Help William Shatner Get His Director’s Cut of Star Trek V: The Final Frontier

Posted by on June 21st, 2010   Filed under: Fandom, Internet, Sci-fi
Source: TrekWeb

In the years prior to J.J. Abrams’ reboot of the Star Trek movie franchise, the various Star Trek movies were each given pretty solid Special Edition re-issues on DVD, including new Director’s Editions of the first two films. While the new cut of Star Trek: The Motion Picture seemed to fix some of the complaints that fans had, there is still one poorly-received Star Trek movie that was not given the opportunity to be improved upon: William Shatner’s Star Trek V: The Final Frontier. After being rejected initially, there is now a new online petition that is pushing Paramount to allow Bill to finally take a shot at salvaging this long lambasted Shatnerpiece once and for all.

Shoddy special effects have often been cited as the biggest problem with Star Trek V, since they didn’t allow the film’s ending to be fully realized. Screenwriter David Loughery had this to say about it back in 1990:

“The FX turned to out to be very disappointing, and this was a movie that we really needed them to put us over the top story-wise. Especially at the climax with the horde of rock gargolyes. You don’t ever like to say that because you don’t want to think that a movie is dependent on special FX. Certainly, Star Trek is the kind of thing where the FX play less of a role than the characters and the story, but I think that the story we were telling this time, at least at the movie’s end, very much needed unique and convincing special FX to make those story points work. Those FX don’t quite deliver, and in some cases, it looked a little shoddy and ludicrous.”

With the recent upgrade given to Star Trek: The Original Series, I suppose it is as good a time as any for some new CGI work to reconstruct Shatner’s original vision. But will the movie still suck even with better effects? I guess there’s only one way to find out! Head over to TrekWeb to read more about the Star Trek V: The Director’s Cut internet campaign, and to learn how you can help make it a reality.



  • projectgenesis

    I believe Galaxy Quest already parodied the supposed “rock monster” of ST:V so I think seeing it now might be kind of passe. That said, I signed it. Go Bill go!

    My best, projectgenesis

  • A wise man once said, ” you can’t polish a turd”.

  • projectgenesis, it never occurred to me that the rock monster in Galaxy Quest was a reference to the rock monsters that Shatner wanted for Star Trek V.

    Personally, I think Star Trek V is perfect the way it is. Some people probably think I say this to provoke a reaction. But I sincerely love Star Trek V for reasons I’ve mentioned before.

    On the topic of contrary opinions, I rewatched J.J. Abrams’ Star Trek, and I still can’t believe that the majority of people like it. One new nitpick I have is I don’t understand why Earth didn’t have any defenses against the mining drill thingie. And even though Nero refused any help from Kirk, it doesn’t make any sense to condemn the rest of the mining crew. It’s like going over to Afghanistan to kill civilians just because Bin Laden is an idiot. That’s not the philosophy of Star Trek. I hope Star Trek’s philosophy didn’t get reimagined!

  • 1138

    @ reed

    I’m not sure what your are referring to reed when you mention that Nero refused help from Kirk. Are you talking about the end when Kirk and Spock offered help to Nero and his crew? I think they were being sarcastic which made me hate the movie even more. I was left with the impression that they had no intention of helping them anyway. Horrible movie that bewilders my movie instincts.

  • @1138: Yeah, I’m talking about the end. I do realize that Nero did kill Kirk’s father. Spock does tell Kirk that he’s not inclined to be forgiving in this instance given that Nero killed his mom. I agree in that it does seem that their exchange was a nod to Star Trek fans rather than a sincere offer of help.

  • 1138

    @ Reed

    The Kirk and Spock I know would have made their intentions clear that the battle was over and that help was indeed being offered and that it would be in Nero’s best interest to accept their aide. If these new incarnations of Kirk and Spock never fully felt sincere enough to offer help, and were just making platitudes, then these characters have become nothing that I can respect in this franchise.

    And I know that Nero killed Spock’s mother but the original Spock would still offer help, he would never become like his enemies.

  • @1138: I totally agree with you. Even in Star Trek III after Kirk has discovered that the Klingons have killed his son, Kirk tries to save Kruge on the Genesis planet. Only after Kruge tries to take Kirk over the cliff with him is Kirk forced to kill Kruge in order to preserve his own life.

  • Reed and 1138: You seem to be discounting the fact that these are young versions of Kirk and Spock and their sense of honour, respect or whatever else may not be fully developed. You seem to be assuming that the character of Kirk is the same no matter what his age, unable to grow/change/mature.

  • @Jay: I had thought about that myself. But that would mean the Starfleet and Federation ideals don’t arise until later during Kirk and Spock’s adventures. Perhaps as they matured, they influenced all of humanity’s outlook on life? Or maybe they start a darker “mirror universe”? Since this is a reimagining, then I guess any explanation will suffice. In any case, the Star Trek movie showed a universe that I want no part of.

  • 1138

    @ Jay

    Granted these are young versions of Spock and Kirk but as officers of the federation I would assume that morals are taught at the academy and that the two of them would have picked up a few of these morals along the way (though the way JJ Abrams describes the academy, the cadets all seem more like a bunch of horny morons than a bunch of geniuses that the federation has to offer) By the time your like 25 one should have at least some moral values in place. If these two need time to mature into decent individuals then the federation is indeed doomed.

    Besides when you film in a beer factory and it looks like a beer factory ya got problems.

  • “In any case, the Star Trek movie showed a universe that I want no part of.”

    You’re willing to write off this entire universe/franchise simply because you felt they weren’t sincere enough in offering help to the bad guy? It sounds to me like both of you guys are more interested in simply maintaining consistency/canon rather than exploring any emotional or moral depths within these characters.

    “as officers of the federation I would assume that morals are taught at the academy and that the two of them would have picked up a few of these morals along the way”

    Haven’t these characters time and time again shown that they’re more than willing to break whatever rules the federation has laid out? I mean, if you’re going to restrict all of the decisions these characters make based on the rules of the federation, you’re essentially turning them into emotionless robots. I thought the whole reason people loved Kirk is because he’s a bit of a loose canon? Is it so wrong to watch him mature or make mistakes as a reckless young adult?

    If you guys are suggesting that the most important role of the Star Trek universe is simply to remain consistent, than that’s a universe I want no part of.

  • “You’re willing to write off this entire universe/franchise simply because you felt they weren’t sincere enough in offering help to the bad guy?”

    Jay, you know I have other problems with the movie. Why are you resorting to hyperbole? You should know better. :-)

    “It sounds to me like both of you guys are more interested in simply maintaining consistency/canon rather than exploring any emotional or moral depths within these characters.”

    I would have been interested if the scriptwriters had given the characters a moral quandary to solve.

    “Haven’t these characters time and time again shown that they’re more than willing to break whatever rules the federation has laid out?”

    Yes, but they break the rules to help lifeforms, not to kill them.

    “If you guys are suggesting that the most important role of the Star Trek universe is simply to remain consistent, than that’s a universe I want no part of.”

    As a filmmaker, you should know that a key ingredient for a satisfying movie is to create an environment that is internally consistent. I think any movie that is lacking in one area can ruin a movie. Over the years, the creative people involved in Star Trek have been trying to make its universe consistent until the reboot. The fans didn’t create the canon. If you don’t want to be part of a consistent Star Trek universe, then why have you been watching Star Trek all these years?

  • “If you don’t want to be part of a consistent Star Trek universe, then why have you been watching Star Trek all these years?”

    Because I don’t like Star Trek for its consistency, I like it for its characters and stories. I’m open to the exploration of characters that might challenge the boundaries laid out in the past. This is just the difference between how we watch things. You seem to obsess over details like make up seams and continuity errors while I watch films first and foremost for a more visceral ‘gut’ reaction. You prefer the intellectual approach and I prefer the emotional approach. This means that I might be more willing to sit back and appreciate a character’s flaws while you just match and compare them to 30 years of canon and try and point out where things don’t line up. To each his own! I figure a reboot is the perfect opportunity to take some liberties with the characters.

    “Jay, you know I have other problems with the movie. Why are you resorting to hyperbole? You should know better.”

    YOU really want to accuse ME of hyperbole? Your opinion on the Star Trek film seems to change depending on the weather (or simply taking the opposite side of whoever you might be discussing the film with). I’m pretty sure you said at one point that you hated it.

    “Yes, but they break the rules to help lifeforms, not to kill them.”

    See my previous comments about the opportunity to explore the characters beyond the restrictions laid out over the last 30 years.

    “As a filmmaker, you should know that a key ingredient for a satisfying movie is to create an environment that is internally consistent.”

    The film was internally consistent with itself as a reboot of a dead franchise.

    If consistency is so much of a concern, what are we supposed to make of the difference between Spock’s character in The Cage versus the rest of the series? He’s practically a completely different person. You can’t tell me that through 30 something years of Star Trek TV that there aren’t inconsistencies. And if there are, you’re willing to look past those ones but not the ones that make the most sense (being a reboot and alternate universe and all).

    You’re one step away from Kathy Bates in Misery. I can only imagine if Robert Orci and Alex Kurtzman had a car accident and were saved by you. You’d be lambasting them for Kirk’s moral ambiguity right before you break their ankles with a sledgehammer.

  • 1138

    @ Jay

    That single insincere moment did not make or break the movie for me…it was just one of many things wrong with the movie.

    I for one wanted a new look and feel for the franchise and was not opposed to new ideas as long as they made sense and operated on a sense of being new and exciting.

    What I got was a hack poorly done movie. Forget about it being a Star Trek movie…as a movie it sucked.

    The production was cheap, the acting was fine just weird character development, cheesy lines, poor plot and just bad bad guys.

    I’ve gone into details in the past on this website so I don’t want to rehash.

    I was expecting no wanting to see something new and fresh…on a scale similar to BSG on Scifi, a new interpretation that really boggled my mind. Instead I got an engine room that was a beer factory! If that isn’t cheesy go figure.

  • “If consistency is so much of a concern, what are we supposed to make of the difference between Spock’s character in The Cage versus the rest of the series?”

    That was at the beginning of Star Trek when the creators including the actors were working out the characters. It might be expected that there be some consistency issues here. (For the record, some fans have speculated that something happened in Spock’s life between Pike’s command and Kirk’s command that caused a change in him.)

    (Note to readers: Jay watched all of Enterprise and liked it!)

    Jay, if you want to continue this argument, then let’s take it to the forum (or better yet, the Roman Colliseum!) before Sean cuts us off. It’s apparent that 1138 and I have won the argument, because you’re now resorting to ad hominem. Ha ha.

  • 1138

    @ Jay

    If you going to reboot something as familiar and imbedded in the American consciousness as Star Trek you got to do it well. Are you telling me that a 200+ million production with the oh so great Abrams couldn’t match the quality of a budgeted TV show on a minor themed television station??? BSG was a great remake…Star trek was a bad movie.

  • “That was at the beginning of Star Trek when the creators including the actors were working out the characters.”

    Yes, and this was the beginning of the NEW Star Trek under Abrams. A REBOOT which takes place in an ALTERNATE UNIVERSE. No expectancy for inconsistency there?

    How about the inconsistency between Star Trek: The Motion Picture and Star Trek 2: The Wrath of Khan? There’s clearly a disconnect between the two, both within the visuals and the writing. Why is everyone cool with Star Trek suddenly turning into a military style operation where people read books and wear glasses? Are you guys on the list of folks pissed about the inclusion of a kitchen in Star Trek 6?

    It reminds me of the game where you have two photos side by side and you have to pick out the differences between them. Rather then judging the photo or painting for its artistic merits, you simply scan both of them and say ‘the necklace is missing in this one’ or ‘the shirt doesn’t have a collar in this one’.

    “If you going to reboot something as familiar and imbedded in the American consciousness as Star Trek you got to do it well.”

    This statement would make sense if Star Trek wasn’t a dead franchise and, most importantly, if the film wasn’t a success. It’s pretty clear that the majority of people really enjoyed it and it opened up the Star Trek franchise to a new audience. It’s the hardcore fans who are more concerned with consistency with canon then looking at the film within its own borders. They were before the film was even released!

    The total domestic gross of Star Trek: $257,730,019 That’s more than double the gross of the most successful Star Trek film (not accounting for inflation) and over $200,000 more than the last Star Trek film made.

    Almost a year after its release, Star Trek is still sitting at a 94% on Rotten Tomatoes.

    Are you guys just pissed that Star Trek sold out?

  • Kyriacos

    “This is just the difference between how we watch things. You seem to obsess over details like make up seams and continuity errors while I watch films first and foremost for a more visceral ‘gut’ reaction. You prefer the intellectual approach and I prefer the emotional approach.”

    If that is the case then REED should be a fun of Primer, but he is not. The Fact is Reed is actually interested in the pseudo-intellectual approach of things cause that is exactly what the earliest star trek flicks were.
    StarTrek always simplified stuff out for the masses, (to the point it was insufferable because you felt like the creators were assuming that you are an idiot) In fact the new Star Trek approach just like with District 9 is more intellectual because it assumes that you know already some theoretical sci-fi stuff and does not waste your precious time with banal retarded dialogues.

    If you wanna be intellectual be like primer or don’t even bother.

    Reed is just pissed that everyone likes Startrek now and he is being detached because he is not used to hang out with popular kids at school. Thats all.

  • Kyriacos

    Ps:
    I know that Reed is not fan of Primer nor a non emotional viewer because at the past he stated:

    “The problem with Primer for me is that there is no emotional involvement with the characters. The movie doesn’t create suspense.”

    Of-course Primer “fully intellectual approach” results an overall weak movie but at least it sticks to its guns till the end thus making it an appreciable attempt to my books.

    @ Reed
    I am wondering what you think about “Timecrimes”.

  • Henrik

    “Are you guys just pissed that Star Trek sold out?”

    Well I am!

  • @Kyriacos: I haven’t seen Timecrimes, yet.

    I’m not pissed that Star Trek “sold out.” Actually, I’m disappointed that the movie doing well hasn’t translated into more activity regarding Star Trek. Fan activity doesn’t seem to have increased. Merchandising hasn’t increased.

    I’m flabbergasted that both “critics” and the general audience liked the new Star Trek movie so much. I still want to read some “intellectual” discussion concerning the new movie, but I can’t find any despite people sending me links. I would like to think that there are many people ignorant of Trek who would think the latest Star Trek movie is “bad.”

  • Kyriacos

    Well I don’t think it was awesome.. But comparing it to the old Startreks its overall a better film.

    I liked the elderly Spock twist and the destruction of its planet. I also liked some other stuff about it but I cannot recall.. I wish it was a bit longer.. it surely felt a bit short. I would like some female narrator in it, but that’s just me. And few more Asian chicks would have been nice..

    Oh, I got it.. An Asian female narrator talking about the relatively vast and empty corners of our universe..

    see..
    ..That’s how retarded star trek would have been if they ‘ve listen to people like u n me..

  • 1138

    @ Jay

    I’m not pissed that Star Trek Sold out…and besides what the hell does that mean??? Sold out??? It’s not like we’re talking about the Godfather here or one of the all time classic movies or TV shows of all time or even Shakespeare!…it’s part of a Americana but come on it’s pop culture!

    Just because Transformers grossed a gazzillion dollars doesn’t make it a great movie. There are plenty of movies that made tons of money that leave people like me going Huh????

    Star Trek was a crappy movie with tons of HUH??? moments. That’s my opinion and I’ve watched it twice, not in the theater of course…to see whether I was just being to critical of the movie and you know what I wasn’t. That was just a horrid movie with stupid plot points and stupid character developments. It just that simple. Now that is just my opinion. Obviously other people disagree because the movie did go on to gross over 200 million. Which isn’t Avatar money or even Transfomers money but it made it’s 200 million + budget back.

    Now look, plenty of people enjoyed the Transformers series…I didn’t because they sucked in my opinion and they weren’t even popcorn fun.

    Oh and who cares about the consistency crap. Since when was Star Trek ever consistent?

    All I wanted was smart filmmaking. Look if people liked Star Trek that’s fine…look people liked Britney Spears for years…but that doesn’t make the stuff quality…Star Trek for me was a dud…just bleah filmmaking.

  • 1138

    @ jay

    And let’s not forget the beer factory too…oh I mean the engine room though I’m sure that Spock and Kirk will be having a few cold ones now when they’re on shore leave…JJ thinks of everything.

  • JasonHW

    I fully support a refit of Star Trek V: The Final Frontier. The Cheezy Special Effects were those of Superman IV: The Quest for Peace. Very disappointed. Why not? Donner redid Superman II. I say Shatner, do it! :)

  • Duke Togo

    I remember seeing the concept art of Kirk having a showdown with the Klingon warbird, he had his phaser drawn while standing on the top of a mountain and the Warbird hovers right in front of him.

  • Bryan Jones

    Abrams Star Trek has a 91% favorable rating on Rotten Tomatoes. I realize this isn’t going to matter to all of you detractors, but it would seem that the majority of the movie going public disagree with your analysis of the movie.

  • David A. Murray

    I think a new cut would be an improvement. I always liked Laurence Luckinbill as Sybok and Jerry Goldsmith’s music was excellent. If it was Paramount that insisted on the ‘humour’ element being emphasised and that could be toned down in a new cut then it would help. Enhanced special effects are a necessity, but ultimately the film needed more work at the script stage and that can’t really be solved, only tinkered with. I do think Shatner should be accomodated by Paramount and whatever necessary parties, because he did afterall earn Paramount considerable profits from the franchise (along with obviously other key cast and crew).