Theatrical Release Date:June 8, 1989 Release Date:September 6, 2006 Availability:Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Synopsis:
When the starship Enterprise's shakedown cruise goes poorly, Captain Kirk and crew put it into Spacedock for repairs. But an urgent mission interrupts their Earth-bound shore leave. A renegade Vulcan named Sybok has taken several ambassadors hostage on the planet Nimbus III, which attracts the attention of a Klingon captain who wants to make a name for himself. Sybok's rag-tag army captures the Enterprise and takes it on a journey to the center of the galaxy in search of the Supreme Being. The Enterprise is called to Nimbus III, the Planet of Intergalactic Peace. They are to negotiate in a case of kidnapping, only to find out that the kidnapper is a relative of Spock. This man is possessed by his lifelong search for the planet Shaka-Ri, which is supposed to be the source of all life. Together they begin to search for this mysterious planet. It's Stardate 8454.130 and vacationing Captain Kirk faces two challenges: climbing Yosemite's El Capitan and teaching campfire songs to Spock. But vacations are cut short when a renegade Vulcan hijacks the Enterprise, and pilots it on a journey to uncover the universe's innermost secrets.
What is this film really about...?September 7, 2010 Adam B. Krenn(Las Vegas, NV United States) This film suffers from a cheesy script, absurd situations and a somewhat campy feel (more so than other "Treks"). Does this make the film bad? Sure the Klingons look like Glam-Rock rejects and Sybok was not a fully developed character (nor would he have been if Sean Connery played him) despite him being Spock's half-brother. This Trek film is a conglomeration of other Trek cliches' all rolled up into one. Blame Harve Bennett or blame William Shatner. Heck, blame Paramount for even allowing the film to be made. But for all of these flaws and any "blame" one may want to assign, it is vitally important, as a TOS Star Trek fan, to understand what this film is really about; The relationships of the seven main characters based off of a lifelong professional career and friendship (much like the actual actors themselves). More importantly it is about the original Star Trek triumvirate's relationship with each other. The mutual love, respect and whatever other adjective may apply, built over decades of adventuring, working, living and dying with each other (or, more precisely; the actors similar, if not so serious yet real, relationships through the years).
The film is not without its shining moments; The entire scene with Sybok attempting to put the whammy on(Okay, help) McCoy, Spock and Kirk and the questioning Sybok's idea of god, to name a couple.
As bad as the film is it shines in these areas, despite the aforementioned script, situations and camp. As a fan, I feel it defines the same characters and their relationships making previous and post films (regarding these characters specifically) feel more complete because of it. In the end, is this such a bad thing?
When Shatner directs...December 21, 2009 jackbauerfan 0 out of 1 found this review helpful
...this is what we get. A long, cheesy, terrible episode of the television show. You know the odd numbered rule about the Star Trek movies? It really applies to this movie. This was just absolutely horrible. The plot, the effects, the conflict, the unfulfilling ending...man. Horrible. But I'm not going to spend this review talking about how bad this movie was. I'm going to talk about how it could have been good, and how they wasted so much potential.
The movie starts off with a guy riding through a desert on some horse-like animal. He comes up to a little bald guy defending some holes in the sand. The stranger gets off the horse thing and tells the bald guy to "share your pain with me". The bald guy starts crying because he has absolutely no hair at all. The stranger, whose name is Sybok, is then revealed to be a Vulcan. When the bald guy comments on this, Sybok starts laughing like a nut. We then cut to William Shatner trying to scale his own ego. He, Spock, and Bones are on shore leave and have decided to spend it camping. They have a scene where they try to teach campfire songs to Spock. Many people hated this scene, but I thought it was kind of funny. This is interrupted, however, because a hostage situation has developed at Nakatomi...uh...some planet. The Vulcan from the opening scene has captured the capital city, and has captured three important officials, a Romulan, a human, and a Klingon. Enterprise has been ordered to take direct action, even though the new ship is literally falling apart. The admiral says that they need an experienced captain to settle the problem, no matter what the status of his ship is. This felt kind of contrived to me. If they wanted an experienced captain, why didn't they just beam Kirk over to a ship that was working properly? Because then we wouldn't have had all that suspense with them having to do their jobs in spite of the ship's problems.
So they get to the planet and fight their way into the Vulcan guy's city. They get to the hostages, but it turns out that the hostages have all "shared their pain" with Sybok, and are now loyal to him. The whole thing was a plan of Sybok's to capture a starship which will aid him on his "quest". We don't know what that is yet. So the boarding party is forced to fly the shuttle back to the Enterprise. You see, the transporters on the ship aren't working. Also, a Klingon commander is after the Enterprise. He wants Kirk. The Klingons still have a grudge against Kirk for blowing up the Klingons when they were trespassing on his ship. So the shuttle makes it into the hangar just before the klingon ship attacks them. I know many people hate this scene, but I actually liked it. As they are getting off the shuttlecraft, Kirk jumps Sybok. Sybok overpowers him, but Spock grabs a gun and has a chance to kill Sybok. He does not, however. Instead, he allows Sybok to take the gun from him he is recaptured.
Now let's review here. At this point, I thought the movie was okay. You have a pretty interesting conflict going on. A Vulcan who appears to be delusional is in possession of the Enterprise. And he and Spock appear to know each other. Spock refused to kill him, which makes him a very personal enemy for Spock. We don't know exactly what Sybok wants with the ship, but they could have made him a crazy terrorist leader or something. They could have made this about Spock having to overcome his feelings towards Sybok and help Kirk take over the ship. At the very least, they could have made it a dumb action movie about terrorists taking over the Enterprise and Kirk and Spock trying to defeat the terrorists by themselves. Instead, out of the blue, we get Sybok trying to find GOD.
But I'm getting ahead of myself. Spock says that Sybok is his half-brother, in one of the biggest plot contrivances I've ever heard of.
Spock: Sybok is my brother.
Kirk: I know for a fact that you don't have a brother.
Spock: Well, I have a half-brother.
What? Like I said, contrived. So the rest of this movie is too painful for me to go into too much detail on. Sybok persuades them to assist him on his quest to find God. They decide to the center of the galaxy and through the Great Barrier. Which might mean something if we had ever heard of the Great Barrier before. They get through the barrier, and they go to the planet. It turns out that the thing on the planet is not God, and Sybok sacrifices himself to allow the others to escape. Suddenly, the Klingons (why are they even in the movie?) attack the Enterprise. Spock convinces General Korrd, the Klingon hostage, to talk the Klingons down. Korrd succeds, and the klingons beam Kirk off the planet. Everyone is saved, and the audiences walk out of the theater cursing Shatner.
Most people would say that the movie in it's entirety is bad. I disagree. As I stated before, I thought the first half was pretty good. The second half was terrible. The plot just didn't know what it was doing in that half. One minute the movie is about terrorists taking control of the Enterprise, then all of a sudden it's about God, then it's some kind of demon and not really God, then the Klingons are thrown into the mix (why not?) then the movie just kind of ends. I want to talk about the effects for a minute. The previous four Trek movies were not very big on the effects. But they were all better than this one. I know there was some confusion with Industrial Light and Magic working on the Back to the Future sequels instead of this, but man. These effects were bad. This was the only Star Trek movie that reminded me of the TV show. The effects, the plot, the terrible ending, and the heavy-handed message were all very reminiscent of an episode of the series. Star Trek 5 was a failure for many reasons, not the least of which was the directing job done by one Willian Shatner. The plot, the effects, the story, the conflicts were simply terrible. This is not, in my opinion as bad as Star Trek the Motion Picture, but it is close.
I decided to post a link to a rifftrax clip of this movie. If you don't know what rifftrax is, it's the same thing as MST3K. If you don't know what that is, just click the link anyway. The clip his hilarious.
Not The Best But....November 11, 2009 C. Weaver(Rusk, Texas United States) 1 out of 1 found this review helpful
I always wondered what they would come out with after the Voyage Home and I wasn't too surprised by what came up. Some of the insight into the main characters backgrounds was nice but the movie really just didn't make it. I liked OK, but not one of the best Star Treks.
Why does Amazon.com put all these positive reviews on here?October 31, 2009 AS 0 out of 3 found this review helpful
This movie was considered by most people to be horrible.
Why does Amazon.com put these fanboys reviews over even serious critics
Ebert, denounced it as the worst. So somebody will buy this B-movie?
Give it a break!October 5, 2009 Curst Saden 2 out of 2 found this review helpful
I've read a lot of criticizm toward this movie on here. It's not THAT bad! Come on, it's got action, philosophy and comedy, the ingredients to a proper Star Trek movie! No it wasn't the best. Yes the plot was a bit weak, but I personally think it was a half-decent movie. The effects are decent for the time it was made, the acting was good, maybe could have been a bit better. I suppose the plot could have been used in a one-hour episode rather than a movie, but I think that everyone would agree with me when I say that this movie is NOT the worst compared to The Motion Picture, which is the only Star Trek movie I don't like because NOTHING happens in it! In this one they fight Spock's long lost half brother and find an evil alien claiming to be God (and the part where Spock gives the neck-pinch to a horse is priceless). In the Motion Picture, what did they do? Fly through a cloud. Oooooh, how exciting!
No, it's not the best Star Trek movie out there, but I say it was a fun, entertaining installment to the adventure.
