Kent Pitman

Kent Pitman
Location
New England, USA
Title
Philosopher, Technologist, Writer
Bio
I've been using the net in various roles—technical, social, and political—for the last 30 years. I'm disappointed that most forums don't pay for good writing and I'm ever in search of forums that do. (I've not seen any Tippem money, that's for sure.) And I worry some that our posting here for free could one day put paid writers in Closed Salon out of work. See my personal home page for more about me.

MY RECENT POSTS

Editor’s Pick
FEBRUARY 18, 2009 11:19PM

Best Movie of All Time: “Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan”

Rate: 25 Flag

My personal choice for best movie of all time is Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan.

Many would say that the best movie of all time is, by definition, Citizen Kane, that the matter is no longer even open for debate. And make no mistake, I think Citizen Kane is a fine movie. It was expertly done, tells a good story, and was a source of substantial innovation. But I don't join the bandwagon of people who say it's the best movie of all time.

There are also a lot of people who will rank Wrath of Khan at the top of SciFi movies, but I disagree with limiting it that way. I do not mean to say here something so trivial as that I like SciFi movies, Wrath of Khan is the SciFi movie I like best, and therefore clearly it must be the best. Rather, I mean to say that I watch all kinds of movies, and that this is simply “the best.”

First of all, the story is a powerful story. It is full of timeless themes: the quest for adventure, the defense of family, matters of youth and aging, anger, revenge, sacrifice, and even technology at its worst and best.

Wrath of Khan managed to do what Star Trek: The Motion Picture had previously attempted and failed. It took the soul of a well-loved television series and brought it back onto the screen. That was itself quite a landmark. In so doing, it changed the endgame for the television series forever and established the notion of television as multimedia franchise opportunity.

But more than that, it was transformational in a different way. Before this movie, the standard model for beloved characters appearing in movie sequels was like James Bond or Superman, where the character never aged even if the actor did. Aging was not spoken of. Actors were replaced when used up. Wrath of Khan went where none had gone before. They used the time that had elapsed between the television episodes and the movies to their advantage. This movie broke the taboo on aging and did what Star Trek as a TV show had been famous for, it made it ok to talk about something that previously people had only danced around.

Ironically, Citizen Kane was praised for its innovative use of special make-up effects to allow actors to appear to age. One thing that Wrath of Khan does the best is make innovative use of not making people up, or at least not overly, and instead using the actual aging as raw material. So I would say these two masterpieces share in common their having made important innovations, even if in very different ways, in the big screen portrayal of aging.

Khan had been a powerful superman kind of character in the TV show to which this movie was sequel. Rather than either get a new actor or pretend there was no aging, the movie capitalized on the length of time in order to underscore the degree to which time can intensify an emotion. Khan's hatred of Kirk has simmered for far too long, and the result is powerful. But Kirk's friendship with Spock and McCoy and Scotty has also continued over the years, and the power of that friendship is likewise drawn onto the screen. The actors' fears of being old, of being put out to pasture, and their struggle to stay relevant is capitalized upon in order to play Star Fleet officers with exactly the same set of concerns.

The movie was also a transformation in other ways. On the show, one always knew that as the hour closed, things would get better. Even people who had died during the show were often brought back to life. But in the movies, it was not so clear. No one ever quite knew if there was to be another movie. There is a definite feeling of “playing for keeps” in this movie that leaves television behind and forces us to grow up, all of a sudden, and to boldly go where we have feared to go before. As Kirk admits he has always only cheated death—and never really faced it—he brings us to a new understanding of the words “final frontier.” He faces problems we all must face, and in the best tradition of the television series, he brings us along to witness and learn from his experience.

The movie is also well-paced, and full of history-making special effects. For example, the movie-within-a-movie of the Genesis Project was the first ever fully-computer-generated movie sequence. And, aptly enough, the production of this movie shared in common with the Genesis device it portrayed the fact that it was a one-way ticket into the future—once released it could not be undone; the sequence itself was too expensive to redo, and yet it was also unpredictable so no one knew how it would come out until they saw it in action! It had to just be tried to find out how it would work. (Proof of this claim is easily visible in the movie if you watch carefully where the viewer's viewpoint, or “camera,” follows around the equator of the quickly evolving planet and at one point accidentally passes through a mountain rather than over it. The creators couldn't go back to refilm it, so at the last moment on the screen a hand-drawn valley is opened up for the “camera” to miraculously pass through. It's easy to spot once it's pointed out. One could easily call this detail a flaw, but I find that it is more of a badge of honor that helps to underscore the truly revolutionary nature of the computation that was done to create this sequence.)

Performances by Shatner, Nimoy, and Montalbán are top-notch. The movie is well-paced and uses a nice mix of serious and humorous elements. It builds on the TV series but does not require that; knowledge of the series merely gives the viewer's understanding a bit more texture.

The plot begins with abstract ethical dilemmas posed by the Kobayashi Maru test used for training in Star Fleet Academy and leads quickly into real life dilemmas, culiminating in Spock's personal solution to the Kobayashi Maru toward the end. It shows us honor, sacrifice, and even hope in a way that is simply hard to top. It goes, quite literally, light years beyond Citizen Kane.


If you got value from this post, please "rate" it.

Your tags:

TIP:

Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Recipient's email address:
Personal message (optional):

Your email address:

Comments

Type your comment below:
Great review! I think you might enjoy the new Star Trek trailer. Looks like they've revamped the entire franchise from the ground up. Which I think is good, since the first series of films felt a bit too constrained by the television program. It's a great franchise that deserves to be monumentally reconcepted.
Oops! Sorry, be sure to see "TRAILER 2" on that link.
Khaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan!

(It needed to be said.)
Monsieur, I haven't seen the trailer but am dreading it. My big concern is that they've picked the same characters. There's no reason for it. By doing so, they show fear that the movie cannot survive on its own merit and must be about the famous characters. That doesn't make it impossible to win. I enjoyed Young Sherlock Holmes for its general premise, though it screwed up in other ways by trying to do too much in one movie. But by picking something where the future is written, it's much harder to create suspense of the right kind. And it's needless. They should have just started with a fresh slate and fresh characters. That's what Roddenberry would have done. I doubted him at first with The Next Generation but it turned out absolutely right and a series that was actually better than the original, I think, if that's possible. So we'll see.
Heh—thanks for getting that out of the way, then, Bursa.
I came here to say what Bursa did. Beat. Dag.

That aside, I didn't know that Khan was played by one of the original Hispanic actors of Hollywood.

Ah, yes, he wore some soft, Corinthian leather.
I'm with ya man. OK, not all the way in but maybe just behind you. I'm a sci-fi freak and for me 2001 A Space Odyssey is tops but The Wrath Of Khan was and is a high point for me. And yes, "the needs of the many, outweigh the needs of the few...or the one". Rated.
Kent... You make me ashamed to say that I m a Trekkie. I have loved the Star Trek franchise throughout my entire life. It was one of the few things that my father and I did together as I was growing up. We watched professional wrestling and Star Trek. I never had a problem with this because he was always home and always accessible... but other than working in the yard we didn't do a whole lot. So Star Trek became special.

I have seen them all. All of the television series and all of the movies... and I have never approached the intellectual appreciation for the Wrath of Khan that you brought out here. To be clear... now that you have so clearly pointed these attributes out... I agree with everythng that you said. I just never saw it in the way. I loved the movie... but I would have hardly recognized it for the landmark achievements that you highlighted.

This is an extraordinary post... and this is from someone who would have claimed himself to be an expert. (rated)
This seems particularly timely with the recent passing of Ricardo Montelbán; though I realize that had nothing to do with your choice, it's been what's had this movie in my mind for the last month or so. Thanks for the good overview and reminder of its qualities.
Bursa said it once, but I'll say it again, "Khaaaaaaaaaaaaan!"

An excellent choice and a flawlessly logical analysis of the film. Your nugget about the computer graphics used is a priceless piece of film trivia. Thanks for sharing it.

Rated for overall goodness and because I'm proud to be a Trekkie.
Hi, Jon—welcome. Feel free to yell it, too, if you'd like. To indulge a bit of cross-over among SciFi universes, allow me to remind you that “in space, no one can hear you scream.”

Americain, indeed, a case can be made for 2001. I understand there are those who think that. For me, it would be an odd choice because although I think it has many fabulous scenes, it also has one of the most boring scenes in all moviedom (the speech scene on the moon). And the pace is quite erratic. It's very Clarke in that way. Some of his books are that way, too. I'm willing to pay the price to get to his many other magical contributions. But as an overall work it falls a little short for me. Nevertheless, we can perhaps agree to disagree as Asimov and Clarke did... There was a dedication from one to the other in one of their books that said soemthing like: From the world's second best science writer to the world's second best science fiction writer. Or some such thing. Heh.
Harp, Star Trek is a celebration. No place for shame here. I'm touched I could help you see something new in something you already enjoyed so much, though.

Saturn, yeah, he was quite something in it. Curious, too, that when they asked him to do the movie he didn't even remember having done the TV show, which wasn't really memorable to him. I'm sure once he went to do the movie he pulled up a video copy and relearned it though. Quite a performance.

Coyote, thanks. That bit of movie trivia came to me from people who knew people in the industry by a kind of word of mouth. I trust the people who told it to me, and it certainly matches what you can see onscreen. The work was done on a supercomputer somewhere, before it was cheap enough for anyone to have a supercomputer (e.g., an Apple G5) of their own. I assume there must be some public account of those details somewhere but I've never gone looking. If anyone knows and wants to post a pointer, that'd be useful. (Even if it contradicts anything I've said, I'd appreciate knowing.)
That was a good one, Kent. Great post.

If I recall, writer/director Nicolas Meyer completely reworked the script just prior to production (though he only took directing credit). And Leonard Nimoy commented on more than once occasion how wonderful it was to have a gifted writer available before production and on set.

For example, the pre-production script included this dialogue from Spock to Saavik, “We can't all be perfect, Saavik. You must control your prejudices and remember that as a Vulcan as well as a Romulan you are forever a stranger in an alien land.” Meyer’s rewrite included things like switching out ‘control your prejudices’ to ‘govern your passions’.

And I’m sure you’ve heard George Costanza’s ‘Khan’ primal scream, yes?
Kent,

I'm always hesitant to say anything is THE best of all-time. But this one is definitely one of my all-time favorites! And you wrote a nice review of the movie.

RATED
Yes, I like this movie a lot, too. Imagineering Ricardo Montalban into an action character: that's something. Also, for its time, the creepy image of that little alien scorpionoid thing that crawled into people's ears was truly creepy and horrific.

However, my heart belongs to Star Trek IV, the San Francisco one. I have always felt that the Treksters were at their best when they were most whimsical. IV was the natural analog to the TV episode named "The Trouble with Tribbles". More of a romp than a drama.
I love this movie - just LOVE it.
David (no relation to the Commodore, I suppose? His great-grandfather perhaps?), I guess I assumed you always got a script-writer on site to make patches, but if not, I can see why it helps.

Rick, thanks. Sometimes you've just got to take a stand. I agree there are other contenders, but I'd have to justify any of them. And this is the one I worked out a while back is really at the top for me.

Rich, yeah, that's a little icky. Kind of like the ROUS's in The Princess Bride.
sciencechick, yeah, that's kind of the bottom line isn't it? It's just a good movie. And it's so not Star Trek: The Motion Picture. Strange. The TV series had an unsuccessful pilot and yet they insisted on another. Very unusual. A wonder the series happened at all. Then the movies had what amounted to an unsuccessful pilot and they insisted on another. Again a wonder that this movie got made at all. But that it was so good...
Thanks, JK.

I've seen the TV episodes on the big screen. The Lecture Series Committee at MIT got a couple of them to show. They are serious cheesy when blown up big enough to see in that detail. The sets were all designed for small screen and don't stand up to the large screen at all, except to people who just loved the show and are watching for fun.

And the plots kind of follow suit with the sets.

One of the few virtues of the ST: TMP (the original movie) was that it showed how the majesty of the screen could work for the visuals, so I won't claim this movie initiates that. But what this movie does is make sure the plots are similarly able to stand the scrutiny of the big screen. This is a plot designed for the theater, no doubt about it.
Kent, as the others have said your review is well done. I liked the film a lot, as well. I would add that I thank the movie's writers for a term I use often, "The Wrath of Khan." Also, I have seen the movie several times and, unless I am mistaken, the dramatic scene in which Ricardo Montalbán utters "Corinthian leather" never made it to the final cut that was released to theaters.
I too love Trek, in almost all of its incarnations. I have to say that "First Contact", I think, is a better movie than "Khan"...but "Khan" is my second favorite. I love "First Contact" because it shows all of the Next Generation actors at their best, it has the Borg and it has HUMOR!

But the number one reason it is better is because in the bit Kirk-Picard controversy...I am solidly in the Picard camp. The scene between Alfre Woodard and Patrick Stewart where she calls him "Ahab"...and he falters in his anger...and compellingly quotes the part of Moby Dick about Abab's obsession with the white whale is one of the best scenes in cinema...period.
designanator, that may be. I'm not familiar with the line, or not remembering it as being of major significance.

yek, First Contact is good but is really a scifi lover's movie, not a movie for general audiences. To follow even the basic plot structure requires detailed knowledge of the Star Trek universe. The themes of Khan are much more accessible. Star Trek IV was one people liked, too, and was a popular success. But I think it's hard to understand it as a piece in isolation; it's more a part of a series. Although II was a part of a series also, it works better as a free-standing element. And it's more ground-breaking, as I've enumerated.
Another way to look at the Trek franchise, from an actor's point of view, is to consider the idea of the ensemble.

Actors, at least stage actors, like to be part of an ensemble (that's what rep companies are).

Star Trek, over a forty year span, showed how commercial television and film could sustain good stories with appearances by hundreds of able, even great actors.

Star Trek is a very large ensemble of players.

Many notable performers in the English speaking theater, as well as American and British film and television, appeared in character roles in the various Trek shows.

Another example of the points made about Khan, in terms of showing characters in real time, was one episode from the Deep Space Nine show where the three aged Klingon warriors go into battle one last time with Lt. Dax.

The Klingon characters were based on the original NBC show from the mid Sixties; and the actors who played those characters at that time performed, for the last time, those roles in the DSN episode.

Not too shabby.
Dirigo, I agree with you about the ensemble thing. Although, Bond movies (and perhaps others) were doing this already before so th is wasn't entirely new ground. Btw, that's a nice tidbit about DS9. Thanks!
True enough about the Bond films on the question of precedent.

But the Trek ensemble is probably larger than any other.
I've got chills all over remembering the Spock death scene. Almost breaks me everytime.

The "Khhhhaaaaannnnn!!!" scene is perfect because of the setup by Montalban: "And now, Kirk, I leave you as you once left me--marrrrooned for all eternity, in the center of a dead world!"
Sam, I totally agree. A wonderful setup. Chilling setups, triumphant responses, back and forth in a kind of tennis match that leads you almost back to thinking it's like TV—then the ending with Spock acting without any preamble and precluding Kirk's antics, Kirk's self-satisfied "my team always saves me", and then the truth...
Karin, the fun comes from being bold. If it gets you thinking, I think that's great. Too often, I think, people pick Kane because they're told to, as if there ever could be on single, unique, right-for-everyone answer.
A compelling case for a movie Ive loved but never would have put in this catagory. Good work here Kent. Rated
Thanks, Tim. Glad to be featuring a favorite of others as well.
Karin, interesting theory. (My immediate thought: Why would it matter to impress me?) Maybe some are. Maybe some are lazy or scared of not having an opinion. Maybe some have traditional taste. But yeah, if you took 1000 people who were very good judges of movies but knew nothing about how movies had previously been ranked and sat them down to watch 1000 movies and then after they did, you asked them what the best was, I'd give you very good odds they would not all converge on Citizen Kane. Then again, the same might be said in many cases for great works of art. I'm not sure how repeatable history is, and a lot of our culture is The History of Chance.