Rating: 
Summary: The Final Directoral Frontier for Shatner..!
Review: The cheesiest (and worst) of the franchise. STAR TREK: THE FINAL FRONTIER is decent from the beginnning and then it falls flat (everyone knows, Trekkie and non-Trekkie alike, when and where in the film). The special effects were done by George Lucas' ILM but one wouldn't know it if it wasn't listed in the closing credits. The worst of the effects by far is the final leg of the film when Kirk amd crew encounter "God"? and it looks as if they ran out of money. The omnipotent being (looks like Santa Claus who just got up on the wrong side of the bed) with lightning bolts shouting out of the eyes with hovering humanoid face is extremely bad even for pre-digital-era special effects. The effects from the original 1960's series looked better than this. Also, it doesn't help that the sequence is entirely vague and shallow and it leaves the audience hanging. Nothing was resolved except that Sybok (Laurence Luckinbill) ends up dead. The sequences of the crew during an R&R stopover at Yosemite is okay, but the humor seems a little forced and unnatural compared to STAR TREK: THE VOYAGE HOME. Overall, a film that could have worked provided they toned down the camp, used better special effects, and had someone else directing.
Rating: 
Summary: Better than any Trek today, for sure.
Review: Is this movie flawed? Oh yes. But this has more character and feels like more, genuine Trek than anything Berman and his bunch have put out in years. It really is a startling night and day difference to go back and watch some of these older Trek films and really just see how far Star Trek has declined since in quality. Very sad. Star Trek IV is even the more outstanding example of a night and day contrast. What happened to that? What happened to Star Trek? Why was it allowed to go down so low in the past...almost decade or so? These Special Edition DVD's are must owns for Trekkers, especially the classic films.
You'll enjoy this one for nostalgia and completist's sake, if nothing else.
Rating:
Summary: The visual effects just barely work....
Review: According to Ralph Winter's interview on the DVD, the visual effects for Star Trek V were done by a New Jeresy based effects unit called Barn Ferran Associates. They were a small operation and mostly did TV production effects work, having done very few feature films. and such their equipment and the work studio for making and placing effects work on to film was very limited. It appears that they did pretty good in doing the effects early in post-production, but when the deadline drew near for the movie's release, they kind of ran out of gas, and many effects shots such as the apperance of the planet and the energy creature were not quite finished, so in the editing room, they took the best of what was completed and edited it such a way so that the movie would have a good climax. regretfully the climax is short and not quite what they had in mind in the original screenplay. These effects are not ILM quality, nor are they up to the standards that Doug Trumbull did for 2001; A Space Odyssey. The Star Trek V effects are about even with say the effects done in ALIENS. Some work and some do not.
Rating: 
Summary: Bring the ship... closer
Review: This movie gets five stars for extreme un-intentional humour. If you would allow me to spoil the ending, Captain Kirk finds what appears to be God on some planet. After refusing to give "God" the usage of his ship, lighting bolts and proton torpedoes fly. It can only be guessed as to what thoughts were going through Mr. Shatner's head when he created this ridiculous barrel of laughs. I love it for all the wrong reasons.
Rating:
Summary: Nice transfer, good extras for a solid Trek
Review: Trek V has taken it on the chin so long kicking it when it's down doesn't seem fair. The script is riddled with plot holes, the optical effects (as noted before) are subpar for a Trek film. What's good about the film is the strong chemistry between the original cast (particularly Nimoy, Shatner and Kelly). Lawrence Luckinbill gives a marvelous performance as Sybok (in a role originally intended for Sean Connery). The film as a whole is less than the sum of its parts. With a number of strong sequences scattered throughout the film, it's tempting to take all the criticism at face value. All the Trek films have their merits but it seems this one has been unfairly condemned. Sybok (Lawrence Luckinbill) a renegade Vulcan takes Federation, Klingon and Romulan representatives hostage on the "planet of peace". This hideous dust ball of a world along the Neutral Zone suddenly becomes the center of the galaxy. It seems that Sybok has an unusual empathetic power to heal emotional and psychological wounds and has used this power to gather a cult of followers on his quest. To complete his journey, however, he needs a powerful ship--a Starship. His dream comes true when the less than ship shape Enterprise is forced into action without adequate shake down time after drydock. Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Sulu, Chekov, Uhura and Scotty are supplemented by a skeleton crew and pushed into a commando raid on Paradise City where Sybok has taken refugee. He manages to take the senior personnel prisoner and take the Enterprise as well. Most of the cast does an admirable job. Luckinbill is marvelous. Nimoy and Kelley have a number of sparing moments that rank with their best. Every cast member is given a moment to shine although some of those moments are better than others. Supporting player David Warner is completely wasted in his role as the alcholic Ambassador to the "planet of peace". It's a pity as he's a marvelous actor. Take a look at his work in Time After Time or even The Undiscovered Country to see what he's capable of in a genre film. Let's discuss the transfer first. There's a surprising amount of analog artifacts (i.e., dirt, hair, etc.)during the beginning of the film. That's rather a surprise given the stellar transfers for the other films in the series. The blacks are rock solid and the colors vivid. The clarity and picture in this anamorphic widescreen transfer looks sharp. While the film could have used a bit of cleaning up it looks, on the whole, very good. The beautiful cinematography by Andrew Laszlo comes to life on this disc. While it isnt' quite as good as seeing it in the theater, it's pretty darn close. The sound also sounds pretty good overall. It's presented in Dolby Digital 5.1 and, while there isn't as much action in the surround speakers as I'd like, it's well balanced sounding with good clarity. Jerry Goldsmith's score is beautifully reproduced here (it's among his best scores which is ironic given the film's reception). Shatner's commentary track isn't the most informative on the other hand, Shatner doesn't babble like Nick Meyer does on his commentary track for Wrath of Kahn and The Undiscovered Country. Still, the film could have benefited from a full cast commentary track much more than the other films in the series. I haven't had a chance to check out all the special features but the outtakes and the cut sequences involving the rock creature are quite interesting. Sadly, Paramount wouldn't give Shatner the money to go back and digitally create the ending he originally had in mind. One can only imagine what the film would have looked like with an ending out of Dante's Inferno. Shatner's feauturette shot at the Yosemite National Park rambles a bit but there are a couple of interesting moments there as well. It could have used a bit of tightening up in the editing department. The Journey: A Behind-the-Scenes Documentary provides interesting insights into why the film failed to find an audience. The Pre-Visualization Models sequence provides an idea of what Shatner was attempting to achieve with the film as does Rock Man in the Raw. In a sense, it's good the Rock Man costumes didn't work out although I do miss the opportunity to see the planet turned into a variation on Dante's Inferno. That would have been interesting and possible given today's CGI technology. While Trek V was riddled with production problems, budget problems and other poltical issues, the film isn't horrible. Shatner, Harve Bennett and screenwriter David Loughery make the best of what they have at hand. Certainly some of the sequences might be offensive to hardcore Trekkers; the comedy bits in particular seem more like outtakes from a 3 Stooges film but they add levity to a story that could have been taken way too seriously. The bottom line on Trek V--it's an enjoyable romp with the original crew. Remember folks, it's only a movie--entertainment--so take it in the spirit it was made in.
Rating:
Summary: We've believed the hype .. but V ain't so bad
Review: This movie seemed to have bad word of mouth even before it opened in the summer of '89 (most of it dealing with "Shatner directed it. It's gonna be awful"). And it isn't. Awful is reserved for Star Trek:the monumentally dull motion picture. And I will return to Five before I go back and watch Three. In the DVD extras, everyone interviewed seems to take a slightly apologetic apporoach and the prodeedings are subdued. Really, there's no need to be. ST 5 is funny and charming and exciting .. about what you would get from a superior episode of the original show. It's a little goopy in some places, but Roddenberry (show's creator) EXCELLED at goopy. 5 has all the action and wit of any better-than-average action movie of the 80s (this movie has a very 80s feel, but that's not saying it in a bad way). It seems that the band wagon persists and people will choose to diminish this one when the first movie and its bloated ponderousness really needs to be explained and apologized for. 5 is fun. 5 is charming. And 5 is exciting. I just wish that the people responsible for this movie didn't feel the need to be apologetic. It's a pretty nifty film.
Rating:
Summary: Star Trek V: The Curse of Shatner's Ego
Review: Yes, this is probably the worst Star Trek movie made, but I don't think it is as bad as its reputation. I think this story was filmed before its time. The special effectsof the time period weren't enough to pull off what they were called upon to do, the script should have been more polished so as to avoid some serious mischaracterizations (A sixty year old Uhura dancing nsked?), and the time just wasn't right for a spiritual quest to find God. That said, it is still a film worth watching. There are some humorous moments, particularly between Kelly and Nimoy. Yes, therer are obvious flaws and inconsistencies in the script, but that is what suspension of disbelief is all about. It's a fun movie to watch, even though it could have been much more. I can see why some members of the cast have an axe to grind with Shatner after seeing these results. The Paramount powers That be have never let him nar a camera ago, you know. I'd advise anyone to seek out the story about Harlan Ellison's pitch for this movie. That, my friends, would have been a classic.
Rating:
Summary: Fantastic DVD for the worst "original cast" Trek
Review: Many Trek fans consider #5 the worst in the series (although I do not) Unfortunately, it's difficult to tell exactly why that is. There are lots of good parts. The plot could have been taken directly out of the Original Series (albeit the 3rd season). To wit: a renegade Vulcan and his band of followers takes over the Enterprise in order to find the Creator of the Universe (conveniently located beyond the "Great Barrier" at the centre of our own galaxy; apparently a different Great Barrier than that in "Where No Man Has Gone Before" located at the edge of the galaxy). But, for some reason, the good parts just don't fit together. Firstly, there's the idiotic ease with which the Enterprise is commandeered by the rebels. Next there is the over-emoted acting (the blame for this has to fall on Shatner's shoulders - the self-proclaimed "hammeister"). The effects are sub-par, in relation to the rest of the series. But is it the worst Trek? I'd say not. When compared to the plot stupidities of Nemesis, this film is practically high art. And I didn't like Insurrection either. There are ample reasons for buying this DVD, not the least of which is that the compulsive collector should have all the Special Edition Trek films in his/her library. But beyond that is the sheer scope and quality of the extras. Okuda's text commentary is fun and trivia-filled, as usual. Footage of the orginal ending (Kirk being attacked by rock-monsters) is interesting. There are some neat original promotional material - trailers, a press conference, etc. I certainly recommend this DVD, even if I can't recommend the film.
Rating: 
Summary: One of the best science fiction movies
Review: Being a science fiction addict since the early Fifties, I bought many fantastic books (by Alfred E. Van Vogt, Philip K. Dick, Clifford Simak, Poul Anderson, Leigh Brackett, Cordwainer Smith, Asimov etc.) but saw only a few great films (Forbidden Planet, Quatermass Xperiment, Quatermass II... and, later, Star Wars II The Empire Strikes Back), and I did'nt expect much when I went to see my first Star Trek movie, one night in a Bruxelles' theater with nothing else to do; but Star Trek V happened to be a beautiful surprise.
This was a superb space opera; it was fun, with great photography, and the characters had soul, intelligence, personality and a sense of humor. After seeing it I bought the entire series (at the time) on video, liked them but number V remained my favorite. How come the reviews here are so bad, and why putting such a blame on William Shatner? This man seems to be smart, he knows how to build a story and he is definitely a magnetic actor; he has a strong ego? Well, being talented as he is he can afford it. Jerry Lee Lewis, one of my rock'n'roll heroes, has the greatest ego of them all; who cares? Just listen to JLL's music, or just enjoy Star Trek V, this exciting movie, and ignore the gossips.
PS: Besides, Jerry Lee is a wonderful man (I have not met William Shatner yet).
Rating:
Summary: Not such a bad movie
Review: Star Trek V is the fifth Star Trek feature and the second last for the Original series crew. Most people regard this as the worst Star Trek film ever made, and look for reasons to attack the film and William Shatner in general. Being a Star Trek fan for some time now, I try to take a more objective stance on things. Here's what I thought of the movie: Good points about The Final Frontier: -The acting is top drawer, particularly between Sybok and the heroes, Kirk, Spock and McCoy. -The film features some very nice camera work, particulalry with the introduction of Sybok and also on Sha Ka Ree. Also, the orbital scene at the end, featuring the Klingons and the Enterprise, is a beautiful shot.
-The soundtrack is excellent, particularly towards the end of the film.
-The film features some nice moments of comedy, particularly among the lesser cast members (lesser only in terms of amount of screentime they recieve). Some of the comedy is a little inappropriate, but for the most part it's pretty good.
-The exploration of religion, normally a tabboo subject in Star Trek, is done nicely. Bad points about The Final Frontier: -The FX are not terribly good, reminiscent of those in The Original Series. That being said, the FX for the approach to The Great Barrier (particularly when seen from the observation lounge) are pretty good. But most of the FX are of fairly low quality.
-There are obvious script problems, particularly with some of the dialouge scenes. I'm no expert on the subject, but I can see some clear moments of script weakness throughout the film.
-There are several continuity errors, most notably the one concerning the trip to the centre of the galaxy. The edge of the Great Barrier is nearly 20,000 light years from Earth, which would be almost a 40 year trip for the Enterprise. A technical explanation for this should have been made in the film. I have made a reason myself to justify this, as I believe that Sybok knew of ancient subspace corridor routes to Sha Ka Ree, but I won't go into that.
-The role of the Klingons in the film wasn't done well at all. There should have been some sort of minor starship combat scene between them and Kirk early in the movie. His feelings towards them are also inconsistent with those expressed in ST:III and ST:VI, where they are finally resolved. I found this to be one of the lowpoints of the film.
-Anothe problem stemming from the script again concerns the Great Barrier. It was contually emphasised that it was incredibly dangerous and that no ship had ever been able to get through. Yet the Enterprise passed through easily. More should have been done with that sequence. Overall, ST:V is an enjoyable film, but it does have faults. I recommend people who like Star Trek, whether they be serious or casual fans, to buy this film.
| 
