Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan

Directed by Nicholas Meyer.

1982. Rated PG, 113 minutes.

Cast:

William Shatner

Leonard Nimoy

Ricardo Montalban

DeForest Kelley

Walter Koenig

Nichelle Nichols

James Doohan

George Takei

Bibi Besch

Kirstie Alley

Paul Winfield

No, I’ve never dressed in costume or went to conventions. Still, I was a bit of a Trekkie as a youth. I used to watch re-runs of the original series nearly every weeknight at 11 PM. I never could get into any of the spin-offs that followed years later, but Cpt. James Tiberius Kirk was always my guy. One of my favorite episodes featured Ricardo Montalban, AKA the guy from Fantasy Island, as Khan. He was one of the coolest villains in the show’s history. The episode ends with Khan, and some of his cohorts, being banished to a planet with no hope of getting off. I’ve left out some details which the movie will re-cap for you since it knows the gap between when this show first aired and when Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan hit theaters is so great many in the audience will have either never seen it, heard of it, or plain just can’t remember what happened. Now thirty plus years since the movie came out, that’s certainly the case.

We pick things up with my guy, now an Admiral since Star Trek: The Motion Picture, very unhappy with his job’s lack of excitement. This means, Adm. Kirk (Shatner) spends the early parts of the movie longing for the days of galaxy hopping and banging green chicks. His nostalgia is only worsened by the fact he’s about to go on a three week rip on his beloved Enterprise, but it’s only a training exercise. Meanwhile, one of Kirk’s former subordinates, Mr. Chekov (Koenig), lands on a barren planet with his new leader, Cpt. Terrell (Winfield). Much to their chagrin, they run into Khan and his ragtag bunch of survivors. As he is happy to remind us, Khan possesses a superior intellect, therefore he recognizes Chekov and remembers him as a member of Kirk’s crew. In short order, he devises a plan to exact his revenge against James T. Luckily for Kirk, when he has to spring into action he has some familiar faces on-board: Spock (Nimoy), Bones (Kelley), Scotty (Doohan), Sulu (Takei), and Uhura (Nichols), along with a bunch of fresh faced youngsters. Among the kids on the crew is young Kirstie Alley as Saavik, a Vulcan in training to become commander of her own starship.

The movie plays out as a chess match between Kirk and Khan. I know that doesn’t sound thrilling, but this is a fun movie. William Shatner plays things surprisingly subdued, but does get into his signature over-the-top style during verbal confrontations with his adversary. On the other hand, Ricardo Montalban’s performance is so deliciously hammy it’s not to be resisted. This guy doesn’t just chew scenery, he devours it large chunks at a time. How he wasn’t cast more often in villainous roles is beyond me. Trust me, anyone who can make Shatner appear restrained is doing big things.

While The Motion Picture feels like an overly long and boring love letter to the USS Enterprise, this feels like an actual episode of the show. That’s because lots of things the series was known for, good and bad/cheesy, are present in Wrath of Khan. There is a certain charm to seeing Kirk and company thrash around in an effected manner when their ship has been hit. Ditto for seeing some poor sap instantly drop to the floor when Spock grabs his shoulder. Spock himself provides us with was certainly, at the time, and is probably still the most shocking moment in franchise history. It gives us a jolt because it goes against the rules of the franchise. Precisely for that reason, it works wonderfully. It elevates what was a good ST flick to being arguably the best cinematic entry in the canon.

MY SCORE: 8/10

Star Trek: The Motion Picture

Directed by Robert Wise.

1979. Rated PG, 136 minutes.

Cast:

William Shatner

Leonard Nimoy

DeForest Kelley

James Doohan

Walter Koenig

Nichelle Nichols

George Takei

Stephen Collins

Persis Khambatta

Cpt. Kirk (Shatner), actually now an Admiral, re-assumes control of the USS Enterprise in order to stop a mysterious, enormous and extremely powerful cloud from destroying Earth. Honestly, Star Trek has never been so boring. However, to give it a few points in its favor you have to understand the circumstances under which this movie was made.

Of course, common knowledge is that  Star Trek was a late 1960s television series that was far more successful in syndication than its original run. So it was known that the show had a loyal following but not if that was enough to guarantee the movie would be a hit.

Two things were working against it. First, it had been roughly a decade since the show last aired an original episode; remember The Next Generation or any of the other ST spin-offs hadn't happened, yet. Not only was no one sure if the public really wanted new ST material, but how do you introduce it to new fans? Second, no one was remaking old TV shows into movies at the time. Conventional wisdom said that TV shows and their stars didn't translate well to theaters. All of this equals a movie meant to bring in new fans while appeasing hardcore Trekkies.

To accomplish this we get a plot that would be right at home on the TV series, but feels stretched thin here. We also get lots of iconic moments, themes, and lines rehashed for the big screen. This includes dramatic grand entrances for several of the most famous characters. And way too many lingering, loving shots of the Enterprise doing nothing. All of this makes the movie move sooooo s l o w. Its 136 minute runtime feels more like 136 hours.

For those new fans there's lots of special fx which look like a laser light show, at best. They've aged poorly, to say the least. In fact, the fx of the first two Star Wars movies, released in 1977 and 1980, respectively, have held up far better. All of this might be forgiven if it had just been more fun. Its the same trap that befell Superman Returns just a few years ago. It's so reverential of its source material that it strait-jackets itself into just giving praise to it without ever becoming a good ST experience.

MY SCORE: 4.5/10

Larry Crowne

Directed by Tom Hanks.

2011. Rated PG-13, 99 minutes.
Cast:
Tom Hanks
Julia Roberts
Cedric the Entertainer
Bryan Cranston
George Takei
Pam Grier
Taraji P. Henson
Gugu Mbatha-Raw
Wilmer Valderrama
Rob Riggle
Nia Vardalos

Our story starts with 50-something Larry Crowne (Hanks) losing his job at big-box store U-Mart. It’s an obvious downsizing move but he’s told that since he didn’t go to college he has virtually no chance for advancement within the company and it’s against policy to limit their employees in such a manner. That runs counter to what I’ve seen and experienced. Such people are a gold mine because they become experts at their jobs and the company has a built in excuse for not promoting them. This saves the company money since they don’t have to give that person a raise nor hire and train a new person to take their place, but I digress. With all of his newfound free time since he can’t find a job, Larry does indeed decide to go to college to keep this from happening to him in the future. Once there, he’s encouraged to take Speech 217 because it’s a life-changer. It doesn’t hurt that he’s given a huge hint that the instructor is hot. When he gets there, he agrees she’s hot. She is Mrs. Tainot (Roberts), pronounced Tay-no, she emphasizes. Note the Mrs. Prefix but understand her marriage sucks. We spend a good deal of time in her class.

Lest you go thinking Speech is his only class, we also spend lots of time with Larry in Econ 1, taught by Dr. Matsutani played by George Takei AKA Mr. Sulu. He pimps his book, laughs at his own jokes and confiscates Larry’s cell phone repeatedly. It’s an odd, somewhat creepy but still enjoyable performance. Before he gets to either class, Larry runs into Talia (Raw). She’s young, pretty and vibrant. She’s also capable of overrunning men in mere seconds, bringing to life the term “killing them with kindness.” Almost immediately after meeting Larry she changes everything about him: his wardrobe, his hair, the way his furniture is arranged, even his name. She insists upon calling him Lance because she thinks it fits him better. He’s so smitten, he lets it all happen. We’re told she has this effect on all men.

Most of the movie just trots by without much in the way of joy or pain. When I say trot, I should say prance because it is shamelessly bland. There are some exceptions, of course. We bristle, or at least I did, whenever Talia is busy recreating Larry. It’s like a horror movie with some happy-go-lucky psycho taking over your life. On the other hand, the scenes with Mr. (Cranston) and Mrs. Tainot are much more enjoyable. The story of their deteriorating marriage is an interesting subplot we’re tempted to try and separate from the rest of the movie. Their scenes are funny, melodramatic and infinitely more intriguing than anything else going on. It could possibly have made a nice dark comedy.

Alas, it is not to be. We’re stuck with Larry Crowne as is. It wants to have something deep to say about the economy but doesn’t. It wants to be an enthralling romantic comedy, but isn’t. Larry gets not one, but two “game-winning” moments that are anti-climactic to the point of being boring. Even the plucky neighbor routine is botched. Cedric the Entertainer and Taraji P. Henson play the happily married couple that lives next door to Larry and makes their living by having a yard sale every single day. Seriously. Ced is supposed to dispense sage advice and make us laugh as he haggles price on everything. Instead, he just says a lot and most of it is unfunny. As he’s running off at the mouth, Ms. Henson just hangs out in the background collecting a paycheck for doing nothing. Good for her, managing to get paid while participating in this mess as little as possible.