Star Trek III: The Search for Spock (1984) User Reviews

better than you've heard

[dr_foreman · 7/10 · 19 March 2004]

I almost never agree with Trekkies! They usually pan "Star Trek III" and label it a disappointing follow-up to the classic "Wrath of Khan." But I just don't see anything wrong here. The Klingons are delightfully over-the-top villains, the effects and spaceship models are great (arguably the best in the series), and the theft of the Enterprise is a wonderful sequence loaded with humor and tension. DeForest Kelley gets some great material as the "possessed" McCoy, and Shatner's performance - slightly more understated than in the last film - is again rock solid.

So what's the problem? I suppose this movie has difficulties standing on its own; it relies heavily on knowledge of "Khan." But, such issues inevitably crop up when you're dealing with a long-running series of interconnected movies, and they don't matter much in terms of raw entertainment value. Some fans complain that nothing really happens in this film - it's just about getting Spock back and nothing else - but the death of David and the destruction of the Enterprise load it up with more than enough dramatic punch for me.

And, can you possibly imagine Picard stealing the Enterprise to go on a rescue mission? I can't. This movie's storyline captures exactly what makes the original crew so warm, funny, and rebellious...and so it's a good Trek movie, despite what the fans will tell you.

Underappreciated Star Trek film

[perfectbond · 8/10 · 4 February 2003]

I believe Star Trek III is an underappreciated film in part because it is not accessible to a general audience. It is a pure science fiction film. In my opinion it is the one odd numbered film in the series that isn't victimized by 'the curse' of uneven numeration. I enjoyed the film because of the exciting action and fight sequences, the nostalgia, and the developed characterization of characters I am already so familiar with. I also found the film to be surprisingly spiritual and revelatory, a rarity for a sequel in a commercial film franchise. Anyone with close friends will be touched by Kirk's loyalty and sacrifice for Spock. Highly recommended, 8/10.

Best odd numbered "Trek"

[jhaggardjr · 8/10 · 17 August 2000]

The even numbered "Star Trek" movies (parts 2, 4, 6, 8) have turned out to be the best in the series while the odd numbered ones (parts 1, 3, 5, 7, 9) are the weaker films even though some of the odd numbered ones are pretty good. "Star Trek III: The Search for Spock" is, in my opinion, the best odd numbered movie in the series to date. If you recall at the end of "Star Trek II", Mr. Spock (Leonard Nimoy) gave his life to save his friends. His coffin was shipped off to the Genesis Planet, an experiment co-created by Kirk's son David. "Star Trek III" opens with some of this footage from the previous film. As the new scenes begin, the Enterprise crew is on their way home. But weird things start happening. Dr. McCoy (DeForest Kelley) begins to act strange, and a lifeform has been discovered on the Genesis Planet. Is Spock really dead? Is Dr. McCoy going insane? Admiral Kirk (William Shatner) discovers that before his demise Mr. Spock implanted some of his mind into Dr. McCoy, which explains why he's been acting unusual. Spock's father Sarek tells Kirk that he must find Spock's body in whatever condition it's in if there's any chance for Spock and McCoy to have peace. And what follows is a very exciting adventure. In addition to finding Spock, the Enterprise crew must do battle with their most lethal enemy, the Klingons, who's leader (Christopher Lloyd) wants the secrets to the Genesis Project. As far as how good this film is, "Star Trek III: The Search for Spock" is just a few notches below "Star Trek II". The story could have used a little tightening and it's a little slow in the first half. But then the film picks up the pace with a thrilling second half. Will Spock be rescued? By now I think everybody knows the answer to this question. Leonard Nimoy made his directorial debut with "Star Trek III: The Search for Spock" and did a very good job (he did an even better job on the next film "Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home"). "Star Trek III" has all the other elements as well: action, special effects, and performances, all above average. The cast does a good job as usual. Shatner, Kelley, and the rest of the Enterprise crew are back in good form. Lloyd is an exceptional villain here. Look for a pre-"Night Court" John Larroquette as a Klingon. "Star Trek III: The Search for Spock" is a fun movie, which was a perfect set-up for the next "Star Trek" adventure.

*** (out of four)

The Needs of One...

[cariart · 27 November 2003]

STAR TREK III: THE SEARCH FOR SPOCK was yet another 'Star Trek' film Paramount had not originally intended to make (considering the profits the studio has reaped from the franchise, their continuing narrow vision is astonishing!), but Spock's death in STAR TREK: THE WRATH OF KHAN had created such controversy, and the first two Trek films had been so successful, that it required little arm-twisting to convince studio bosses to 'green light' a third installment (with a very modest budget).

Producer/Writer Harve Bennett knew how he wanted to resurrect Spock, but with Nicholas Meyer unavailable to direct, he needed someone familiar with the 'Star Trek Universe' to helm the project. So when 'Spock', himself, Leonard Nimoy, expressed a desire to direct it, Bennett was more than pleased. Nimoy was not a complete novice, having directed for television (including an episode of William Shatner's 'T.J. Hooker'), his understanding of his fellow crewmates and Vulcan ritual was unimpeachable, and he had little 'ego', making the working experience with him a joy for everyone involved.

As was the case with ST:TWOK, THE SEARCH FOR SPOCK was filmed primarily on sound stages, due to budget restraints, utilizing existing sets, when possible (which was why the Genesis Planet sequences appeared so claustrophobic). The film begins with a flashback from the previous film, concluding with Spock's coffin on the Genesis Planet. As the Enterprise returns to Earth to be decommissioned, strange things are happening to Dr. McCoy (the always reliable DeForest Kelley). He is hanging out in Spock's darkened quarters, and Spock's voice can be heard, coming from him. Admiral Kirk (William Shatner) chalks it up to depression, something the entire crew is experiencing, and sympathizes with him. Meanwhile, Kirk's son, David Marcus (Merritt Butrick), and Lt. Saavik (Robin Curtis, replacing Kirstie Alley, who had joined the cast of 'Cheers'), are on a science ship investigating the Genesis Planet (why David's mother, Carol Marcus, isn't involved, or even mentioned, is left unexplained), and they are detecting a lifeform reading that shouldn't be there. Faster than you can say "Spock!", the pair beam down to investigate. Also investigating the planet is a Klingon Bird-of-Prey, helmed by the ruthless Commander Kruge (Christopher Lloyd), who hopes that any technology powerful enough to 'remake' a planet might provide a weapon against the Federation. Destroying the science ship, he and a party beam down to the surface to capture it's 'creator', Marcus.

Back on Earth, Kirk is visited by Spock's father, Sarek (Mark Lenard), who is stunned to discover that Kirk had 'dumped' his son's body on the planet, and didn't possess the Vulcan's 'soul'. Unknown to Kirk, Vulcan ritual required a melding of both body and mind, with resurrection as the end result. Kirk quickly deduces that McCoy possesses the 'soul', (explaining his 'lapses' into Spock's personality) and finds him in a padded cell, after the good doctor, trying to hire a ship to go to the Genesis Planet, attempted to fight off Federation security using a Vulcan nerve pinch. Despite the warnings of the Federation, Kirk, after 'springing' McCoy, and the original crew hijack the Enterprise, and are soon on their way to recover Spock's body, and return it to Vulcan.

Saavik and Marcus find a rejuvenated and rapidly maturing Spock, and the female Vulcan introduces him to sex, when the youth experiences Pon Farr for the first time (one wishes Alley had been playing Saavik during THIS scene!) Soon after, the Klingons capture the trio, and threaten torture to learn Genesis' secret. Learning that the Enterprise is en route, young Marcus sacrifices himself to save the others (Kirk's stunned reaction to the death of his son would color his opinion of Klingons, ever afterward). With the planet self-destructing, Kirk would have to defeat his son's killer, and rescue Spock and Saavik, returning them immediately to Vulcan, or risk losing his friend, forever. The climax, featuring the destruction of the Enterprise, and re-emergence of Leonard Nimoy, as Spock, make ST:TSFS a memorable experience.

While the film lacked the electricity of ST:TWOK, it is a moving, powerful film in it's own right, with a haunting variation of the earlier film's music, by James Horner, and a cameo by legendary Dame Judith Anderson. Nimoy's direction was strong and cinematic, assuring him the directorial duties for the next Trek, THE VOYAGE HOME.

No matter what 'tradition' says about 'odd' and 'even'-numbered 'Star Trek' films, ST:TSFS is not a 'loser', in any sense of the word. It provided Scotty, Uhura, Chekov, and Sulu (James Doohan, Nichelle Nichols, Walter Koenig, and George Takei) their best big-screen appearances, gave Kelley an opportunity to play 'dual' roles, and reaffirmed what ST:TWOK had demonstrated about William Shatner; that after his fiasco in STAR TREK: THE MOTION PICTURE, the Canadian actor had truly reclaimed the role of Kirk.

Definitely worth watching!

You Klingon bastards! Kirk gets personal.

[hitchcockthelegend · 7/10 · 4 March 2008]

It is what it is folks, it's a good honest Star Trek story, it beats a real emotive heart and although some may decry the lack of blistering space battles, or end of the universe peril scenarios, it's an essential film for dealing with the protagonists we know and love.

Into the mix here we have our favourite alien enemies The Klingons (led by the oddly cast Christopher Lloyd), Spock's father, Sarek, who adds grace to the story, and crucially Kirk gets an emotional kicker. While elsewhere hardcore fans get a big surprise with the beloved Enterprise.

It's of course merely a set up for the next (and delightfully great) instalment of Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home, but on its own terms this stands up as one of the better character pieces in the series. Due in no small part to having Leonard Nimoy directing it because he shows care and thought about a subject he obviously knows quite a bit about. 7/10

This third part in cinema Star Trek turns out to be an exciting and thrilling sequel well directed by Leonard Nimoy

[ma-cortes · 7/10 · 20 October 2005]

The film talks the veteran crew of the Enterprise NC1701 piloted by James T.Kirk (Wililam Shatner) arrives in spacial station for repairing their starship but they quickly must set out to search Spock (Leonard Nimoy) who's found on planet Genesis . They'll face off nefarious enemies and battle the Klingon (commanded by Christopher Lloyd) . This Star Trek is principally the follow-up to ¨Wrath of Khan¨ that finished with death of Khan (Ricardo Montalban) and Spock sacrificing his life to save his friends .

The storyline is concentrated on characters as well as thrill-packed action and special effects although there're numerous of that too . The movie has tension , comedy , emotion ,suspense and sensational spacial scenarios as is customary development in the franchise , besides with impressive aircrafts made by means of miniature and non computer generator . Spectacular, exciting , fast-paced , thrilling this is the description of this new outing of Star Trek , film that reinvents various elements , including a perfect pulse narrative that does not give a second of rest to the spectator who is trapped for almost two hours approx. in a genuine visual spectacle . As our heroes are propelled into an epic chess game of life and death, love will be challenged, friendships will be torn apart, and sacrifices must be made for the only family Kirk has left: his crew . Usual saga actors making brief appearances as Uhura (Michelle Nichols) , James Doohan (Scotty) , Zulu (George Takei) , Chejov (Walter Koenig) and trademark effects abound in a film that will please the fans and even non enthusiasts will most likely find it agreeable . The villains of the film were originally intended to be Romulans, but upper studio management wanted Klingons to be used since they were better-known enemies. By the time the decision was made, the Romulan ship was already built and they did not want the expense of replacing it. However, since the original Star Trek (1966) series had already established that the Klingons and Romulans had shared technologies and ships in the past (for exactly the same real-world cost-cutting reasons), the idea of Klingons using a Romulan-style vessel was not a problem . The motion picture has a climatic and spectacular ending . Stirring final amazing the spectator , in which the moving and spectacular scenes create a perfect union that terminates with an ending that leaves you stuck in the armchair facing the formidable spectacle as a privileged witness . James Horner musical score (replacing Jerry Goldsmith)is exceptional and atmospheric . Release was well directed by Leonard Nimoy who appears secondary in this film , too . The flick will appeal to long time series buffs such as the neophite .

You'll never watch "Taxi" reruns the same way again!

[ray-280 · 7/10 · 4 August 2006]

Christopher Lloyd has to be one of the most brilliant actors in history. When I first saw him, as Reverend Jim Ignatowski, I was very young, and his presence was very "memorable." As with Sean Penn as Jeff Spicoli in Fast Times At Ridgemont High, it takes several different performances to truly grasp his range.

The rest of the cast? If you have to ask....

The plot? If you have to ask...okay, this time the crew goes on a mission to find Spock, whose mind has been placed in Dr. McCoy for safekeeping while his body chilled out at the Genesis spa. Only a vulcan ritual can make everything right, but first the crew has to retrieve Spock's body from Genesis, and in doing so they encounter the evil Klingon commander Kruge (Lloyd).

The special effects on this film were subpar, particularly the fight scenes on the exploding Genesis planet; I've seen better special effects with fire on a soap opera. That's acceptable, however, since when the film came out, we needed Spock to return to the living, though today's audiences wouldn't understand the significance of having killed him off at the end of II.

To those who don't know, when Kruge says "I come all this way for Genesis, and this is what I find," Lloyd is in the character of Reverend Jim from Taxi, and the theater I was in exploded in laughter at the time; this joke would be lost on anyone who hasn't seen that series. All that was missing was Danny DeVito as a space dispatcher or Andy Kaufman as an alien.

Whereas Star Trek I tilted a little too much towards the hardcore fan base, and Star Trek II was perfect for everyone (by far the best of the series), Star Trek III was a decent film that satisfied the intense cravings of Trekkies (not Trekkers, as there was no shame in being a Trekkie back then) for more footage of the famous crew of space pioneers. This was before the internet, before cable and even video stores (almost), and when all we had were the 78/79 episodes that were in reruns and which we had memorized every line to. I left the theater pleased with the film, knowing it could have been better, but it also could have been far worse.

Perhaps the film's greatest achievement is that it was obviously made to cash in on the growing rerun audience from the series, yet it still managed to be superior to most episodes, while stacking up decently against every other Trek film ever made, except for Star Trek II and First Contact.

If you're a hardcore fan, buy the DVD; if not, catch it on cable. Either way, you'll be pleased.

The Mindful Physician...

[Xstal · 7/10 · 1 March 2022]

Boldly going where no man (or woman) has gone before, climb aboard the Enterprise and let it fly and soar, as old friends gather, reunite, off to battle and to fight, strange new worlds, civilisations to explore.

A child is discovered all alone, a Vulcan without soul, perhaps a clone, while a Doctor rediscovers, an old friend inside another and a starship's final journey helps them home.

Some things are more important than rules and regulations as the captain of the Enterprise takes his pride and joy to recover what was lost and resurrect what was saved.

Criminally underrated

[mozillameister · 9/10 · 14 April 2018]

I think the problem with The Search For Spock was that it followed such a spectacular movie. Wrath of Khan is one of the best sci fi movies ever made. Even if you aren't a Trek fan, it's intensity and pacing is unrivaled.

TSFS never tries to even touch what TWOK did. Even though it's right after the events of that film, it has a much light hearted and optimistic tone.

And if you go watch them as separate films and come in with no expectations, you'll see a very fun and tightly wounded story with impeccable acting and great dialog.

Story wise, it's a really simple tale. Spock was left on Genesis but his mind is still in McCoy. They need to go back and get Spock in whatever condition he is to mend his soul. Except Klingons.

The plot isn't what drives the film, but the characters really do flesh out the story. Seeing McCoy acting all crazy is hilarious, and several really memorable scenes really make this film a joy to rewatch. Christopher Lloyd is awesome if a bit hokey as a Klingon baddie. Some truly memorable quotes here too.

In the end, it's a very enjoyable film with great acting and pacing. It's a top notch film done on a shoe string budget. Even more impressive that it's Nimoys first directing film, and you would never know it watching this.

I'm still searching for answers

[ironhorse_iv · 7/10 · 24 March 2013]

This movie didn't answer much. Search for Spock has some aspect of the Star Trek theme, but it is very poorly handled. Still, not bad for Leonard Nimoy's first directed film. This one isn't as bad as the other odd numbered installments, especially if you factor in the fact that it ties what happen in the events of the previous Star Trek movie 'Wrath of Khan' so well. If you are a first time viewer of this movie, I wouldn't watch this movie until you watch Wrath of Khan first. It's very important to watch that movie before this. Yes, Star Trek III: The Search for Spock came after that movie, and being after such a masterpiece, people going to look at it being worst compare to that film. No, Star Trek film can live up to that film. Still the movie has some OK action scenes and interesting story. The movie starts out with recaps of the last few minutes of Wrath of Khan and then the movie officially begins. A spy has deliver some information about the Genesis program that Klingon commander Kruge (Christopher Lloyd) needs to hear. It seems like Genesis does, what Nintendo don't. What I meant by that is that Genesis has create life on a planet. The Klingons see this as a weapon to have. The Klingons were always Russian allegory in these films. So hearing this, must have been the same feeling when the Soviets heard about the Atom Bomb. Still, I cannot get over the fact that Christopher Lloyd is playing a Klingon, here. I was expecting him to shout "Great Scott!" or something. His character is quite stupid and silly at times. Just watch the killer plant scene, you can't help laughing at him. He's just not that menacing enough and not epic to the likes of Khan. Well, the Klingons are not the only ones hearing voices, but Dr. McCoy (De Forest Kelly) is talking all crazy about a certain Vulcan name Spock and that Captain Kirk (William Shatner) and the crew should go to Genesis to search for him. Now it's a quest between the crew of the Enterprise to rescue Spock before the Klingons get a hold of the planet. This movie suffers from the typical middle child syndrome of being a 2nd movie in a trilogy's story arc. Star Trek III: The Search For Spock is the second chapter of what is called by some fans "the Star Trek Trilogy", yes it is the third film of the series, but it's the second act in what is indeed a three parter. The first act is in Wrath of Khan, concerning its events leading up to somebody's death. The second act is in Search for Spock where somebody soul and body have to be re united and the third is in Voyage Home where somebody fully regains himself. My biggest problem with Start Trek 3 is that I feel it takes away from the impact of 2. The whole idea of life and death at the end of the 2nd one regarding a death of a character and the birth of a new planet is breath taking. Then this movie has Genesis's kind of break that apart! Breaking apart is a theme here. This film shows that Kirk ends up losing so much more than a friend. He sacrifices his ship, loses a family member and hope. The scene where Kirk is forced to relive his friend's death when he does the mind meld is a wonderful scene. The problem is when you look at how strong, 2 is with its story and themes and how this one causes those scenes to be all for nothing. It's disappointing. I think the worst idea is bringing back a character back after such a heroic death. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Captain Kirk's friend is noted to say for the reasons and justifying about his sacrifice. I believe that if you kill a character, then that character should stays dead. It does no favors for somebody to kill a character, only to bring them back in a later movie. Its movies like this, that started the 'resurrection of Jesus' concept of bringing dead characters back to live. A good example is Ellen Ripley who dies in Alien 3 only to be given an awful new spin in Alien Resurrection. It's like Nimoy woke up and realize how much money he can make, if he brings back a beloved character back to life. At less, this character got a good story on how he came back, so I can't complain too loudly. Still, it makes you wonders if Genesis was aging faster and faster; how come Kirk's friend didn't aged out as well. Wouldn't he die again by old age? Also how comes, nobody else aged on the planet if Genesis does that to life forms? Wouldn't they also grow older as long as they stay on the planet? The science is baffling. Also what's baffling is how Kristie Alley regenerated to Robin Curtis. It's seem like Alley didn't want to return, so the character was rewritten as a new character as Savvik. I find the Pon-Farr scene, stupid as hell. And where was David Marcus's mother, Carol? It would've been interesting to have her in Saavik's place down on Genesis and it would make more sense. The movie's over all is that it's works to a level, but compare to others. It's not that awesome. Still, it's worth the watch, so check it out. So start trekking.

Is it a search if they know where he is the whole time?

[jonathanfisk · 4/10 · 13 July 2016]

It feels a little strange to say, but this film may be worse than the first Star Trek movie. At least the first film was creative and slightly intriguing, even if it did not translate to the big screen. But The Search for Spock contained little mystery, a prolonged and obvious outcome, and continued the same flawed subplot (and basically the only negative aspect of) The Wrath of Khan, that being the Genesis Project. This unlikely Federation project was at least a bit on the afterburner in the previous film, compared to Khan's quest for vengeance against Kirk. Now it's the main story as it gives Spock his rebirth, but this time there is hardly any thought to the moral dilemma of the project.

There are some positives in this film; I don't think it is a disaster. It was nice to see the rest of the crew given a little more of the spotlight, such as Uhura putting the young Federation member in his place (then she disappearing for basically the rest of the film…) and Sulu taking out the Federation MP's (his hand-to-hand combat is much more believable than Kirk's; more on that in a bit). Also, while it is a little strange to see Christopher Lloyd as a Klingon, he made the character sinister and interesting.

But my main criticism with Search for Spock is that we always know Spock will return, and the child version of the character is found early on. The film could have been so much better if the Spock regeneration was settled during the first or second act, then we can move on to a new Star Trek adventure with the crew back together. There is a sense with this film, especially since it was directed by Leonard Nimoy himself, that Kirk got his movie with Wrath of Khan, now let's explore more about Spock's nature throughout this entire film. But it all just comes across as a lackluster, immediate follow-up to the previous installment. With Wrath of Khan, it felt like a reboot to the franchise, not a sequel. But this film exemplified exactly what most of us don't like about sequels: trying to wrap- up loose ends from the last film and taking it up a notch from there, but failing.

Final thoughts: Please, no more hand-to-hand combat from Kirk, it doesn't work anymore. The character plays so much better as a captain outwitting the enemy, as he does with the destruction of the Enterprise. And are you serious with that Ponfar scene? I know Kirstie Alley said she didn't want to be typecast, so she chose not to continue her role as Saavik, but I have to think that this scene with post-adolescent Spock had to really push her over the edge. Plus, do we really think that these characters who are pushing 50 could walk up all of those steps on Vulcan carrying a comatose Spock? Scotty must have been freaking out. And what is Bones regular "poison"? Gotta be Romulan ale.

*My film rating follows the soccer player rating measure of 6 as a baseline: you did what was expected of you. This film is a 4 because it fails to intrigue and shows essentially nothing new. It is simply a sequel trying to continue the excitement of its predecessor, but utterly failing.

A solid and good yet predictable sequel that does not disappoint

[mike48128 · 9/10 · 28 September 2017]

One of the better written and directed Star Trek (early) movies. The actors (especially "Scotty and Bones") look quite long-in-the-tooth. So many full head wigs, probably sold at a "fire sale" to Pat Sajak of Wheel Of Fortune. Just a comment about Vulcan men in "season". There must be more to it than the intense rubbing of fingertips. The ILM models are good but some of the scenes look over-processed and a bit fake. Christopher Lloyd makes a pretty good "Klingon" and his snarly alligator-dog is a hoot! The new "Vulcans" prove that it's all in the ear make-up as female "Saavik" can truly be played by anyone, so it appears. A rather fast-moving story with pretty good scenery and somewhat convincing set decoration. The "puppet worms" on the planet look truly disgusting. The Genesis Planet doesn't look quite as hokey as most Star Trek "worlds" do. I expected Kirk's son would die as both the other hostages were needed for the movie to continue. Star Trek (usually) only kills off extraneous female aliens. As usual, typically over-tight costumes on female personnel. Saavik was needed to help transport young Spock's "body shell" home to Vulcan. A good satisfying film although quite a predictable ending. A nice Star Trek adventure from beginning to end.

A watchable but disappointing search

[TheLittleSongbird · 6/10 · 19 July 2017]

Having been one of the shows that was part of my childhood and growing up, the original 'Star Trek' still holds up as great and ground-breaking, even if not perfect.

'The Search for Spock' is not the 'Star Trek' franchise at its worst (marginally better than 'The Motion Picture' and much better than 'Final Frontier' for the films based on the original series). However, considering that it came after one of the best (perhaps even the best) 'Star Trek' films 'The Wrath of Khan', it was a disappointment and could have been so much more. It is not as bad as has been said by some but has too many faults to be in the passionate defence camp. Am in the camp that was mixed on the film.

Starting with the faults with 'The Search for Spock', like 'The Motion Picture' the pacing is pedestrian, again taking a while to get going, and parts could easily have been trimmed and gotten to the point more. The whole Grissom and crew stuff could have been better explored (like being lost suddenly and then their fate being ambiguous).

Leonard Nimoy takes the director's helm and while he does a competent job it is somewhat workmanlike and his experience in TV and not-so-much-experience in feature films shows, loved the focus on the characters and their relationships but it could have been more expansive. While 'Wrath of Khan' took a darker approach it wasn't consistently so and had themes that many could relate to, with the pacing being as dull as it was the tone often feels bleak and funereal which takes away from any excitement. The final scene is emotional, but the lead up is somewhat self-indulgent, while Robin Curtis is as stiff as a board and with the emotion of a corpse.

However, for all its flaws 'The Search for Spock' has a lot to recommend too. The visuals, like 'Wrath of Khan', are a marked improvement over the original series. The sets are more elaborate, the photography is moody and stylish and the special effects (and there's plenty of them) are amazing and have a real sense of wonder and emotional charge. The music by James Horner is even more clever than in 'Wrath of Khan' and him returning was effective for continuity reasons. It is bombastic and rousing at times but also swelling in romance and sensitivity and beautiful orchestration, the heavy representation of the percussive and dissonant theme for the Klingons was also effective.

'The Search for Spock' does have an intelligent script that develops the characters very well indeed, it also doesn't feel too talky like 'The Motion Picture' did. The story is not perfect and the search could have been more exciting and had more point to it, but that it focused on the characters and allowed them and their relationships to drive the story proved to be a good move, plus the characters that were underused before have more to do and the characters are interesting apart from the underdeveloped villain. The stealing and destruction of the Enterprise are a lot of fun and also very tense and the Kirk and David relationship does bring some emotional wallop.

Acting-wise, 'The Search for Spock' is just fine. Nimoy proves why Spock is such an interesting and well-loved character, while William Shatner is more understated than usual and the rest of the original series crew have expanded screen time and make good impressions, DeForest Kelley having some really meaty moments. Consensus on Christopher Lloyd has been mixed, to me he did a really good job with what he was given to work with (the character itself could have been better written and was the problem, not Lloyd), bringing a sinister approach and also an enjoyably over-the-top one.

In conclusion, watchable but disappointing at the same time. 6/10 Bethany Cox

The Search for Plot.

[dunmore_ego · 5/10 · 7 September 2009]

The rumors of his death have been greatly exaggerated.

It was a fantastic climax, bringing tears to the eyes of Terrans and Vulcans alike, as Spock bad his final farewell through perspex, busting his Live Long and Prosper sign to his lifelong friend whom he could not touch, radiation eating at his body; as Kirk pulled some of the best overacting of his Starfleet career while shooting Spock's coffin at the heart of the Genesis Planet... The conclusion to STAR TREK II: THE WRATH OF KHAN was a tear-jerking scorcher... But now we find out it needn't have been so overwrought...

You see, in this sequel, STAR TREK III: THE SEARCH FOR SPOCK, we see that just before his death, Spock (Leonard Nimoy), had mind-melded his essence, his "Katra," into Dr. "Bones" McCoy (DeForest Kelley) with what could have been construed a sexual harassment touch and a single word: "Remember!"

Would it have been too much to ask that Spock MENTION THAT FACT to Kirk, who thought he was gone forever and therefore shot his corpse at the Genesis Planet, instead of keeping his body and rushing him to Vulcan General Hospital?

Enticed back into the fold by being offered the director's chair, Leonard Nimoy helms a story by Harve Bennett, that picks up where TREK II left off...

Back on Earth, Kirk (William Shatner) is confronted by Spock's father, Sarek (Mark Lenard), seeking Spock's Katra in the lifelong friend whom we believe Spock would have left it in. Tragically, it is not there. But Bones starts acting weirdly Spocky - and everyone realizes Spock's body must be retrieved from Genesis, to download it with Bones.

Bones-as-Spock tries to hire a black market ship to Genesis, in a cantina sequence that reeks of cheap masks and flimsy plastic sets. Bones is arrested. Kirk, Chekov and Sulu pull a wild west rescue, steal the Enterprise with Scotty and Uhura, and head for Genesis.

Meanwhile, on the science vessel orbiting Genesis, Vulcan Saavik (now Robin Curtis, warp-factor-two hotter than Kirstie Alley) and Kirk's son, David (Merritt Butrick, warp-factor-three feyer than Richard Simmons), discover some terraforming element of Genesis has affected Spock's man-corpse and rejuvenated it as a boy, who is aging in years by the minute. (I dare any Trekker to explain it "scientifically.") Actually, the script makes no sense at all. But we'll continue anyway, just like the filmmakers.

As Kirk's Enterprise wings its warp way to Genesis, so does a Bird of Prey - a Klingon warship of ferocious design, helmed by Captain Kruge (Christopher Lloyd, chewing plastic scenery like Juicy Fruit), the Klingons seeking the Genesis Device. Don't know how they plan to use it for ultimate domination - but it should be great for growing a nice terrarium on their Bird of Prey patio.

Spock continues his growth at an alarming rate, so he goes through his seven-year jones for pointy-eared pussy every few minutes. Saavik does a sensually-charged finger dance with the teenaged Spock, which should outrage a few puritanical thumpers - if they had the wherewithal to apprehend sensuality rather than blatant humping as more conducive to causing social disharmony.

The technical prowess of this production is once again light years ahead of its predecessors, and Nimoy proves himself a good director. Unfortunately, the story is simple in a bad way. And knowing Nimoy is pouting there behind the camera kinda gives the game away, dunnit? And Saavik finding young Spock early in the piece seals the deal that our pointy-eared playmate will soon come out and play with us again. So... what now?...

Let's kill something.

In this TREK, two more Grand Deaths - that of the Enterprise and Kirk's son: one poignant, one very, very fey. Kirk dupes Kruge's Klingon Krew onto the Enterprise, then self-destructs it, as he and his man-crew beam down to Genesis's surface to watch the fireball which used to be their party bus flame into the atmosphere - a heart-wrenching moment for fan boys, almost as bad as the cancellation of the Scott Bakula line of action figures.

David's death is a little funnier: in a callous gesture, Kruge orders a henchman to kill either young Spock, Saavik or David, which prompts David to jump their would-be Klingon assassin, only to get knifed by the Klingon. (Must've gotten that weak fighter gene from his mother's side...) For "tampering in god's domain" (trying to create life with Genesis) David was punished with death - at least, that's what the filmmakers say, to tenuously connect the neck-sweater-wearing David with the brooding genius of Victor Frankenstein) - but I think they just didn't want someone around that fey to tamper with the masculinity of the Kirk legacy.

The dramatic climax involves Kirk fisticuffing Kruge on the Genesis Planet - two middle-aged hammies throwing movie punches on a cardboard set.

Then it's all aboard the Bird of Prey to Vulcan, where Bones is thrown on the op table and mind-melded back into Spock, Teen Spock very conveniently having grown to the age of Leonard Nimoy.

Revived Spock, disoriented, asks of Kirk, "Why did you do this?" Kirk replies, "Because the needs of the one outweigh the needs of the many." But I'm not buying it. You mean after all that turmoil in the last movie to illustrate sacrifice, you've just gone through the same amount of turmoil to prove the opposite? What if Chekov or Uhura had died on the Genesis Planet? Think Kirk would have wasted the fuel to go back? There would have been ten irate fan letters and the series would have green-lit production on STAR TREK IV with one less above-the-line paycheck to worry about.

Because the needs of the many (the fans) outweigh the needs of the few (one minor bad actor).

William Shatner VS Christopher Lloyd

[DarthBill · 15 April 2004]

Picking up where "The Wrath of Khan" left off, McCoy seems to be going mad, the Enterprise is being retired, Kirk mourns the loss of Spock and his son Dr. David Marcus is off exploring his newly created Genesis planet with the lovely Vulcan vixen Saavik (exit Kirstie Alley, enter Robin Curtis). Kirk then finds out from Sarek (Mark Lenard, who had a brief, unrecognizable role in the opening of "Star Trek: The Motion Picture" as an ill fated Klingon Commander and played a Romulan before playing Spock's dad) catches up with Kirk and tells him that there's a chance at resurrecting Spock, who's mind and spirit are housed in McCoy's brain while his body is on Genesis. Feeling obligated to return the favor for saving them all at the end of #2, Kirk and the gang hijack the Enterprise and rush towards the Genesis planet to rescue Spock "in whatever form he may still be alive." Meanwhile, a bodily resurrected and rapidly re-aging Spock has been found by Saavik and David and they are stranded on Genesis after their ship is destroyed by Klingon Commander Kruge (Christopher Lloyd) and he comes looking for them in hopes of unlocking the secrets of the Genesis project, which he thinks could be used as a weapon against his people. Who will survive?

Considered by some to be trash and by others to be the only good odd numbered Star Trek film, this is a sufficiently entertaining bit of science fiction yarn that continues following the theme of what happens when you mess with mother nature. Good performances as usual, with Lloyd giving one of his best as the Klingon Commander Kruge, who becomes oddly sympathetic in light of his blood thirsty actions when you consider that he was just looking out for his own brood and was willing to spare the crew of the USS Grissom. Shatner's brawl with Lloyd is also fun to watch, and the film still has that great James Horner music. Don't miss Shatner kicking Lloyd in the face shouting "I... have HAD... enough of... YOU!"

Robin Curtis is a capable Saavik. As a bit of trivia, Saavik apparently engaged in sexual intercourse with Spock while he was going through his aging phases and, as part of an idea never utilized in the films or even in the spin off series, Saavik became pregnant with Spock's child, which was originally why she was supposed to stay on Vulcan in "Star Trek 4: The Voyage Home".

Competent, but not great...

[mentalcritic · 6/10 · 5 October 2004]

Perhaps it is the inevitable comparison to the previous episode, but Star Trek III very much has a feel of being low-rent or second-rate. An excellent example of this can be seen whenever Saavik is on the screen. Kirstie Alley may not be the greatest actor in the world, but Robin Curtis succeeds in making her look like Anna Paquin or Sigourney Weaver by comparison. The strange thing is that Merritt Butrick seems to suffer a decline in performance whenever he is in the same frame with her.

Let's face it, any dialogue heavy film was going to be a letdown after the epic battles in Star Trek II. A very personal battle between two enemies that have been festering in one another's minds for years is always going to make a brief fight with a crew of Klingons seem pretty restrained by comparison. A lot of the film's plot elements also come second-hand from the previous film, so it isn't as if much is done to separate it.

The spaceship sequences also look far less realistic in this film than is the case in the past two films. It seems that Paramount hired another effects house to simulate these moments, and the result is that the ships look as if they are under a constant invisible spotlight, rather than the realistic tones that were evident in the previous two films. The combat doesn't seem nearly as realistic, either. After the massive tradings of torpedoes and phaser energy in the previous film, expecting us to believe the Enterprise can be disabled by a single torpedo is a bit much.

The dynamic between Kirk, Spock, and McCoy was always a big part of what made the original series work, so it's not surprising that an entire film be dedicated to restoring this dynamic. To the credit of the screenwriters, it works. The fights on the surface of Genesis, and some of the dialogues, give the whole film a connection with the audience that later films in the franchise particularly lack. Everyone certainly has a friend that they'd do things like this for if they had to, so it's hard not to get behind the Enterprise crew as they battle for one of their most prominent members.

I would have appreciated more footage to show how Uhura arrives on Vulcan, and what the Federation does when they learn that the crew is on Vulcan. Still, the film is much more tightly paced than some give it credit for, so we can let that one slide. It is, however, interesting to note how little internal security the Starfleet orbital station has. I would have thought that the Starfleet version of the drunk tank would have more than just two security guards, given the wide variation in alien races that make up the organisation.

In all, I gave Star Trek III a six out of ten. Most sequels try to be bigger and bolder than the previous episode. Star Trek III is an exception, but it certainly is a worthwhile viewing if you like a bit of science fiction.

Underrated, for sure

[davidmvining · 7/10 · 22 November 2019]

How does one follow a film with a fantastic villain, perfect structure, and really good special effects? Muddy the waters, apparently.

Don't get me wrong. I feel like the third Star Trek film is good, but it's also got problems.

So, let's start with the good. The Enterprise is coming home from the Mutara system, wounded with one less officer. There's no sense of victory as the ship tracks into spacedock where its wounds get pushed into a harsh light. Captain Kirk dismisses a cadet's desire for a celebration by referring to paying for their return with their dearest blood. And, on top of it, McCoy is acting odd. He breaks into Spock's sealed quarters and talks of a need to go to Vulcan. Spock's father, the Vulcan ambassador Sarek, tells Kirk of the need to bring Spock's katra, his soul, back to Vulcan, or his essence will die forever.

Kirk must get Spock's body back from the Genesis planet where they shot his body, but Starfleet won't allow it. The Genesis planet is at the center of a galactic controversy and has been declared forbidden.

All of this first act up to this point is a bit clunkier than it should be, but it's effective at getting the point across. And then we get to one of my two favorite individual sequences in all of the Star Trek movies (both of which are in this one, actually).

There are a few things in the sequence of the Enterprise escaping Space Dock that get me. First is the music. James Horner did a bang up job for the previous film, and Nimoy, the director, brought him back to score this. Here, Horner explores the musical themes he created in the second film and gives them greater scope and a larger breadth. The second is the action itself. Much like in the second film, there's an understanding of the limitations of what the models can do, and turning a slow chase out of a dock into something really exciting through the editing is a solid accomplishment. The third is about Kirk. Kirk knows that what he's doing is going to ruin his career, but he has to do it because his friends need him. He's not doing this because he expects to get Spock back, but he does know that Spock's soul is hurting McCoy and needs to find a place to rest. When the captain of the Excelsior tells him that he'll never sit in a captain's chair again, Kirk's face doesn't move. That may be a coincidence of editing, an accident more than anything else, but it's also effective. Kirk's face doesn't move in a way that suggests he knows what the Excelsior's captain is telling him is the truth and that he's still willing to go through with the action anyway. He understands the consequences of his actions, and he's sill stalwart. It's such a fantastic moment.

Before I go any further, I'm going to address the single largest problem with the film: Christopher Lloyd's Klingon, Kruge. Taken in a vacuum, Kruge is actually a pretty good Klingon. The way he strangles a giant space worm with his bare hands, picks up his communicator, and tells his ship that nothing's going on is just perfect. The problem, though, is that he feels like a missing subplot from The Wrath of Khan rather than a natural element in The Search for Spock. He doesn't fit thematically. The theme of the film is about rebirth and creating second chances, while Kruge is having an argument that he missed out on with Khan. He feels like a puzzle piece in the wrong puzzle.

Anyway, the movie continues to the point that Kruge overpowers the weakened Enterprise and sends most of his men onboard in order to commandeer. That's when we get to my other favorite moment in the Star Trek film series.

The self-destruct sequence became such a cliché after this, but it never meant anything because they all got aborted or reversed somehow. Here we have the self-destruct go all the way through, and the destruction of the ship is beautiful. I love how the saucer section essentially melts away, tearing apart the letters of the timeless ship before exploding and falling into the atmosphere of the Genesis planet and turning into nothing more than a ball of flame. There's something permanent and meaningful about that action.

The movie's final action beats are weaker, though. A fist fight in an exploding environment (with some dodgy compositions with the special effects) between our main character and a bad guy from another movie just feels a bit unsatisfactory.

The Vulcan mysticism of the final few minutes of the movie hints at a larger culture that I really enjoy as well. Vulcans, driven by logic, also hang on ceremony in extremely focused ways.

Amidst all of this action, I think we have Shatner's best performance in a Star Trek movie. His reaction to hearing his son die, where he simply falls to the ground instead of into his chair, is great. DeForest Kelley is very good as the confused and angry version of Bones. Lloyd is solid as the bad guy from another movie.

Overall, I do think the movie is solidly good, but it had the capability of being something great. Rewriting Kruge so he actually fit in thematically would have helped, I'm sure. Upping the production and special effects budget a bit so that the effects weren't such a mixed bag would have done good things as well. Still, as a follow up to what is arguably the best Star Trek movie, they could have done far, far worse.

Worst Trek Movie

[pkanzow · 6/10 · 23 October 2006]

Who are all these people saying Star Trek V was the worst ST movie? It wasn't. This one was.

*** Here be spoilers ***

"The Search For Spock" was boring most of the time. Merrit Buttrick was boring. Where was his brilliant mother, Bibi Besch? Robin Curtis was boring. Why in all heavens did they let Kirstie Alley go? These boring persons were walking trough a planet which was instable. We knew that from the beginning, and were just waiting for the thing to explode. It took way to long. The film did not make us fear and mourn one second for the dying planet and the failing project which should have brought life to desert planets.

Yes, and they had Spock with them. A kid at the beginning, rapidly aging but never showing any interesting feature. Not only because Spock's soul was elsewhere, but because the script had no ideas for him. He was played by four actors other than Nimoy himself, none of which did anything interesting.

Boy, was that boring.

The better parts of this movie were Kirk and his crew stealing the Enterprise, but Scotty sabotaging the Excelsior seems rather unbelievable. I wish they had escaped because they are the better sailors. Then they have a confrontation with some Klingons. I always like space battles. But this one was disappointing. It started promising. Kirk's and the Klingon ships both damaged, both captains thinking the other was in the better position, and both bluffing. But then intelligence left the Klingon when he sent all his men into Kirk's simple trap. No comparison to Khan.

Overall, these Klingons were far worse than the ones of ST V. The Klingon Captain running around only screaming for the Genesis device became boring fast. Fortunately, he killed one of the other bores.

Since the plot was not really interesting, something exciting had to happen. Let's blow up the Enterprise and swap ships, the writers thought. So Kirk blows up the Enterprise to get rid of a dozen Klingons whom he had lured on board. These dozen Klingons had come, by the way, to take over a ship of 400 crewmen. Wow. And then they went into a trap. And there was no way to fill the bridge with narcotic gas to knock them out? It had to be self-destruction?

At the end, we have to force ourselves through the Vulcan ritual of transferring a soul from one body to the other. We knew it would succeed. Why was it taking so long then, and why did everybody say "it wasn't done forever, and only in legends" ? It was plain boring.

Finally, Spock was back, and the film started to be interesting, trek-like - five minutes before it ended. Maybe we had to go through this to get Spock back. The price was not too high, thinking e.g. of his brilliant role in ST VI. But hey, hadn't the crew left Spock on Genesis, they could have spared themselves from becoming criminals, destroying the Enterprise, and boring the fans with this superfluous film where only the music is remarkable.

An excellent followup film

[planktonrules · 7/10 · 15 July 2006]

This movie, at first, seemed dumb when I first read about it. After all, how can the crew search for Spock when we all saw him die in the last film?! Well, it being the great and scientifically advanced future, death is not necessarily the end of the line! Spock's body was jettisoned onto the planet where the Genesis Probe had been deployed in the last film. It seems that Spock's consciousness was deposited into McCoy and they needed to try to find his body as McCoy wasn't particularly happy or useful as a multiple personality. So, they go off to search for the body and see if they can shove the two back together. But, Klingons, lead by the rather amusing Christopher Lloyd (no he does NOT play a combination of a Klingon and Jim Ignatowsky), are waiting in ambush.

The film has very similar production values and acting from the last film. About the only negatives is that STAR TREK II was so exciting and bold that this film can't help but pale in comparison. But it's still an exceptional film that fans of the series should enjoy and others should also like if they are open-minded.

Very entertaining.

[pmtelefon · 9/10 · 31 March 2019]

The cast of the Star Trek movies are not know as great actors. I think maybe they should be. They have helped create some of the most likable characters ever. The crew of the Enterprise are all great characters that are played perfectly. It's all wildly entertaining to watch. "Star Trek III: The Search for Spock" is funny, exciting and surprisingly emotional. I'm sorry I missed this one when it was in the theaters. I don't know what I was thinking.

A dull and forgettable entry into the series

[danielloe · 6/10 · 17 July 2016]

So, I'm not generally one of those people who are really critical of the Star Trek movies just because they don't 'have the intelligent messages' of the show. I get that they need to appeal to a broader audience, and sometimes I think that works better, because I've liked most of the Star Trek movies to some degree and then there are some that I can just respect but don't really care for them.

Search for Spock, is more like that, except, I really have very little respect for it. Movies like Generations, or even Nemesis, have lots of flaws whether it's in the acting, the story, the characters or whatever, but those always have some entertaining sequences, but Search for Spock really doesn't have anything like that. It is just so boring.

I mean, nowadays, the Kirk era style just feels a little corny, so you kind of have to judge it based on the time. Wrath of Khan, for example, has corny moments, but the story, atmosphere, acting, and writing all elevated it past the cheesy moments, so that the audience was willing to ignore the weak links. The problem with Search for Spock is that it doesn't give us anything. We get the slowest build-up ever, as we spend at least an hour just to get Enterprise to the Genesis Planet, and let's not mention this is essentially a glorified reset button for Wrath of Khan.

Spock is resurrected by a deus ex machine plot device introduced for the movie (the Vulcan Khat'ra), David Marcus dies, Carol Marcus disappears, never to be mentioned again, the Genesis planet is destroyed, so…yeah, you take one of the best Star Trek movies and nullify it. Also, we have one of the lamest villains in Kruge, who tops even William Shatner on overacting. The only positive to him is that he is so cheesy he makes his scenes marginally entertaining, but they still aren't actually good scenes. He and Kirk get into a really weak, fake-looking brawl, which is the final battle of the two action scenes in the movie (the first being the 5-second space battle between the Enterprise and the bird of prey). I'm not saying action is the most important part of a Star Trek movie, or even necessarily an important part, but when a movie has nothing else going for it, an entertaining action scene can go a long way. This is by no means the worst Star Trek movie, but this one has so little going for it that it's hard to see why it would even be considered one of the better ones.

Worst Star Trek by far!!!

[Tschibo · 3/10 · 31 January 2003]

Sorry, but this is the most boring, stilted, non-enjoyable ST movie of them all. I'm really a big ST fan, but all this meta-matter stuff and oh-so-angry Kirk/Kirk's son story isn't really enjoyable. For me it's the worst ST movie. By far, as the summary says

Intelligent life in the universe....

[Mister-6 · 10/10 · 17 May 2002]

Let's fact it, wasn't this film inevitable? I doubt true Trekkers would have it any other way.

After Spock's sacrifice in the previous "Wrath of Khan", it only stands to reason that if there was a glimmer of hope to bring him back that his friends would seize the opportunity...which they indeed do in "Star Trek III: The Search for Spock", leading the Enterprise crew on their most risky "Trek" of all.

Upon urging from Spock's father Sarek (Lenard, great as always), Admiral Kirk (Shatner) gathers up Bones (Kelley), Sulu (Takei), Chekov (Koenig) and Scott (Doohan) race for the slowly degenerating Genesis planet to find their friend.

This being the "Star Trek" universe, however, intrigue abounds as a group of treacherous Klingons (headed by the suitably villainous Lloyd) also head to the planet to find its secrets. Instead they find Lt. Saavik (Curtis), Dr. Marcus (Butrick)...and a young Vulcan boy.

As directed by Leonard Nimoy himself and penned by Harve Bennett, this film plays much like a Greek tragedy, with loss, great drama and pathos played out against a backdrop of galaxies, heroes, villains and hope itself: the greatest power in the universe.

The acting is right on note as is the action, neither of which pushes the story any further than it will go. And the FX are as good as what you've come to expect from this galaxy. Everything and everyone is uniformly fine, right down the line.

But do they actually find Spock at the end? Ah, that would be telling. You'll have to catch the next film in the series as (without any doubt), the Enterprise crew's adventures continue.

Ten stars for "Star Trek III", a "Search" well worth seeking out.

More of an interlude, yet enjoyable enough for what it is.

[Pjtaylor-96-138044 · 6/10 · 2 January 2022]

'Star Trek III: The Search For Spock (1984)' feels like an interlude. It isn't exactly inconsequential, but it only serves to (mild spoilers for anyone who has lived under a rock for the last forty years) reintroduce Spock back into the series. It's basically a slice of connective tissue, a necessary yet sort of tedious tether between 'Star Trek II: The Wrath Of Kahn (1982)' and 'Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home (1986)'. Still, it isn't devoid of merit. It moves at a brisk pace and is generally enjoyable. It also features a few entertaining set-pieces, including a short-but-sweet space battle and a fairly ferocious fight on the surface of an exploding planet. It's impossible to deny the time and talent put into every aspect of production, especially its impressive visual effects and comprehensive Klingon language. The cast is as good as ever. Christopher Lloyd is underused yet solid as the big bad, and Shatner's apparently improvised response to the death of a certain character is genuinely affecting, too. At the same time, the movie feels much more like a television episode than either of its predecessors. Its plot is a bit thin and some of it is ever-so-slightly dull. Plus, Robin Curtis is a poor substitute for Kirstie Alley (who supposedly didn't return because of a disagreement over her salary, but I'm sure the scene in which her character fingers a teenage Spock didn't help). It's hard to decide whether or not I prefer this to the first; it certainly isn't as epic (it doesn't feel as much like a film, if that makes sense), but its pacing is much tighter and it has stronger set-pieces overall. It's probably about as good, to be honest, just in different ways. Ultimately, this is a solid entry in its series. It's nowhere near as good as its immediate predecessor, but it's a respectable sci-fi flick nevertheless. 6/10.

The search for script (DVD)

[leplatypus · 4/10 · 25 August 2010]

I never liked this segment and the new viewing doesn't change anything: it's dull and flat as all rescue stories. It's a galactic Baywatch, without the"talent" of Pamela! If Davis is a fine substitute for Saavik and "Doc" the best Klingon ever, the magic of Trek eludes me there.

The audio commentary says that in a trilogy, the middle part is always the weakest or hardest because the audience loses the excitement of the original surprise and lacks the pleasure of the ending climax. Well, i remember to have seen excellent "Part II" movies: Back to the future, Superman, Empire strikes back, War of the clones, Aliens! Here, I think the explanation comes the empty seat for Spock that tells a lot of the importance of the character. Thus my reluctance to see next generation, explorer, deep space, enterprise shows and my pleasure to go to the revamping of the original series in 2009.

That's makes me aware of a strange fact: as a child or a teen, we never went to a Trek movie in spite my parents are really cool about movies. But it's true than in France, Trek haven't the same glamor than Star Wars, maybe because the merchandising was quite nonexistent. I discovered Trek, show and movies, with the defunct TV channel "La Cinq" thus around the beginning of the nineties that's is to say the end of this wonderful story of filmmaking.

Thus, just Warp 10 to ST 4 !