Friday, July 8, 2016

Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home

When they finished writing the script for “Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home,” released in 1986, they must have had so many pointless smirks on their faces. This is easily the most convoluted of the “Star Trek” stories – however, strangely enough, it is also the best, the funniest and the most enjoyable in laymen’s terms. Roger Ebert admitted, “I'm relieved that nothing like restraint or common sense stood in their way.”

The movie starts with some unfinished work from the previous movie, including the Klingon ambassador’s protests before the Federation Council. These scenes don’t have much to do with the rest of the movie, but they give a certain encouragement (like, how Ebert described, “James Bond's ritual flirtation with Miss Moneypenny”) that the series remembers it has a history.

The Starship Enterprise team is still stuck on Vulcan with the Klingon starship they confiscated in “Star Trek 3.” They choose to return home on this alien ship, but on the way they find a strange deep-space inquiry. It is sending out signals in some strange language which, when translated, turns out to be the song of the humpback whale.

It’s around this mark that the script talks must have really taken off. See if you can wrap your head around this: The Enterprise team decides that the inquiry is targeting on Earth, and if no humpback songs are responded, the planet could be destroyed. Therefore, the team’s mission becomes this: Because humpback whales are extinct in the 23rd Century, they must travel back in time to the 20th century, steal some humpback whales, and return with them to the future – which will save Earth. Ebert said, “After they thought up this notion, I hope the writers lit up cigars.”

No matter how questionable the story is, it gives what is probably the best of the “Star Trek” movies so far, directed with cool professionalism by the late Leonard Nimoy. What happens is that the Enterprise team land their Klingon starship in San Francisco’s Golden Gate Park, cloak it with an invisibility shield, and separate into the teams through the Bay area looking for humpback whales and a complete source of reduced nuclear power.

What makes their search entertaining is we already know the members of this team really well. That cast’s laidback contact is unique among movies, because it hasn’t been figured out in a few weeks of rehearsal or shooting. By the time this movie was released, it was the 20th anniversary of “Star Trek,” and most of these actors have been working together for most of their professional lives. These characters know one another.

For example, Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock visit a Sea World-type aquarium, where two humpback whales are held in custody. Catherine Hicks (who played the mother in the horrendous “7th Heaven” show), as Gillian, the marine biologist in charge, plans to release the whales, and the Enterprise team need to find out her plans so they can recapture the whales and go back to the future.

Obviously, this requires the two men to ask Gillian out to dinner.

She asks if they like Italian food, and Kirk and Spock do a wonderful little verbal jazz based on the running joke that Spock, as a Vulcan, cannot tell a lie. Ebert advised, “Find another space opera in which verbal counterpoint creates humor.”

The stories of the previous “Star Trek” have focused around dramatic villains, such as Khan, the feared genius in “Star Trek 2.” This time, the villains are faceless: the international hunters who continue to follow and kill whales despite clear signs they will annihilate these decent mammals from the Earth. “To hunt a race to extinction is not logical,” Spock calmly observes, but we see shocking footage of whalers doing just that.

Instead of giving a single human villain as counterpoint, “Star Trek 4” gives a heroine, in Hicks. She obviously is moved by the dilemma of the whales, and although at first she understandably questions Kirk’s story that he comes from the 23rd Century, eventually she joins in the mission and even claims on returning to the future with them, because of course, without the humpback whales, the 23rd Century also doesn’t have humpback whale experts.

There are some major action scenes in the movie, but they aren’t the highlights. The “Star Trek” series has always depended more on human contact and thoughtful, cause-leaning stories. What happens in San Francisco is must more interesting that what happens in outer space, and this movie, which might seem to have an unlikely and inconvenient plot, is actually the smartest and satisfying “Star Trek” film so far.

I liked this better than 2, just like James Rolfe admits. The environmental message in this movie was needed at the time, and they pulled it off perfectly. Plus, the comedy in this movie is the best of all of them thus far, especially with how the crew is trying to fit in the 20th Century. Nimoy really followed this movie up from 3 very well, so it ended the trilogy very well. Now, when I mean “Trek Trilogy,” I mean 2, 3 and 4. These three are connected very well to one another and I highly recommend everyone to check this one out. If you liked 2 and 3, you’ll love this one, I promise you.

Look out next Monday when I review what Trekkies and regular moviegoers like to call the worst “Star Trek” movie. Trust me, I’m not looking forward to it either.

6 comments:

  1. Great review. I agree this film was really funny and I didn`t mind the environmental message as some people did. I do prefer II and VI as I thought they were more thematically rich and exciting. I really like how this completed the Star Trek trilogy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's fine, I just found myself to thoroughly enjoy this one more. It did cap off the Trek Trilogy well, and the environmental message is still needed today, and it still holds up by today's standards

      Delete
    2. Yes this one was very funny and enjoyable. I heard some critics dislike it because it is a comedy but some Original Series episodes were comedies and it gave us something different. The Motion Picture was a serene, cerebral film, Wrath of Khan a revenge thriller and war film, Search For Spock a space opera and adventure film, and this was a time travel comedy. I think they were all good in their own and added something new. Motion Picture took inspiration from 2001, this film from Back To The Future, Wrath of Khan from Moby Dick and Paradise Lost, and Search For Spock felt the most like Star Wars. They all mixed the old with the new.

      Delete
    3. That's actually a great analysis and comparison you made on the first four films. I never thought of it in that sort of a way. I didn't know that critics disliked this film, but I was thoroughly enjoying it. James Rolfe said it best that this was all about communication and the environmental message in this movie still holds up today

      Delete
    4. Thank you. Some of these points were also made by other critics. There was one who defended nearly all of the odd numbered films while also really loving II, VI and First Contact. He made the point that Generations and Resurrection integrated humour into the larger dramatic narrative but they were more truly sci fi than this film. I liked both Generations and Resurrection, but this one was great as well. So were II, III, VI, First Contact, and I think even the Motion Picture was good. I think each off them had its own quality. Some critics disliked this one. Thankfully most of them liked it. I agree. I think this film holds up very well. I think they all do to a degree.

      Delete
    5. That's fine that you do, I have no problem with people thinking that. I just think that I get everyone when they say that most of the odd-numbered ones are bad, but this one was actually very entertaining and really hit a home run with the environmental message, which makes it a powerhouse film in the franchise

      Delete