Rating: 
Summary: shame on paramount for a missed opportunity
Review: I do not hate this movie. It may not be the best Trek but it has its moments. My real problem was the bad effects and sloppy ending (as mentioned in many other reviews). My BIG problem now is that Paramount had an opportunity to fix these problems and failed. Shatner was willing. I'm certain would have allowed some input after the guff he's taken, and the technology is there to fix it all without reshooting main characters. It is just plain cheap of them to put out product that they know us fans will buy without any concern about increasing quality. The other "special" DVDs were getting worse and worse. IV isn't even worth purchasing if you have a prior edition. I am really bothered that I will miss what could have been a much improved chapter in Star Trek history. For Christ's sake, just replacing the floating God heads would have been something. If the franchise dies, Paramount is responsible. How do they expect new fans to come along if they won't take the logical steps. (no pun intended).
Rating:
Summary: Star Trek V: Give Shatner a Break
Review: Look amongst the below reviews and you will find the pathetic and deluded ravings of one Erik Morton, who reveals himself to be an ungodly impostor in the ranks of Star Trek fans. Putting down the directorial mastery of Nicholas Meyer on "Star Trek II: The Wrath of God", that glorious shining cinematic beacon, Mr. Morton flashes the self-possessed lunacy of Sybok the Happy Vulcan. (Perhaps such kindred spirits have found their kismet.) In any case, the Captain's direction of the jubilant Yosemite bookends makes for a glimmer of warmth, now and then.
Rating:
Summary: What more can be said?
Review: The classic Enterprise crew from The Original Series (Kirk, Spock, McCoy, etc.) are enjoying a fun shore leave. What could be better? Captain Kirk is off scaling mountains without protective gear, Spock is flying around with something like jet-propelled shoes, and Dr. McCoy is in a rather grumpy mood. But all's not bad. The three later have a nice campfire set up as they do things such as try to teach Spock "Row Row Row Your Boat" and share tastes in a secret McCoy recipe.
But little do they know that Spock's half brother, a fellow Vulcan, has a goal of capturing the Enterprise ship and then going on a venture to find God. Will he be one of the crew's fiercest enemies ever? So much for shore leave!There's not much, if anything, that hasn't already been said in the many reviews for "Star Trek V - The Final Frontier." Its plot is sort of bleh, the main enemy doesn't even seem like an enemy the majority of the time, the special effects are underwhelming, and there are many other things about the movie that are a bit subpar. Yep, I agree that this is the worst Star Trek movie that includes the original members. However, there are some good times to be had. I thoroughly enjoy the shore leave scenes, especially the ones that take place around the campfire. It's this good-natured humor and reminiscing about the past (Kirk saying he misses his old chair, McCoy getting into his usual arguments with Spock, etc.) that will remind you of the Original Series episodes of Star Trek. I also thought that the character development was done fairly well. All in all, "Star Trek V - The Final Frontier" is an average movie at heart, but, like all the bad episodes of Star Trek and the other not so spectacular movies, it's worth seeing. If, for nothing else, IT'S STAR TREK. You may not want to own it, but if you're a Trekkie, you KNOW you want to see it. Overall: 2.5 stars
Rating: 
Summary: No getting around it, this is the worst Star Trek film
Review: "Star Trek: The Final Frontier" was a blow from which the Star Trek franchise never quite recovered. Released after the enormously successful "Voyage Home", this was a perfect opportunity for the Trek franchise to vault itself to immortality (like James Bond- he'll just never die). Instead, entry #5 got the worst reviews of all Trek films, both before and after. Audiences were furious at how bad it was, and after a modest opening weekend it fell like a stone at the box office. That was that- after "The Final Frontier", there were more hit Trek films, but the franchise never again recaptured its box office glory of the mid-80's, and finally died whimpering with "Nemesis" in 2002. So just what is wrong with "The Final Frontier"? Namely, the film tries to combine the action of "The Wrath of Khan" with the comedy of "The Voyage Home", but somehow only pulls the worst parts from both of those films. The action is boring, and the humor is dangerously misplaced. The Trek regulars are sleepwalking through their roles, with only Deforest Kelley showing some energy as McCoy. The "guest actors"- such as David Warner and Laurence Luckinbill- are given nothing to do. The special effects were terrible, probably the low point of the series. Finally, the entire "search for God" storyline is presented in the most boring and mundane fashion imaginable. The only time the film manages to generate a little tension is during its ending, and even then it manages to blow it with a very confusing climax. So what went wrong? Many "Final Frontier" defenders blame the budget. It is true that Paramount repeatedly cut the budget for this film, but that can't be the entire problem. "The Wrath of Khan" was the best Trek film and yet it had the lowest budget, even when adjusted for inflation. "Batman", which came out the same summer as "Final Frontier", had a roughly equal budget but was a much better looking film. The blame then must be put on the screenwriters and director. Just how much of it was Shatner's fault I'm not really sure of, but considering that he directed and co-wrote the film and that it focuses on the heroics of Kirk at the expense of the other characters, I must say that I partially blame him for it. I will rent this DVD to check out the special features, but I will never buy it. Not even Gene Roddenberry liked this film- that should tell you something. It has its moments, but it does not belong in the Star Trek franchise.
Rating: 
Summary: This bomb was a dud!
Review: Stupid, patronizing, poorly directed exploitation of Star Trek fans. The 'coming attractions' was the best part of this particular visit to the theater.
Rating:
Summary: The Classic "Bad Episode" on the Big Screen
Review: Classic "Star Trek" had its share of bad episodes. They're part of the "Star Trek" canon. Like the episode "Spock's Brain," in which the lobotomized Vulcan stiffly stumbles around papier mache sets with his pals in search of his stolen brain. (His rigid locomation is triggered by a pie plate on his head that Dr. McCoy wired to a garage door opener). As the story progresses, the gang discovers the culprits: a race of bikini-clad bimbos who are almost as brainless as the post-surgical Spock. Imagine a young, gorgeous Gracie Allen in go-go boots. (You can find this video gem at Amazon, too.). Like it or not, that's part of classic "Star Trek." And "Star Trek V" fits into that heritage. But don't just think of it as "bad." Enjoy it for the classic cliches that it recycles with reckless abandon: the group of renegades that takes over the Enterprise, the waves of intense(though not particularly thoughtful) Klingon hostility, the transporter that won't work, the communications officer (Uhura) who breaks into song, the transporter that won't work, the lavishly choreographed fistfights, the paradise that really isn't a paradise. And of course, there's the cheezy special effects. Sound familiar, Trek fans? And for the first time in the history of Trek movies, you get that classic esprit d'corps between Spock, Kirk and McCoy, who were conspicuously split up (always for a different reason...or lack of reason) in movies 2-4, then again in 6. What you get is a new "episode." Not the best episode by any means, but an episode nonetheless. Really that's what most Trek fans wanted. What fan wouldn't have fought off a pack of Klingons to get 20 or 30 episodes added to the stingy 79 that were rerun over and over and over? Wouldn't it be great to go off on more adventures with the crew of the Enterprise? Not desk-bound Admiral Kirk, meloncholy about aging--CAPTAIN Kirk sitting in his chair on the bridge like that's where he's always been...and like that's where he'll always be. (In fact, the key lighting on the sets is so intense and the makeup is so heavy that the aging actors look at least five years younger than they were). And the family of characters all serving and interacting together with a chemistry you just can't get in any other incarnation of "Star Trek." Sure, it's got its downside. Probably the worst aspect is that the crew doesn't act--it always RE-acts to the mischief of the villains. (Kirk's sole response to someone hijacking HIS ship is to send a message to Star Fleet requesting a "rescue ship"? Not even a discussion about turning the tables on the assailants? Incredible that writer/director Shatner could play the part so long and learn so little about it). And then there's Spock's incomprehensible refusal to shoot the leader of the renegades...the only chance any of them had to prevent the bad guys from taking over the ship. He later claims he's afraid he'd kill the guy because the weapon fires bullets and there's no stun setting. So wouldn't the logical thing be to shoot him repeatedly in the legs? So, I only give it three stars because of these and a few other serious blunders (Checkov the navigator gets lost in the woods? Scotty brags about knowing the ship like the back of his hand, then absentmindedly knocks himself unconscious on a low-hanging beam?). You won't find the kinds of missing scenes and other juicy revitalizing elements that have characterized other releases. But go ahead -- enjoy it for what it has: the classic Trek essence in spades.
Rating: 
Summary: Worst in the franchise....but excellent background disk
Review: Despite being a Star Trek fan, I would never bring myself to buying the bare-bones DVD Paramount originally offered for Star Trek V: The Final Frontier. I had been hoping that Paramount would grant William Shatner's wish to redo the movie in the same fashion they allowed Robert Wise to redo Star Trek: The Motion Picture. Sadly, they denied the request. However, the extra disk in the Special Edition set boasts some of the best most candid interviews we've had from William Shatner and crew to date. I actually understand now where Shatner was trying to go with this movie. His original script concept was definitely thought-provoking and could have been brilliantly executed. The Powers-That-Be at Paramount chopped his concept to pieces and we received a very watered down version of the original idea. Shatner confesses that compromising on the script was truly his fatal error in directing/writing this movie. Then, Paramount slashes the film's budget, so they could not get the special effects crew from ILM...hence the substandard special effects in this film compared to what had been previously seen. Shatner had beautiful visions of how this movie would have proceeded, but without the budget or the original storyline, things really started to pale out of his control. Unfortunately, Shatner admits that he used a lot of the film's already weak budget for the beginning and middle of the movie and was left with little to no money to shoot the finale...hence, we have a very lackluster unsatisfying sloppy ending to the feature. Having discovered what was intended and dreaming of what could have been allows me to forgive this palid entry into the Star Trek film franchise. This DVD set is a must own, just to understand what was going on and why this film failed. Not to mention that there is some classic dialogue between the humorous trio of Kirk/Spock/McCoy that make the film worth viewing. Give it a shot...
Rating:
Summary: Good old Star Trek fun
Review: With this movie it seemed that Star Trek was winding down, but on the other side TNG was taking off. It is still good old Star Trek fun in spite of a poor plot, terrible scenes and low budget visual effects. On the other hand it follows the comic tradition of Star Trek IV and the original series and it is still a human adventure. For Trek fans it is good to see William Shatner's perspective on the nature of the series but as Trek movies go it is probably the worst (after Nemesis).
Rating:
Summary: Paramount Says Sorry For the Movie, So Crunch On The Extras
Review: I believe that Star Trek V has its moments with the crew and has a potentially strong story if you watch and think about it for a few times. Paramount should have given William Shatner the chance to improve the special effects and the ending like Robert Wise did to Star Trek: The Motion Picture. In the end, it is still an above average special edition compared to the others like II-IV, which could have had more special features like the deleted scenes. Star Trek V is definitely a good collector's item if you plan to purchase all 10 of the special editions.
Rating:
Summary: Good but it could have been much better
Review: Star Trek V is commonly considered the worst of the star trek movies and alot in it is bad but it is watchable. This movie needed a much higher budget than it was given and a lot of William Shatner's original story was changed, mostly for the worst. If the movie had been given a adequate budget, Shatner would have gotten to film more scenes and afford better special effects. This would improve Star Trek V dramatically and if the storyline hadn't been changed this film would probably deserve a 4 1/2 or even 5 star rating.
| 
