—even when I don’t agree. (Though, you and I do agree about this movie.) I’m a storyteller, currently finalizing work on my dark fantasy trilogy. Honest analysis of story arcs and character arcs is incredibly important to me.

Here's a take from a real non-trek fan... https://youtu.be/Bzgf9-ezRXE?si=N55U74hgx3OBs7iY

Wow. 100 minutes of my favorite aspect of your channel…the DISCUSSION! 💜 🖖

I do think this movie is better if you grew up during any aspect of the Cold war. Josh and Alex hadn't been born yet when the Soviet Union dissolved.

I still don't get liking Motion Picture...other than the transporter death scene it has nothing memorable.

Snarky Alex is my favorite Alex lol

Hold the phone. Did Alex say that he rewatched the movie at 1.5 speed? I’m sorry but if you’re going to critique a movie you can’t do that and still experience the movie as it’s meant to be seen. A little like reading the Cliff Notes to a book instead of reading the book.

I still love this movie but watching your critique does make me look at some aspects in a different light. For me it will always have that magic as I was about 8 when I first watched it, I loved how real it seemed with both the acting and the visuals, especially the ship interiors and external models 😘👌. I remember pausing the video for hours so I could make a Lego USS Excelsior. Watching again, the first act is perfect, the 2nd act drags (I now remember fast forwarding the VHS tape we had) and the 3rd act is too short. There’s too much detail over the assassination evidence, I’d rather they build tension over the peace summit and the ramifications of what would happen if the President were assassinated. I never noticed before how long the guy took to assemble his sniper before, and it seems odd he’d need a massive scope to snipe the president who was 10 metres from the window. I still think they had no clue why they randomly added Worf, this always confused me and I first assumed he was just really old in TNG. Star Trek was never good for continuity… All in all I’m always going to love it but I can see why you guys were disappointed.

Originally, Chekov was going to be one of the conspirators.... but Roddenberry had a cow.... so they respected his opinion, and walked away from this idea.

The studio wanted Saavik to return. Sorry to use AI for this, but I'm multitasking, and have limited time: Saavik was originally intended to be the conspirator in Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country. Here's the breakdown of why that changed: Original Script Intent: In early drafts of the script, Saavik, a beloved Vulcan character introduced in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, was planned to be part of the conspiracy to assassinate Chancellor Gorkon and sabotage peace efforts with the Klingons. Kristie Alley's Refusal to Return: Kristie Alley portrayed Saavik in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan but declined to reprise the role in subsequent films due to contract disputes and career decisions. Decision Against Robin Curtis: By the time Star Trek VI was being developed, the studio and filmmakers decided they did not want Robin Curtis to return. This could have been due to a desire for a fresh take on the character or perceived differences in reception between her portrayal and Alley's. Creation of Valeris: To avoid tarnishing the legacy of Saavik—a character well-loved by fans—the writers opted to create a new Vulcan character, Valeris, played by Kim Cattrall. Valeris became the traitorous Starfleet officer in the story, fulfilling the role initially intended for Saavik. Fan Backlash Avoidance: The decision to replace Saavik with Valeris also avoided potential backlash from fans who might have objected to seeing Saavik, a trusted ally in previous films, betray the Federation.

I agree with both of you. No magic in this movie. It's a fine movie... But it didn't have the HEART of the series ... or even the heart of the MOVIE series. Alex also explained how the movie wasn't much of a "who done it" mystery angle. It was all obvious. And I can't get emotionally involved by how a new character, like Valeris.... betrayed.... what, precisely? MY trust? MY expectation? Nah, I wasn't there for it. We see Spock offended, or disappointed, or whatever. Okay, I can feel badly for HIM.... but my emotions are a tad removed from the offense itself. (In what Valeris does.)

Thanks for showing my take during the Saavik talk, I stand by that opinion. Would she still have been a fairly obvious suspect? Sure. Would it have a much greater impact on the franchise? Yes, and it would have been awesome. Someone both Spock and Kirk trusted betraying them. She would have made sense to "replace" Spock as he says. And while I certainly like Kim Cattrel's performance, Robin Curtiss is the perfect Vulcan actress and would have elevated those scenes and I would have enjoyed her take on the mind meld interrogation. It also would have brought back around the "a lie?" type of questions she asks Spock from Wrath of Khan but flipped around. While I think the whodunnit aspect as-is is rather obvious, I do really enjoy the thought that Valeris was the one who planted the boots in Crewman Dax's locker as the fall guy, only for it to blow up in her face when they see his feet.

Wow I can’t believe people saw that as Worf, including the big fans that you said. Now sure, back in the day we knew it because the press told us, but the name “Colonel Worf” and the fact he doesn’t look just like TNG Worf made it obvious I think. And his age. I will grant you it maybe would make more sense if Klingons had last names. 🙂

I agree with just about everything you said here. I will say that the only clue the Lawyer Worf isn't the same Worf is the brow plate. The bump pattern is different from TNG Worf and you can pretty reliably see those patterns like fingerprints.

Star TMP Directors 4K edition is a very different cut to the original version. Some things added, some subtracted. I was pretty indifferent as a kid. It dragged. It doesn’t now.

There is way too much emphasis on whether or not people lived during this time or that time and history. I did not live in cowboy times or ancient Rome, but I still love a bunch of westerns and the Spartacus tv show.

I’ve completely lost my perspective on these movies now. I’ve watched them all so many times I neither love or hate any of them. 😂

This discussion washed away the slightly sour taste your reaction video left me with. You seemed bored and it ended a bit abruptly and I thought that was it, end of. I should've known this was coming to sweeten the deal. Thanks guys.

I have to ask the people who say Kirk’s attitude towards Klingons is perfectly understandable - where was that attitude in Final Frontier? None of the hatred of Klingons he shows in VI was there in V - to me, it is just a plot contrivance that ignores previous character experiences, rather than being a good follow up to them

Alex keeps coming back to "there's no bigotry on the bridge," but I would point out that the bigotry in that instance was from a subordinate under his command, who was aiming it at Kirk's very close friend Spock. That changes it a little. Plus, the Klingons (one of whom killed Kirk's son) have been gunning for Kirk ever since ST3. Their ambassador literally called for his execution in IV. Captain Klaa attacked the Enterprise for NO reason except to kill Kirk in V. Don't you think it would become personal after a while?

I think you nailed why I like it but you guys don’t: I love all the paramilitary realism in 2 and 6. Like how in this it looks like a naval ship and we see the lower deck stuff. Dunno why. Just always liked it. Maybe cause I’m a ship nerd.

Knowing history is not the same as living through it. Josh & Alex are good guys, but they're still a product of their generation. They cannot understand what it was like to suddenly have the cold war end (40 years of war to end without warning). Just like how future generations won't understand what it was like on 9/11. Knowing facts doesn't generate feelings. Also, I really believe the rate they are watching, is having an effect. What they've watch in 1.5 years, took us 12 years. That, and they're crazy.; If anybody in my click said Star Trek 5 is better than Star Trek 6, their credentials would've been stripped and they would've been mocked relentlessly.

I think the hate they have is similar to what NFL fans feel about fans and or players for the other teams. It’s a deeper level because the fight is life and death. We have tried to evolve past hating the people and more hating the leaders of those entities. Also I know you are focused on the ‘Ism from the star fleet cast but it was just as bad the other way from the Klingons too. This was mutual hate on both sides. Does it make it right , nope. But it’s actually a very natural arc to have hate and learn from it. You’ll see a similar arc in rocky when he fights in Russia etc.

I think we all need to start De-Hyping DS9, it's totally meh, you might like it..... Oh and this movie probably has my favorite sound track of all the movies.

Gene Roddenberry would agree with you guys in that Star Fleet was about exploration and hated the military angle as time went on, especially for the movies, but Meyer and Paramount wanted a different take.

This is moreso regarding Josh's final few words in the video as a whole rather than about Star Trek VI, but I wanna say that I personally appreciate you guys. I'm only 20 years old and no one my age loves Star Trek (both TOS and TNG) like I do, so seeing you guys, roughly being the same age as me, digging so deep into Trek is so cool to see and engage in. You two really rekindled my love for the franchise in the past year or so.

Unfortunately or fortunately you are spot on about Valeris(Kim Cattrall from Sex in the City) and Saavik( Robin Curtis) they did retcon it because they had plans for Saavik. It is inferred more maybe implied but confirmed later in the Pon Farr scene with young Spock they mated. And another redaction from the Voyage Home where she stayed behind she was supposedly pregnant with Spock's child. That was what I heard the reasoning was later on and I had also heard Gene Roddenberry saw an advance preview of some of the shooting of this before he died. And he didn't like this movie at all. But yes the Berlin Wall came down about two years BEFORE this movie so this movie for whatever the reason used the symbolism of that event and combined the Chernobyl event which I believe was close in years to that part of the history as well.

This is why I love the target audience and Josh and Alex. We can all sit down and listen to an almost two hour discussion about a star trek movie and agree or disagree, but at the end of the day no one does this unless we actually care about and Love this show and their characters. The idea that Josh and Alex are just saying they hate something just to troll their viewers is crazy talk. What kind weird of long con would that even accomplish? We all love ST for different reasons and TA is no different. Thanks for being Passionate, Genuine, and self aware.

I think you're points about the comments are valid. What you see in the comments coming through as higher grades I attribute to the "nostalgia" factor: where and when people first saw the thing. That factor boosts their/our grades.

I for one thought Kim Cattrall was terribly miscast in this. I don’t think she succeeded in creating a three-dimensional character. She did do a good job in the mind meld scene though.

You're both right: we should have seen this coming after your reaction to Wrath of Khan. For me, I felt kind of disappointed and letdown when it first came out, but would still have given it a B/B-. Over time, I have come to "forgive" it and like it a little more, but would still not give it more than a B+. You both did a good a job pointing out some flaws, and there are others that bothered me (like Shatner being too Shatner-esque in his portrayal, dialog being to espositional from Chekov and Valeris, etc.). The main thing that saved it for me were the scenes with Sulu and the Klingon courtroom scene.

I see EXACTLY what they are saying and I agree with it. However all of the TOS interactions with Klingons Kirk has had Koloth in the Trouble with Tribbles. Kang..the Day of The Dove. Kor( John Colicos) from the Errand of Mercy. All of those interaction were tense and distrusting not out and out hatred. But it is clear we can't be friends here because of the opposing ideologies of conquest and expansion and territoriality vs humanitarian aid, exploration and peaceful colonization and alliances.

One thing that I love about 6 that I was a bit surprised didn't come up at all during either the watch or the discussion is the score. I love the opening theme with the slowly ratcheting cello and choral notes, culminating in the explosion of Praxis. I think the action theme adds some nice tension to the battle sequences. I like the soft, tinkly, nostalgic stuff that plays over the epilogue. It's not necessarily the best of the TOS film soundtracks, and there's some really nice stuff to come, but it is a good dynamic score. Just curious if people have thoughts, especially since Josh has said he's a big score guy.

Introspecting a bit here, and this isn't directly about Star Trek 6, but about media in general, as it was touched on towards the end of your discussion of the Rura Penthe arc: I tend to give more weight to what I love about a film than what I dislike about it (and this applies to tv shows, music, videos games), even if it's not the best approach for constructive criticism The negatives will still have impact in my mental calculus so to speak, to some extent, but it's like a rigged scale where I purposefully don't allow the negatives to overwhelm the good unless they're truly overflowing (like "Justice" from Season 1) To be clear I'm not saying this is objectively the best approach, from a critical standpoint is certainly not. If everyone was like me, there'd be less pressure on studios, artists, game developers etc... to improve. And I think that's what I love about listening to your takes most. You shine a spotlight into corners of a show that I've tuned out. The more you talk about it, the more I see what you mean, and it opens new caverns into my own psyche. It's like a non-addictive drug. (Oh, what am I kidding - this is all highly addictive.

I think a Paramount studio suit made Meyer use Worf as a tie- in to TNG . But you’re probably right in that he had no idea who Dorn or Worf were.

What i appreciate is that you guys are honest, if there is something you don't like you say so, which a lot of reactors don't. Not everyone is going to like the same things. As i said in a previous reaction this isn't just my favourite Star Trek film, it's my ninth favourite movie of all. I did think you'd love it more, but i understand the reasons you explained you didn't, even though i think very differently. For me this is faultless. There are some moments of dialogue i often rewind a few times when i watch this. We might have agreed about Darmok, but not this😋. I'm now worried you'll hate DS9.

Klingon makeup: My theory is they had so many top and/or name brand actors and those actors demanded or thought heavy makeup would interfere with the performance. I can imagine actors thinking they can’t act in heavy makeup but in this case it was misguided, for instance Tony Todd looked great in heavy Klingon makeup and did an amazing acting job in the makeup, as did many of the TNG Klingon Civil War arc actors (K’mpec for instance).

In case you guys didn’t catch this: the actor who played Gorkon, David Warner, played the human Federation representative on Nimbus III in Star Trek V. Also, the Klingon interpreter who provided the English translation during the trial was played by Todd Bryant who also played Captain Klaa (the Klingon captain) in Star Trek V.

Iman was married to David Bowle. If you don’t know who he is check out YT.

Alex did you wear that shirt on purpose??? 🤣

Nicholas Meyer directed the 1979 movie “Time After Time”. Great movie. You guys will probably hate it though.

In perfect agreement with you guys on the fact it should’ve been Saavik. Just a much better storytelling choice. And good point that you wouldn’t have suspected her as quick as Valeris.

“Their version of Avengers Endgame” 😂 It’s the other way around. Endgame borrowed from this movie with the signatures at the end.

Chang's final words and death scene are absolute cinema

To our defense, it's been years since you saw Star Trek 2. You've gotten a lot more viewers since then. That's about when I started watching you. And, we were probably under a false sense of security that you've grown and matured since then. ;

I don’t think there was racism regarding the Klingons. If this was the Soviet Union we are talking about a culture and political structure. The movie still works for me but its impact is not what it was. This was a movie that opened only a few years after the fall of the Berlin Wall and Desert Storm. Current events definitely made an impact.

I wish my Patron take would have been something like this: “while I enjoy the movie for nostalgic reasons, there are superior and even inferior Trek films I choose to watch before revisiting The Undiscovered Country. Nicholas Meyer’s approach to Star Trek is jaded and cynical, and that cynicism is on full display here. He made an angry and depressing Star Trek movie which is a disservice to the legacy of the original cast. I wanted to have fun, but there is no fun or joy in this movie.”

The Rua Penthe section is a highlight of the movie. It is not universally disliked.

❤️

Well, if Patrick Stewart did play his paternal grandfather, his name would be Picard.

Yes, Saavik would have been a better choice over Valeris. It’s so obvious they switched them out when you hear Spock’s exposition about who she is. Missed opportunity.

I was totally confused when it was said that TNG has a more military feel. That's the show where children roam the ship, the restaurant is a main set, their day to day life is so unthreatenng that the captain can spend hours on end playing VR video games, and we watch them attend painting and violin classes when they're not visiting the day care center.

I think Gene Roddenberry would agree with Alex about the racist attitude of Star Fleet. He was very optimistic and idealistic about the human race. Meyer and others thought that even 300 years would not be enough to change human behavior.

Lol there’s literally no one else other than Josh and Alex who thinks that the addition of Colonel Worf is a complete fail. All you had to do was connect the dots to realize it wasn’t the character from TNG. It’s 80 years before TNG, TNG Worf’s name is literally said as “Worf, son of Mogh” multiple times, and even in our society there is a tradition of passing down family names. By naming him anything other than Worf, there would have been no evidence that he was an ancestor of the TNG character.

Ok, fine. You guys are going to hate DS9.

Your level of dislike for this film is a bit ridiculous. The Klingon make up is absolutely fine. Michael Dorn being Worf’s grandfather was absolutely intentional. I think you’ve just moved on and your hearts lie with TNG, which is entirely fine, it’s a better series.

About Kirk’s favorite author—unlike Picard, I can recall seeing Kirk read a book only once, when Spock gave him a copy of Charles Dickens’s “A Tale of Two Cities”—interesting if this movie had been full of Dickens quotes —“Bah, humbug, let the Klingons die!” —“Are there no prisons? Are there no workhouses? There’s one on Rura Penthe!!!!” —“No one is useless in this world who can learn to speak Klingon from a book in real time!” — “I hate the Klingons against reason, against promise, against peace, against hope, against happiness, against all discouragement that could be.” —“Never close your lips to those who have already changed shape twice.” —“Assassinating Chancellor Gorkon is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done.”

I am total fine with Alex' disinterest in the cold war. But he has to understand that in 11991 this wasn't history. It was history in the making. Gorbachev stepped down 19 days AFTER the release of the movie. The Soviet Union seized to exist 6 days after that.

I kind of like it when you guys hate something and you can explain in detail why with rational explanations. I like having different opinions. One of my biggest pet peeves is when I’m criticising something and the other person comes back with “you should just stop watching.” I’m sorry, no, that’s not a good answer for using your brains and discretion to evaluate something.

YES!!! Love for the Motion Picture uniforms. I always hated the thick woollen red uniforms.

I took Colonel Worf as it being Worf’s grandfather or ancestor that settled on Khitomer, tying it in to his family being on Khitomer when the Romulans attacked. It would make sense for Worf to be named after his grandfather. But the Scooby Doo scene cut at the end showed Colonel Worf at the conference. My assumption was that he stayed or came back to Khitomer.

I’m only 5 minutes in so I haven’t watched the discussion yet. Your intro skit is worth the price of admission it was priceless, I’d be OK if you put the mic down till February and that’s all I got. I was disappointed during your reaction for a different reason than most of the comments I’ve read. There seemed to be only passing recognition of the movie in the context of Kirk’s emotional journey after a lifetime of fighting Klingons, losing his only son who he had just found out about, and his deep unreasoning hatred and bigotry against them as a race regardless of individuals. This was of course a deliberate context in the movie and they hit us over the head with it many times (“if there is to be a peace between our races, people like us will have the hardest time living in it”). As far as I’m concerned the entire movie rotates about Kirk’s emotional journey, quite explicitly, and all the scenes were built around that skeleton. I look forward to the discussion but wanted to write about this before getting clouded by hearing everyone else’s takes.

Further proof that people don't always support channels that always agree with them. I found your reaction and discussion to Undiscovered Country to be eye-opening. This is why I watch your videos... for that perspective that I don't have. It's hard for me to separate not just nostalgia but generational zeitgeist when evaluating film and TV. You guys, not having lived through the Cold War and its (alleged) end, have a very different perspective and I think your perspective has value.

They never had to watch 'Sex and the City' with their girlfriends. That's for sure. Ah, the advantages of youth. LOL

I didn’t contribute to the take s but here’s mine . I actually loved where I saw it and it’s one of the movies I like . It was just a good movie that’s all

It’s stated by the Klingon ambassador at the beginning of Star Trek IV that the Federation was negotiating a peace treaty with the Klingons when Kruge did what he did. Also, the young officer who awakens Sulu in the shadows is a famous actor. There’s a longer version of this movie, by the way, which has Kirk’s speech at the end being longer, expressing more of the theme. Also, Chang’s comment during the trial — “Don’t wait for the translation” — came from a real trial during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

To respond to your question about my comment, it breaks down like this: everything up to and including the guards speech before entering Rura Penthe: S. Everything until they get beamed back to the Enterprise: C. The final act: A. Final score: A.

I might have felt what you felt. This comes from the perspective of a 49 year old fan who began really with the fourth movie in 1986-87. This sixth film seemed polished visually. There’s a technology too reminiscent of TNG. The dialogue may have been too pat. Single lines. With exceptions, the scenes were not classic Trek moments. They didn’t stand out as memorable.

Good chat. Listening while on the elliptical and when you got to, “Chang is the worst villain” I was so annoyed I tripled my speed. :)

Haha. You guys are a hoot.

First off, Josh is crushing it with the nostalgia factor - seeing this as a teenager was mindblowing and rewatching it with you, did I change my mind? No. There are a few weird edits and clunky lines but I still love it with all my heart. I could go with the Rura Penthe sequence losing a good 5 minutes but I don't hate it. The Klingon racism I think also is 100% valid, on-brand for the time, and a good way to flesh out things that one could have assumed but hadn't been explicitly stated on screen before. I wonder if 4.5 years of TNG leading up to this and having Worf and a more "neutral" at least Klingon-Federation relationship have tainted some views. Clearly the Klingons were entirely reinvented for the film franchise and since then, we've seen them get ganked by Vger, kill everyone on a science station and Kirk's son, and then chase the Enterprise through the galactic barrier to try and kill Kirk. Why wouldn't he absolutely fucking hate them? "Let them die" all the way, I think it's the most believable line of the movie.

I’m curious to know why Alex complains about the ‘Scooby-Doo’ mystery when that aspect was in the directors cut rather than the theatrical cut you’ve watched

I was fully expecting the start if this to be along the lines of: Josh: “Alex?” Alex: “I prefer it dark.” Josh: “So why do you have a light shining on your face?” Seriously, watch the original scene again… 🤣

Brilliant skit at the beginning love it lol Also could I ask, is some of the loss of excitement over the movie due to moving on to and being more fully invested in tng? So by the time you’ve got to 6 it’s oh and here’s the og’s, ok