Star Trek DVD Savings | Star Trek dvds Star Trek DVDs Full Range and Great Savings

this movie was really cool, i liked how they CGed in new effects for the special editions and made the wampa more scary. this awesome sequel to star wars is the best ever and is surely irvin kershners masterpiece. “the apathy of khan” is cool not only because of its magnificent sense of mystery and light-hearted puns, but also has a really neat plotline. when it starts out, kirk is battleing the evil forces of khan on the ice world of hoth, and his menacing AT AT walkers. all this, while savik and spock are being pursued across the galazy by khan and his evil star ship. spock is finally lured to genesis and thinks he has found shelter with his friend sarek, but is betrayed, and when kirk come to help him, he faces off in a terrifying chess game with khan.
Rating: 1 / 5

There are claims by the film company that this film cost $12 million,but I remember reading at the time it’s budget was only 3 and a half million dollars.Shot by a TV film crew,it re-uses effects from the first film,re-uses the same bridge set(redressed)no less than 3 times and the Eden Cave effect is cheap and terrible.The sets are cheap with the room Spock meets his fate in looking more like a disco dance floor than a power room.On the plus side ST2 has terrific action scenes(better effects in the battle scene),good script,good direction,good acting and a great music score.However,Star Trek 4 and 6 are better movies(due to Leonard Nimoy’s efforts as director on 4 and producer on 6). ST:TNG First Contact and Insurrection are better films,due in part to their bigger budgets.But ST2 is well done for it’s time,although the Eden Cave effect should be re-done.Footnote…why doesn’t Paramount get the support actors to do a commentary on a DVD.What great Shatner stories they could tell!
Rating: 3 / 5

THE STORY: The genetically engineered superhuman Khan returns to seek vengeance on Kirk in this sequel to the television episode “Space Seed.”

COMMENDATION: One good thing I can definitely say about this movie is that it has a very serious and mature vibe; it’s not campy in any way, shape or form (unlike say, Star Trek V: The Final Frontier). This is no doubt one of the main reasons this film is generally regarded so highly amongst Trek fans. It lacks, however, the cinematic epic-ness of The Motion Picture, the first film in the series.

CAN’T BUY IT: The logical errors contained in this story abound: Why is it necessary that so many senior officers appear in a mere cadet simulation (the Kobayashi Maru)? Why use live explosives in a simulator? Are these officers actors in their spare time (it certainly looks like it; Spock in particular hams it up)? How could Starfleet and their cartographers not realize that an entire planet is missing in the Ceti Alpha system? How could Chekov not realize this since he’s a trained navigator? Why didn’t Chekov realize that the Ceti Alpha system was the system in which Khan and his clan were marooned by his former captain (even assuming he WASN’T aboard the Enterprise during the 1st season, he would have certainly gotten word from the rest of the crew, in particular from his Helmsman buddy Sulu)? How did the multi-ethnic supermen of “Space Seed” turn into a bunch of blond Aryans? Why would Scotty melodramatically bring his wounded nephew to the Bridge instead of Sickbay? Why does the ear slug simply leave Chekov instead of killing him (as the creatures did to twenty of Khan’s people)? In an era that highly respects all life-forms why would Kirk unhesitatingly kill the ear slug like an old women trampling on a tarantula? How could Kirk not notice that Spock, his right-hand man, had left the Bridge? Why doesn’t Spock just put on an enviromental space suit before entering the radioactive chamber? I could go on but I’ll be merciful. As great as these errors are, they could easily be ignored or forgiven if the story itself were any good.

FINAL ANALYSIS: I’ve watched this movie (or tryed to) about five times now — I guess I keep hoping that I may have missed something — and I have yet to get through the whole pic in one sitting. The film and cast look great, especially Ricardo Montalban as Khan, but the story itself is just plain dull; it doesn’t involve you. The original TV series may have had cheap sets, but it had great writers (e.g. Gene Roddenberry, Gene Coon, D.C. Fontana, etc.) who were always able to make the characters and story come alive. Here we have the exact opposite: Great sets, costumes and special effects, but a lousy story and dialogue. Case in point: Khan himself. In “Space Seed” the writers (Gene Coon and Carey Wilbur) made the effort to really flesh out his character in many great scenes and well-written dialogue. There’s very little of this in The Wrath of Khan. Although, once again, I admit that Khan and his followers LOOK great, but SO WHAT! Give us some story and character-defining dialogue, please! All Khan seems to do in this movie is scowl at “Kiirrrrk” with angry, beady eyes. Gene Roddenberry himself was disappointed with the movie and honestly stated that the TV Khan was a much deeper and better character than the movie Khan, except that Montalban pulled it off (my feelings EXACTLY).

Oh, at the very end (if you can make it that far) the creators attempt to give meaning and depth to a lousy story by needlessly killing off Spock in a boring self-sacrificial scene. In fact, the ending seems to drag on forever. Apparently, killing off Spock was a lure to draw Leonard Nimoy back into the Trek fold for one final film since he stated he had no interest in participating in a sequel (”If you appear in this movie we’ll give Spock a great death scene at the end, so you’ll never have to worry about playing Spock ever again”). For those not in the know, Nimoy was not very happy at the time for being pigeonholed as Spock by an ever-growing legion of Trek fanatics. In the mid-70’s he even wrote a book titled “I Am Not Spock.” (Little did Nimoy know that he would go on to assume a paternal, nurturing role over the rest of the series — which inludes four more feature film sequels).

The Wrath of Khan easily wins it for Most Overrated Trek Movie. Seriously, I have no idea why so many Trek fans rate this flick so highly — many going so far as to suggest that it’s the best of the six films featuring the original cast. On the contrary, it’s most certainly the worst of the six. I give it two stars (a generous rating) only because the film looks good and takes its subject serious; also because I love Star Trek and the character of Khan so much. In reality it’s an abysmal failure — a soporific dud of stunning dreadfulness. Believe me, I WANTED to savor this movie; it had such great potential, but it was not to be. Staunch Trek fundamentalists (i.e. cookie-cutter automatons) will no doubt gnash their teeth in seething anger for the heresy of this review but, hey, the truth hurts.

Needless to say, the popular idea that only the even-numbered Trek films are good is a colossal myth.
Rating: 2 / 5