Rating: 
Summary: Ugh.
Review: I love Star Trek. I almost worship it. But after watching Star Trek 5: The Final Frontier in it's entirity I can understand everyone's disgust over this one. It's proves once and for all that William Shatner was not meant to direct movies. No disrespect to Captain Kirk, but man this was pretty hard to swallow. Things that really got to me was the horses on the planet seemed out of place, most of the acting was atrocious, the grand scope and point of "God" in the film was virtally blasphemy, the pace was slow, the special FX unmentionable and finally everybody in the cast looks so bored and disinterested. Now on to a few of the good points. There was a few cool parts such as when Spock, McCoy and Kirk shoot up a turbolift shaft on a jet pack and McCoy's conversation with Spock's brother. I can't quite think of any thing else. Thank GOD Nick Meyer was back in the director's chair for the outstanding Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country. (I can't believe this was originally planned to be the last Star Trek movie featuring the original cast. Pathetic.)
Rating:
Summary: Not the worst but still near the bottom of the barrel
Review: [Don't like this movie? I don't blame you.]
After the highly successful Star Trek IV, Paramount wanted to make another lighthearted adventure. But where this film went wrong was with William Shatner, whose original story featured dark elements involving Hell and a maniacal Vulcan's search for God. On top of that, he was elected director because of Nimoy's insistence. If there wasn't any indication of an "odd-numbered" curse, this and the very first Trek adventure might help boast that statement.Before I rack this film for its degrading quality, I will state here that this isn't the worst of the Treks. The story itself is rather Roddenberry-esque, but it's the script's execution (mainly by David Loughery) that needed some extreme adjusting. However, the reason for this film's quality is mostly due to Paramount's contraints of the budget. The camping scenes are also quite good. Where this film goes wrong is the stupid plotting and mostly dumb humor inbetween. In one scene, Scotty says "I know this ship like the back of my hand" and then his head hits a bulkhead, knocking him unconsciousness. What the [heck] is this?! Spock's half-brother, an emotional Vulcan (played by Laurence Luckinbill) seeking God? This actually doesn't like a bad idea, but it comes off as rather hokey and unbelievable. The ending involving God was also ludicrous (again, budget constraint). Also, many people have stated that Shatner can't act. I thought he was good in II and did alright in III and IV, but here is where it's noticeably bad. If there's anything to be praised about this film, it is the choice to return Jerry Goldsmith to do the musical score. He proved his worth with the first one and provided the recognizable Trek TNG theme. His score here is one of the best to date in the composer's career and it's quite a shame that it's slapped onto such a horrible movie. In my opinion, this has the best "End Credits" music (the Trek films employ the Trek theme and bracket it with music within the movie for the ending credits) to date. Overall, a forgettable adventure with a complicated plot. Definitely one of the worst in the series. As a result of this debacle, Star Trek VI would be helmed by returning director Nicholas Meyer and with positive results. No wonder Gene Roddenberry hated this one.
Rating: 
Summary: Not Great but Not Totally Awful Either!
Review: I have Star Trek V: The Final Frontier on video and though it's definitely one of the worst of the Star Trek movies and for some reason the uneven numbered movies have tended to not be as good as the even numbered ones but I don't think Star Trek V is the worst of the uneven numbered movies and I actually enjoyed it for the most part and I enjoyed some of the humor even if it was a little corny and cheesy but unfortunatly some scenes in the movie were absolutely dreadful and stupid so I have mixed feelings about this movie, I liked some parts of the movie while I absolutely hated other parts but I definitely don't think this is the worst of the Star Trek Movies that in my opinion is Star Trek III: The Search for Spock which also had some okay scenes but was kind of boring compared to this and the other Star Trek movies. I rate Star Trek V: The Final Frontier a 3 just for the scenes I kind of enjoyed, like the campire scene, the scenes with Scotty etc but I definitely would not rate it higher then a 3 while I would rate Star Trek III: The Search For Spock a 2 or really a 2 1/2 if I could.
Rating:
Summary: Worst Trek YET but....Still Worth Watching
Review: First let me give you my top 10 before I explain.
1) ST II: The Wrath of Khan
2) ST: First Contact
3) ST: Nemesis
4) ST VI: The Undiscovered Country
5) ST: Insurrection
6) ST IV: The Voyage Home
7) ST: Generations
8) ST III: The Search for Spock
9) ST: The Motion Picture
10) This movie Now in saying this is the worst movie, I mean that it has the weakest villain ever imagined, a very weak story, and some really cheesy effects. Now having said that, there is one tangible that makes this movie worth watching. The cast. The Original cast adds so much to this. Their chemistry together makes this worth watching. The comedy may go overboard sometimes but still it is good most of the time. It may be the worst movie of all the Trek movies but still the cast tried their hardest to make this look good.
Rating:
Summary: It ain't good, but it's more enjoyable than I remember.
Review: Star Trek V has always been noted as the worst of the entire Star Trek franchise, and yes, I too, once considered it an awful film, but after having seen it again, I can't help but feel it's not nearly the worst (Star Trek III: The Search for Spock), though certainly far, far from the best (Star Trek: First Contact). If there's one thing I'll give this entry credit for, it's that it has the most absurdly fascinating premise of the whole series. Ok, I realize summing the film up by stating it's about an eccentric Vulcan searching for God might sound kind of silly, and it certainly is, but for me, just hearing the premise fuels all sorts of ideas in my head, sparks thoughts of the limitless posibilities of the universe and the imagination, and really, isn't that what Star Trek is all about? In The Final Frontier's case, the concept alone is enough to attain my interest. Delivery is a completely different story. This is where the movie stumbles, and often quite badly. As all Trek fans know, this is the one movie in the series directed by William Shatner himself. What he obviously aspired to do was not only to create a popcorn adventure filled with action and humor, but also to infuse themes of spirituality and the wondrous possibilities of the unknown. Sounds like a great odyssey, I know, and while I'm sure some Trek fans will be fully satisfied with the film, I can't help but feel a little frustrated. For starters, the opening segment set on Yosemite while the crew is on shore leave is one of the weakest extended scenes of the series. We get lame attempts at humor, totally unconvcing special effects (Spock's Superman-ish rescue of Kirk), and some rather pathetic bits of dialogue. Things finally get moving when the Enterprise sets out on its rescue mission, after they've discovered that a Vulcan named Sybok has taken three ambassadors hostage and is demanding a starship. This leads to a skirmish set on the desert planet of Nimbus III, a rather poorly choreographed action sequence that clearly shows where Shatner's directing talents don't lie. Oddly enough, it's also very noticeable that the special effects are weaker than the previous entries. Hell, even the tinting is a little bland; the movie actually looks more dated than its immediate predecessor, The Voyage Home. At least Shatner wisely decided to focus more on the characters' situation than on the effects themselves. And that is probably where the enjoyment of the next forty or so minutes originate. I've never much cared for the supporting cast, but Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, and DeForest Kelley make for arguably the most entertaining trio in cinematic history. All three share more screentime together here than in any of the other films, and watching them bicker and/or work together is an absolute delight (loved the conversations they had while in the brig). Simultaneously, it's not hard to notice the blatant plot holes. How exactly can the Enterprise arrive at the center of the Galaxy (where God supposedly lies beyond The Great Barrier) in a matter of hours? Why would Sybok "brainwash" everyone except for Kirk? Why would Spock question if Sybok found Shakara when it's obvious he couldn't have since he's hijacked the Enterprise to search for it? Most infuriatingly, the plot is never fully or even adequately explained and explored. Sybok (who, I might add, is played very enjoyably by Laurence Luckinbill) claims to have received a vision from God, but this is never elaborated on. Did what they eventually find beyond The Great Barrier send him this vision or was he simply delusional? Once they arrive at The Great Barrier, the suspense heightens quite a bit. That joyous, exhilarating sense of wonder swelled in me, boosted by Jerry Goldsmith's wonderful score (arguably the best of the series). What they do discover on the planet isn't necessarily disappointing. "It" makes for an interesting discovery to the end of an ambitious journey and makes some sense, given that you can accept that they could conveniently stand on the right spot for "it" to reveal itself. Once again, more elaboration on "it" would have been nice. The very abrupt conclusion is what's ultimately unsatisfactory, more exploration on that planet and its purpose would have been nice. The climax is pretty much a disappointment, a deus ex machina that wraps things up too neatly and in a far too cliched fasion. The more I think about it, the more I would have liked that Klingon enemy subplot completely excised, since it only serves to detract attention from the "quest," and also as a copout for the conclusion. The Final Frontier has several things going for it: the unswerving chemistry of the three leads, Jerry Goldsmith's exemplary score, and the occasional sense of awe that the best of science fiction achieve. But the story is too muddled, too silly and Shatner's direction is too unfulfilling. As far as popcorn adventures go, it's a middling, half-bad outing.
** 1/2 out of *****
Rating: 
Summary: I hate to tell you, but your not trekies at all!
Review: Like I said I hate to tell you but I happen to like Star Trek alot, I've been a long time trekie, I LOVE ALL THE TREK MOVIES, and really love this one. Yes I think the effects could be better, but Star Trek is more then effects,its the friendship between Kirk, McCoy and Spock that makes this one great. Over all its not as good as ST6 but still one of the best(just think of ST:TMP!)The thing I like about this one is you get to see Spock as he was in ST1 and ST2, not the "teen" in ST3 or the stick in the mud Spock in ST4(had no life at all!). And I like the klingons, I like there culture, there always good(unlike some enemies like the Sona). If you read reveiws you can tell these people aren't trek Fans, there complete fools and don't know what there missing out on. Trust me, if your a trekie you will like it. PS can't wait for the directers cut! if it comes out!
Rating: 
Summary: By far, the worst Star Trek movie
Review: This one was a complete stinker. Why did they let William Shatner direct? Didn't we all know he'd mess this up? Even more disappointing is that this was on the heels of the best Star Trek movie - #4 - the classic about the whales. Star Trek 5 had absolutely no magic at all. This was a terrible excercise of 'running through the motions', complete with a terrible script, very reminiscent of the 3rd season of the TV series.
Rating:
Summary: As bad as you'd think
Review: Because Trek fans I know will go to any lengths to dis this trek flick w/o doing much to explain what went wrong, they inevitably allow some hardcore trekkies to claim that this was a series' jewel in the rough - a flawed flick that could do with some minor alterations (possible w/today's CGI). Actually, even a bare view of this movie confirms that, among Trek movies, this is the flick that-gods-destroy. The plot concerns Sybok (Lawrence Luckinbill), a renegade Vulcan (he smiles, he laughs, he brings hope to the hopeless) who gathers followers from the denizens of the bleak planet Nimbus-III (the so-called "planet of peace", Nimbus-III has been shared by the Romulans, Federation and the Klingons, all of whom quickly realized its worthlessness and assigned their least important diplomats to safeguard it.) Sybok's cause is vague, though it requires a starship - although just about everybody on Nimbus-III could use a ticket off. Sybok engineers a hostage crisis, knowing that Starfleet will send a ship to deal with it. Starfleet sends in the crew of Enterprise, cutting short a much-needed vacation for the crew - and the ship (Enterprise-A, unveiled at the very end of the last film, is now revealed to be less-than-shipshape). Giving a bold effort, the crew plunge in, learning too late that the crisis was a trap meant to snare them. When Sybok is on the verge of failure, a last-minute betrayal by Spock (also revealed as Sybok's half-brother - another instance in which the vastness of the Trek-universe is abridged by relatives - no matter wherever the Enterprise goes, it's going to run across somebody's parents, lover or misc. relative), gives the Enterprise over to the hijackers. Though he has numbers on his side, Sybok really relies on a strange power to control people - the power to end whatever long-lived pain assails them. For Spock, it was being a half-breed; for McCoy, it was his mercy-killing his terminally ill father (adding insult to injury, a cure came out just a few months later). Kirk has barely enough time to spring out of the ship's brig and send a distress call before he confronts Sybok and learns the laughing Vulcan's mater plan: break through the energy barrier at galaxy's edge (seen in episodes of the old show) and find the planet of the all-powerful Shaka-Ree, or god. Complicating things are the crew of a renegade Klingon ship which intercepts the distress call and decide to hunt the Enterprise down for their own glory-hungry captain. So what went wrong? Poor special effects were a convenient excuse. Let's start with the story - the search for god? Forget the "Klingon Glasnost" idea that became "Trek VI" - none of the trek flicks are more dated than this ode to yuppie-angst. There's little else to the story which has the Enterprise traveling through the energy barrier untouched (this is a blatant break of continuity - the barrier is supposed to affect both ship and crew, and Sybok is never shown mind-melding with the Enterprise). Once past the barrier, the crew searches for the planet of Shaka-Ree, making this film look lighter than an episode of one of the shows. What about the characters? Forgetting how the flick makes Kirk the center of attention, the characters are simply too weak and at ease with each other. That's dangerous - instead of the great repartee that underlined Treks II through IV, we get low-comic relief (Uhura's fan dance; Scotty's walking into a bulkhead; even Luckinbill, a distinguished stage actor, crafts his "laughing Vulcan like a cross between a Hollywood agent, new-age Guru and Vegas stand-up). Then there's Kirk - even "Search for Spock" allowed itself to focus (if briefly) on McCoy, Uhura and Hikaru "don't call me Tiny" Sulu. There's no way to explain how shamelessly the script hurls Kirk as superman in your face (and Kirk was always one of my faves - though McCoy always stole the show IMNSHO). Starfleet calls Kirk in because only he can defuse the hostage crisis. The rogue Klingon hunts Kirk down because only the death of the Enterprise's captain will prove what a great Klingon he is. (When a photon torpedo narrowly misses the Enterprise, the Klingon growls of Kirk "He's gooood"). Then there are the lamentable special effects - ILM was too busy filming other films, but that doesn't explain how the spaceships look like AMT models, lumbering across space or zipping through it cartoonishly. Even the energy barrier looks less spectacular than it did when it appeared on the original show. Was ILM the only decent FX firm in 1988. Still, FX can't really save a movie (consider that the blockbusters of '88-89 that did enjoy ILM's attention were "Ghostbusters 2" and the last "Indiana Jones" movie) and Trek came of age without decent special effects at all (easily outlasting "Space 1999" with its gorgeous effects and nonexistent drama or characters). I love Trek as much as the next Trekker, and prefer the classic brand to DS9, Voyager or even NexGen, yet this entry was an embarassment. Instead, take out Trek IV and watch our heroes dish out more dignified fun.
Rating: 
Summary: Star Trek V - Good Movie, Lacks Some Punch
Review: STAR TREK V is probably the weakest Star Trek movie of the bunch, but it still managed to keep me entertained. While it lacks some punch that the other Star Trek movies managed to sustain, THE FINAL FRONTIER still manages to entertain, and I think William Shatner did a good job with this movie...but he could have done a lot better. The movie begins with a silly, but amusing, scene where Kirk, Spock, and McCoy are on a camping trip and take a stab at trying to conjure up some good campfire ditties. However, when the crew of the Enterprise learns that a renegade Vulcan named Sybok is up to no good, they must investigate, only to have the ship highjacked by Sybok himself. Along with some of his followers and a couple of brainwashed crew members, the crew punches through the Great Barrier (which no ship has ever been able to cross before) and finds a place supposedly where God, according to Sybok, exists, a sort of Eden. When Sybok, Kirk, McCoy, and Spock go down to the planet, they later learn this is not the God they were thinking of, but rather, an alien entity that wants a ride on the ship. Enter the Klingons, who, pursuing Kirk in the first place, rendezvous with the Enterprise, but are later persuaded to apologize and make peace again. We then go back to another scene of the resuming camp trip, and Spock plays "Row Row Row Your Boat " and so ends another Trek film. While this wasn't the best Trek movie I have seen, I was nonetheless entertained by it and felt it still managed to be a good Trek movie. Shatner got bruised by critics and some fans, but this a Trek movie, and you the fan should decide for yourself whether it's good or not. STAR TREK V: The Final Frontier may not be the best of the bunch, but it still manages to entertain, even if it lacks the punch of previous and current Trek films.
Rating:
Summary: What an amateurish film.
Review: A laughing Vulcan goes around curing everyone's personal problems by giving them a big hug(if only it was that easy).
A clunky and faulty Enterprise is then sent on a rescue mission with an undermanned crew,despite the fact that the ship was orbiting Earth and could have beamed up as many crew as they wanted.
Kirk and co then embark on a rescue mission down to the planet and are defeated,despite them being armed with phasers and the opposition with primitive weapons.
Kirk then tells Sybok "you'll get no help from me" and yet in the next scene flies him up to the Enterprise.
Despite being in direct contact with the ship,Kirk doesn't warn them and Sybok and and a few friends enter the ship and take it over with no opposition(no security,nothing). Laughable.
Sybok then somehow quickly flies the Enterprise all the way to the centre of the Galaxy to meet "God".
It turns out that the alien posing as "God" really just wants a lift from the ship and this alien is disposed of by a few phaser blasts..........from a ship that couldn't defeat a few primitive inhabitants of the planet.
The only fun scenes in this movie are the campfire and mountain-climbing scenes,but even they are overlong.This is a very silly movie with a very weak story and Bill Shatner deserves every brickbat he gets for it. In essence,he has robbed Star Trek fans of a good Star Trek movie by hijacking ST5 for this rather amatuerish film.
It is sufficient to say that ST5 was by far the poorest performer at the box office of any of the Star Trek films and no wonder.
|
