I dont know why people dont give this movie the respect it deserves. Some may feel that the Movie is a waste of time because you know they are going to find Spock. I think of this movie differently, This movie isn't about finding Spock it's about the sacrifices the crew of the Enterprise (Especially Kirk) make to save a friend. Star Trek 2 told us how the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one. Star Trek 3 tells us that some times the needs of the one outweigh the needs of the many. The Movie is a wonderful Space Opera, its is a natural progression from the previous movie and lays the groundwork for its sequel. Star Trek 3 also gave us our first real in depth look at the klingons not since the Original Television Show that is. It marked the premiere of a number of new Ships, The Excelsior, Oberth class vessel, Klingon Bird of Prey and Space Dock. And it greatest achievement it brought back Spock.

By KoSoVo, son of Mogh'A'Discio on Monday, June 28, 1999 - 10:05 pm:

Well said Eric. Klingon fans shoud note this film gave new birth to the Klingon race. In TMP, they were just filler. We wouldn't have figured out what they were if we hadn't seen the ships they flew.

By Anonymous on Thursday, July 29, 1999 - 08:38 am:

Howcome in the 23rd century, Checkov is wearing
a big 18-19th century style collar? Isn't
that kind of like someone wearing a starched
ruff today?

By Chris Thomas on Friday, July 30, 1999 - 05:14 am:

Don't you know fashion is cyclical? What has gone out of fashion could very well get a new lease of life...

By Chris Thomas on Tuesday, August 03, 1999 - 05:11 am:

Anyone notice a similarity between the South Park movie where Satan kicks Saddam Hussein into the yawning chasm of fire and lava and says "I have had enough of you" and a certain scene in this film where Kirk does the same to the Klingon?

By Dan R. on Tuesday, August 03, 1999 - 08:54 pm:

I thought about that too when I saw it. Someone else said it was a spoof of another movie.
I thought it was Cartman's V-Chip malfunctiong when he cussed, causing him to shoot electricty, that sent Saddam over the cliff.

By Chris Thomas on Wednesday, August 04, 1999 - 04:30 am:

Give the creators of South Park are big Star Trek fans and have put many nods to it in their work, I'd say it's more likely a nod to this film.

By XNZ on Wednesday, August 04, 1999 - 05:32 am:

So will the next film be South Park: The Search For Kenny?
"Why did you leave Kenny on Genesis? You !@#&(*)$^@#*! He's still alive!

By Adam on Wednesday, August 04, 1999 - 02:29 pm:

Somehow I get the feeling it was more of a tribute to the end of "Return of the Jedi." They seem to be bigger fans of Star Wars then Star Trek.

By Dan R. on Wednesday, August 04, 1999 - 05:22 pm:

In one episode they have a Cartman from a mirror universe and that universe is the complete opposite of this one...IE cartman is nice, Stan and Kyle are mean, etc....AND they all have those spock goatees! :-)

By Adam on Wednesday, August 04, 1999 - 10:30 pm:

Yeah I like that one. My favorite was "good vs. evil."

By Nick Angeloni (Nangeloni) on Wednesday, August 04, 1999 - 10:34 pm:

Note from the Moderator: I have no problem with a mention of a similarity between South Park and Trek III, but please don't let it become a discussion of the show South Park.

Thanks!

By cableface on Friday, August 06, 1999 - 01:18 pm:

Also, when Stan is trying to convince Jesus to get back into the fight with Satan, he quotes the "Don't try to be a great man, just try to be a man" speech from First Contact.

By Chris Thomas on Friday, August 06, 1999 - 10:31 pm:

Isn't that actually something John F. Kennedy said?

By Dan R. on Friday, August 06, 1999 - 10:58 pm:

Coulda been a JFK quote...but if so, then why didn't cochrane know that when he said "That's rhetorical nonsense...who said that?"
It was actually Cochraine I think...10 years after FC...and Stan uses that quote (even says it's from ST) to encourage Jesus.


Hmmm...Maybe we should start a South Park board here! :-)

By Matthew Patterson (Mpatterson) on Friday, August 06, 1999 - 11:31 pm:

NO WAY. Phil would probably just look at the email and laugh. And possilby recommend counseling for ther person who suggested it.

By George Dent on Saturday, August 07, 1999 - 02:05 am:

That's because Phil is a wowser.

By Ed Jefferson (Ejefferson) on Saturday, August 07, 1999 - 08:08 am:

Dan R.- That was probably a joke (by the scriptwriter).

By Mark Swinton on Saturday, November 06, 1999 - 05:45 pm:

To go with views at the top of this board:
this movie picks up on the closing scenes of St II so well. It is the MOST moving Star Trek Movie ever. The scenes between Kirk and Sarek in particular- "Everything he knew. Everything he was is lost... Please wait. He would have found a way..." "At what cost have you done this? Your ship- your son... If I hadn't tried, the cost would have been my soul." This taps into the very core of our humanity (as least, that's what I feel).

By Chris Thomas on Wednesday, December 15, 1999 - 08:23 am:

So the Excelsior has transwarp capability... very interesting. You think by the time of NextGen they would have had it all sorted and in common use.
Kruge's teeth aren't the crooked sort we all know so well now.
When the Enterprise docks at the start, I wondered how Uhura managed to change her hair style so quickly.
If Genesis regenerated the cells, why does Spock grow from a boy to a man - his complete body is on the planet so shouldn't that simply be regenerated and he would appear as an adult?

The black trainee who briefly mentions a hero's welcome at the start to Kirk is Phil Morris - he was a regular in a Mission: Impossible revival, filmed in Australia in the late 80s, and I think he's in The Love Boat: The Next Wave.

Interestingly, I noticed that Majel Barrett is not credited anywhere for work on STII or STIII, not even a computer voice.

By Electron on Wednesday, December 15, 1999 - 05:45 pm:

The old transwarp drive didn't work because the Li2-crystals started to melt at very high warp frequencies. Well, Voyager discovered a Li2 modification which worked and got "Threshold"...

By Nick Angeloni (Nangeloni) on Wednesday, December 15, 1999 - 09:15 pm:

Phil Morris also played the astronaut, Lt. Kelly, in Voyager's "One Small Step," as well as a Klingon and Jem'Hadar on DS9 and one of the kids from "Miri." More proof that certain actors are infinitely bound within Star Trek.

By Chris Thomas on Thursday, December 16, 1999 - 01:37 am:

It just made me wonder why transwarp was forgotten for 80-odd years until Voyager - you'd think with all the brains in Starfleet they'd find a way around the problem in that time.

By John A. Lang on Saturday, March 18, 2000 - 12:03 pm:

I think the reason why the self destruct begins on the Bridge is because that's where all
the main computers are.

Tons of info are stored there plus the override
to the self-destruct.

Blow up that first and the enemy can't get the info from the computer & they can't stop the sequence

By John A. Lang on Tuesday, March 28, 2000 - 12:46 pm:

Where is Amanda...Spock's mother...when Kirk & Co. return Spock's body to Vulcan?

The Vulcans seem pretty relaxed when a Klingon
Bird of Prey enters their atmosphere...don't they?

By Chris Thomas on Thursday, March 30, 2000 - 06:43 am:

Maybe Amanda has died by this point in time? An illness, perhaps, or maybe an innocent in some military skirmish?

By Jason on Thursday, March 30, 2000 - 09:50 am:

No, she talks with Spock in the next movie. She is the person who talks to him in the computer room on Vulcan after he finished answering the questions.

It is possible that Kirk phoned ahead to let the Vulcan athorities know that he is comming so they can get ready for Spock and so they won't shoot the BoP.

By Chris Thomas on Saturday, April 01, 2000 - 02:30 am:

Ah yes, sorry I forgot that bit.

By DVD FAN on Sunday, April 02, 2000 - 03:19 pm:

DVD owners, STAR TREK III comes out on DVD April 11th and should feature widescreen, theatrical trailers, look forward to it!

By John A. Lang on Saturday, April 08, 2000 - 11:22 pm:

HMMM...more nits.....

*How come the Bridge from the Enterprise-B in "Generations" looks so radically different from the Excelsior's bridge in this movie?
Better yet, why does the Bridge from the Excelsior in "STVI" look so different from the Bridge of the SAME SHIP in this movie?

*In "STII-The Wrath of Khan", we see a station
where the weapons are fired with a shield monitor.
The station is there, but no monitor. Chekov monitors the shields from the Science station.

*When Kirk goes down to Spock's quarters when it is broken into, there is an alarm going off...
however, when he enters, the alarm shuts itself
off! (Smart alarm!)

*When Kirk & Co. are about to beam down to Genesis,Kirk flips his communicator open twice.

By Jason on Saturday, April 08, 2000 - 11:31 pm:

I guess they swapped the bridge just like they did with the Enterprise's bridge. According to the tech manual, this is possible.

By Chris Thomas on Sunday, April 09, 2000 - 01:01 am:

The Enterprise bridge has been refitted at the start of ST:TMP, so the same probably applies to the Excelsior.

Why shouldn't the Enterprise-B bridge look different, given it was made after the Excelsior?

By John A. Lang on Friday, April 21, 2000 - 01:10 am:

If Pon Far happens every 7th year in Vulcan males,
how did Spock cope with his first Pon Far?

According to Saavik, the told Capt. Estalban
that they found a Vulcan child about 8 - 10
years old.

Did an Orion Slave Girl pass through the area
before Saavik & David showed up?

By Nick Angeloni (Nangeloni) on Friday, April 21, 2000 - 01:31 am:

Maybe it doesn't happen until the Vulcan equivalent of puberty.

By Chris Thomas on Friday, April 21, 2000 - 02:33 am:

About 8-10 is a guesstimate - Spock age seven could be mature enough to look like an eight-year-old.

By John A. Lang on Monday, April 24, 2000 - 01:52 am:

After watching STIII again on DVD, I wish to
resolve my oversight....

According to Saavik, Pon Farr happens to Vulcan males every 7th year of their ADULT life.

So.. I suppose that means Pon Farr starts at age 14.

Also, I found another nit....

After Kirk gets beamed up to the B.O.P., he points his phaser at Maltz and says, "Don't!"
Saavik the grabs Maltz's phaser...however....
after the B.O.P. breaks orbit the camera returns to the full Bridge shot but this time Chekov has the phaser that Saavik once had....not to mention Kirk's face looks a lot less bloodier...true...he
does have a hankerchief in his hand....but...when did he wipe his face? He musta done it when we
weren't looking. (The same applies to the phaser change too, I suppose.)

By Adam Bomb on Saturday, July 29, 2000 - 07:49 pm:

I don't know if this was posted, but I've gotta say it-was one minute enough time for our guys to leave the bridge, take a turbolift to the transporter room, beam out (I assume the coordinates were preset by Sulu or McCoy)and the Klingons to do this in reverse order?

By Derf on Wednesday, August 09, 2000 - 12:43 pm:

Another "Star Wars" reference was in the personage of the feather-haired, big eared dude in the bar on Earth. He was the one who tried to sell a flight to the Mutara sector to McCoy. He spoke like Yoda, but wasn't the short, green, bumpy, knome-like appearance of him. Same sorta big ears, though. I think that having HIM as the owner of the bar at DS9 instead of Quark would have made for a better DS9 show. (At least, there would be no history of Ferengi to contend with, one could invent ANY personality for the guy.)

By John A. Lang on Wednesday, October 11, 2000 - 03:07 am:

KUDOS to the creators on this movie...the ceremonial gong in this movie strongly resembles the one used in "Amok Time"

By KAM on Wednesday, October 11, 2000 - 03:15 am:

Well, they couldn't use the original because Spock broke it. ;-)

By D.W. March on Wednesday, October 11, 2000 - 05:23 am:

On the other two boards, people have wondered why the autodestruct starts at the bridge. I have two theories, one has already been mentioned.

One: The "Mr. Scott's Guide to the Enterprise" explanation. Obviously the author noticed this nit as well because he explains that there are two different kinds of autodestruct for the Enterprise. One is uncorking the antimatter bottles. The other is presumably for use when that isn't an option. Big packages of conventional explosives. The explosion would have thus started at the bridge to ensure uniform and complete destruction. When a building is taken down it explodes in a set pattern so that it doesn't take all the neighbors with it. Why should it be any different for ships.
The other theory is a little simpler: the ship was DAMAGED! As in it had the •••• kicked out it! First Khan got his licks in and then Kruge. I don't think the ship was repaired in spacedock. And Scotty did say something about how he was really Mickey Mousing it to get the ship to run at all. So perhaps with all that damage he didn't use the conventional autodestruct at all. Perhaps he just overloaded the impulse engines or sealed the torpedo bay and armed all the torpedos at once or something like that. It was a crisis and he had to be creative. I forgive him for not blowing the ship up the way it should have blown up!

By John A. Lang on Saturday, October 21, 2000 - 01:16 am:

There's a "47" that everyone missed!

When Saavik looks at Sector 3, she says, "Temperature decreasing rapidly"...watch the numbers on the screen..it says "47.0 degrees Ceclius"

By Derf on Monday, October 23, 2000 - 11:44 am:

I haven't looked yet, but if Saavik says "Temperature decreasing rapidly", I'm curious if the temperature falls to 47, or if it is constant at 47. (time to pull out the movie and use the nit comb)

By Derf on Tuesday, October 24, 2000 - 12:40 pm:

Besides, 47 degrees celcius is approximately equal to 117 degrees farenheit. If the temperature was "decreasing rapidly", then it fell from a horrendous temperature to 117 (still horrendous) in a short period of time. (hardly habitable for "humanoid" life-forms.)
PS- still haven't researched my above "head-scratch". I'm as bad as you guys at finding out stuff! If I don't give a "researched" response in less than 24 hours, somebody shoot me!!

By Derf on Tuesday, October 24, 2000 - 12:43 pm:

Besides, 47 degrees Celsius is approximately equal to 117 degrees Fahrenheit. If the temperature was "decreasing rapidly", then it fell from a horrendous temperature to 117 (still horrendous) in a short period of time. (hardly habitable for "humanoid" life-forms.)
PS- still haven't researched my above "head-scratch". I'm as bad as you guys at finding out stuff! If I don't give a "researched" response in less than 24 hours, somebody shoot me!!

By The Executioner on Monday, October 30, 2000 - 05:35 am:

Has anyone shot Derf yet? ;-)

By Derf on Tuesday, October 31, 2000 - 05:56 pm:

Unfortunately, my copy of ST3 is a VHS copy, and it appears to be something.5 celcius after Saavik says "temperature decreasing rapidly". I see no indication of 47 deg. celcius on my VHS copy. At the risk of being shot, I've spent the last several nights trying to "see" 47 deg. celcius, and have not been able to detect it on my VHS copy. It may be that a DVD shows 47 celcius, and if so, then a "temperature decreasing rapidly" statement can be argued.

By Derf on Sunday, January 28, 2001 - 03:46 pm:

(dialogue just before Klingon Bird-of-Prey and Enterprise engage in combat)
Kirk: Opinion, Mr. Sulu?
Sulu: I think its an energy surge.
Kirk: Enough energy to hide a ship, would you say?
Sulu: A cloaking device, sir.
Kirk: Red alert, Mr. Scott.
Scotty: Aye, sir.

WHY would Kirk waste energy making Scotty put the ship on "Red Alert" when the five of them (Kirk, McCoy,Scotty,Sulu,Chekov) are the ONLY ones on board?

By Mike on Sunday, January 28, 2001 - 04:16 pm:

Red Alert lets the computer know, "Watch out, there is danger here!" It will then be more on the lookout.

By Derf on Sunday, January 28, 2001 - 04:32 pm:

In ST-TMP, usually the COMPUTER did the Red Alert soundings. (Intruder Alert! ... Intruder Alert! ... Incoming Fire! ... etc.) To be MORE on the lookout than that would be bordering paranoid. However, the argument above holds enough credence to be believed. (especially if I revise my body count ... Kirk, McCoy, Scotty, Sulu, Chekov, and the ship's computer)

By Wannabe Trek Writer on Monday, January 29, 2001 - 09:20 am:

Doesn't Red Alert automatically raise the shields and arm the weapons systems?

By Will Spencer on Monday, January 29, 2001 - 11:04 am:

Kirk chides himself for being lax in TWOK, and mumbles to himself, 'Must be getting senile.' It's possible that Kirk momentarily forgot that he didn't have a full crew below decks, even as he was saying 'red alert'. It was a serious situation, but it's still Kirk's job to tell his bridge crew what to do, even if they know he's going to say 'red alert'. Who's to say that Scott or Sulu knew for sure Kirk's choice of action? He could have turned tail and run, or hold position and called for reinforcements, etc.

By Derf on Monday, January 29, 2001 - 12:30 pm:

To add to Will Spencer's comment ... a proclaimation of "Red Alert" would signify to all aboard (whether they were the ONLY ones aboard or not) a pre-ordained Captain's "mind-set". For that reason, Kirk in ST3 would be justified in ordering Red Alert.

But, to offer a correction to Will, I don't think Kirk ever called for Red Alert during the initial confrontation with Khan. He only called for "Yellow Alert".

By margie on Monday, January 29, 2001 - 12:57 pm:

Like it was said above, Red Alert could be an indication for the computer also, to bring up power to systems that are normally powered down during non-combat situations or divert power from non-essential systems to ones that may be needed in a battle. I'm not an expert on the original series, so I could be totally off base.

By Chris Thomas on Monday, January 29, 2001 - 10:52 pm:

Or Kirk's call for red alert could just have been a reflex action.

By Derf on Monday, January 29, 2001 - 11:12 pm:

If just a reflex action, then Scotty's obedience to the "Red Alert" order was also a reflex action.

By Derf on Thursday, February 22, 2001 - 09:06 pm:

Captain of cruiser: Steady ... steady, boys ... keep scanning. (to Valkris) I thought you people were reliable. Where the **** is he?

I've not heard (except long after this film was made ... aka Worf) that Klingons were known to be reliable. Kirk's dealings with the Klingons (in TOS) made it very clear that they could not be trusted.

By John A. Lang on Saturday, March 03, 2001 - 02:39 am:

I hearby nominate the fight scene between Kirk & Kruge as being the BEST Kirk vs. bad guy fight scene.

By Duke of Earl Grey on Monday, March 26, 2001 - 10:58 pm:

"I...have HAD...enough of...YOU!!!"

"I hearby nominate the fight scene between Kirk & Kruge as being the BEST Kirk vs. bad guy fight scene." John A. Lang

That's still not saying much.

By John A. Lang on Tuesday, March 27, 2001 - 01:01 am:

Ok...I'll elaborate....

Kirk tries to kick Kruge, Kruge grabs Kirk's foot, Kirk grabs Krug's shoulder, Kirk does faultless backflip. Later, he dives onto Kruge screaming while Kruge is lying on the ground.

That fight scene is far, far, FAR better than Picard Vs. Soran.

I would've LOVED seeing Kirk Vs. Khan duke it out in STII...but alas, it didn't happen.

By Colin on Thursday, March 29, 2001 - 05:07 am:

Hello Everyone! Ok, I have something that has bugged me for years. Why is the Enterprise so beat up in ST3? As it is pulling into spacedock, you can see the whole starboard side is charred, as is the front end of both nacelles. Yet I only remember the Enterprise getting hit 3 times in TWOK....the first shot on the port side engineering, followed by one torpedo underneath the saucer. Later in TWOK, you have the near collision and phaser strike along the port side torpedo bay. That's it! No starboard damage at all. This really bugs me!

By KAM on Thursday, March 29, 2001 - 05:41 am:

Maybe they were attacked by Orion Pirates between the movies???

Flew too close to a supernova on the way home???

Collided with a parked spaceship, but decided not to report it because it would raise their insurance premiums???

By Wannabe Trek Writer on Thursday, March 29, 2001 - 04:28 pm:

Colin-

It has been a while since I've seen ST3, so I'm not certain of the damage you're referring to. I do recall significant damage on the port side of the ship.

Coincidentally, I just watched ST2 the other night, so I recall some things that *may* help...

There are a few instances where the attacks happen off-camera. The first that I recall is when Khan fires the torpedo (which may be the underside of saucer torpedo you mentioned) and Kirk yells, "Hang on!" We really don't know precisely where that torpedo hit, except that it did seem to be towards the starbard side.

Also, shortly before that torpedo is fired, Spock indicates the damaged parts of the Enterprise. On the schematic, we can see several blinking lights, mostly on the port side of the ship, but there is at least one on the starboard side. Granted, for all we know those blinking lights mean something else, but it stands to reason in the context of the scene that the blinking lights indicate damage of one variety or another.

Finally, just before entering the Mutara Nebula, Reliant fires a warning shot, a torpedo that comes *very* close to the starboard side of the Enterprise. We never do find out what happens to that torpedo (except the Bridge shakes and Saavik remarks how close the shot was). So it's conceiveable that it made some damage to the starboard side that we never saw on-camera.

What *I* want to know is (and this probably belongs on the ST2 board) how, if the Reliant is 4000 kilometers from the Enterprise, we can still see the Enterprise and the Reliant in the same shot. It should look like a pinpoint of light to the Enterprise. And why do the sensors suddenly function so well inside the Nebula once Khan is beaten?

By Kail on Sunday, April 29, 2001 - 08:19 am:

Just watched this film again last night and had 2 thoughts (pretty good for me, and in a row too!)

1. Kirk knees Kruge in the groin. Ouch! Not very.... heroic.

2. When Kruge goes over the cliff, falls and hits the lava with a "poof", it reminded me of the Road Runner.