Very disappointing...

Thanks for the memories!

Admirable film.

This is a tender, generous movie that likes its characters and presents them as real people, full of flaws and strengths.

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 fifth film of the franchise, 'The Final Frontier', is often considered the worst of the films, and one can understand why. To me, it is nowhere near as bad as its reputation, and feel in some way that the film was doomed even before it was released. Whether it is the worst overall 'Star Trek' film is up for debate, it's a worthy contender. Is it the worst of the films based of the original series? Yes.It is not a bad film by all means. The cinematography is neat and very nicely done in the quieter scenes, and William Shatner's direction works well in these moments.Jerry Goldsmith's score is awesome personified, there is no bias intended as Goldsmith has always been one of my favourite composers, but the score here really rouses the spirits while touching the heart also.'Star Trek V: The Final Frontier' does have some good scenes, namely the camping fire scene, the inner/greater pain scene (very intense and moving) and Scotty knocking himself out (the one bit of humour that works).The chemistry between Kirk, Spock and McCoy is the film's driving force, and the interaction and interplay between them is the asset that comes off strongest.A few of the performances are good. Leonard Nimoy and DeForest Kelley are very good, and Laurence Luckinbill does very well with what he's given, a villain that's both menacing and sympathetic. The rest of the crew mostly are very competently played.Unfortunately, they are underused and what they are given falls flat completely mostly, turning them into cartoonish parodies. The erotic dance was completely out of place and the getting lost stuff feels like filler to pad out a story that doesn't have an awful lot to it. Plus we have the most embarrassing rendition of "Row, Row, Row Your Boat" you'll find anywhere.Generally the humour is as flat as a pancake, really overdone and juvenile. 'The Voyage Home' had humour too but it was actually entertaining and even when poking fun felt more like 'Star Trek'. Shatner's direction is incredibly chaotic in the action scenes, which sees production values that look unforgivably cheap even for the budget, with haphazard cinematography and editing and the worst of the uniformly shockingly shoddy special effects.Just for the record, as much as people would say that Shatner's ego has a lot to do with the problematic nature of the film (and yes having him trying to take on more than he could chew was excessive and most likely was not going to work from the start), the failure is much more at the door of budget limitations and studio interference, Shatner's original vision would have made for a much better and actually a fascinating film.On top of that, 'The Final Frontier' is filled with overripe dialogue with too much emphasis on the humour, which as said doesn't work, and less on heartfelt moments and thought-provoking conflicts. While there are a few good performances, the supporting cast are too underused to shine properly and Shatner's performance has more ham than the world's biggest pig farm.A big failure here is the story, which is dull and takes too long to get going with a plot too thin to sustain the running time. The whole stuff about god just confused the story and that for Sybok was a thrown in and unnecessary plot device done to presumably give more development to a character who was actually interesting and well developed already. The ending is convoluted and anti-climactic.Overall, hugely problematic but not without obvious merits. 5/10 Bethany Cox

With the Star Trek II-IV movie "trilogy" (one long plot line) finished, the fifth film of the series is a self-contained story about growing old, friendship, and religion. Sadly, the film fails on all those accounts.The gist of the film is that Spock's half-brother, Sybok (who has rejected his Vulcan heritage), hijacks the Enterprise in search of God in the outer reaches of the universe. Once found, "God" turns out to be a rather temperamental being who becomes angry when his escape from beyond the galaxy (the Enterprise) is taken from him. When Kirk utters the phrase "why would God need a spaceship?", the major plot point of the film turns to shambles. The entire mission (which wasn't all that compelling to begin with) turns into a sham, and ultimately a waste of time.Perhaps the largest downfall of the film, however, is the inability of the writers/producers to create dramatic tension between Spock and Sybok. It is too much of a stretch to believe that the emotionless Spock will succumb to the rash tendencies of a character only just introduced to him.Yet, despite failing on nearly all accounts, a few scenes are inspiring for their place in the Star Trek cannon. Kirk, Spock, and McCoy's vacation at Yosemite National Park is awe-inspiring, heartfelt, and funny (Spock's marshmallow roasting machine is classic!), while the scene where Sybok diagnoses McCoy's and Spock's greatest pain is classic Star Trek fare (even down to Kirk's defiant refusal to be given the same treatment).To conclude, this fifth installment in the Star Trek movie franchise is a forgettable romp through the deepest galaxy. Besides a few interesting scenes, the majority of the movie is unemotional, bland, and even hokey. Hard-care Star Trek fans will enjoy the moments (however slight) of character development this movie brings to the table, but I would advise less dedicated viewers to skip over this installment entirely.

I have yet to see a single episode of the "Star Trek" TV show (or shows) but seeing as how I'm so familiar with the movies, I guess you could go ahead and call me a fan. I had heard that this was the worst "Star Trek" movie ever made and from what I've seen, I agree wholeheartedly. It's sad seeing as how I managed to see all of the good ones already. Anyway, this movie mostly suffers from being needlessly padded. It's actually one of the shorter films, but it certainly seems longer. I guess it's just like that whenever you watch a boring movie. The villain's plan literally isn't revealed until over halfway through the film.He wants to literally find God. It's kind of weird, because I thought that "Star Trek" was supposed to be promoting secularism. They do have this weird moral about where God truly is at the end. I know Gene Roddenberry was an atheist, which is probably why he wants us to forget this film. It's a pity he never truly lived to see the full release of the one after this, the last one he was personally involved with. We get scenes of the characters on vacation which adds nothing to the story at all. I don't think until a half hour in they actually do something themselves. I will admit I like the sets and some of the conversations weren't bad, but any moviegoer can easily skip this one. **

Star Trek V: The Final Frontier is an odd beast of a film. Coming on the back of the successful trilogy of films that re-established the series on the big screen in the wake of The Motion Picture, it could have been the biggest film of the franchise. Instead it has become seen as a failure, a film that somehow failed to live up to expectations and that nearly killed the franchise on the big screen. Is that fair though to the film itself?Short answer: not at all.Yes it's a film with problems. Perhaps the most noticeable of which is its special effects. The films had brought Star Trek a long way from it sometimes iffy TV effects but Final Frontier saw that trend sputter a bit. Compared with previous films in the series which had lower budgets, the effects here are unconvincing including the model shots that had been a point of pride for the film series. Even the film's more original sequence are a let down such as the sequence when the Enterprise enters the Great Barrier, a sequence which could have potentially rivaled the incredible imagery of V'Ger in The Motion Picture. Instead the sequence becomes a series of unconvincing model shots in which the Enterprise looks pasted onto the screen as lighting bolts and clouds swirl around. The problems with the special effects go farther as well as they ultimately robbed the film of its intended ending and instead left it with an ending that feels anti-climactic. It's a disappointment to be sure and one that makes the film feel inferior to its predecessors.The film's other big problem is in its script, or at least in its focus. Star Trek has always been an ensemble show from practically the first episode and while that can be something difficult to bring over to the big screen, the earlier Trek films had managed the transition smoothly by focusing on the core characters (Kirk, Spock and McCoy) while giving everyone their moment to shine. Final Frontier though focuses on the character of Captain Kirk while giving lip service to many of the others of the cast, something that perhaps isn't surprising given that William Shatner is not only the director but co-credited with the storyline the script is based on. Kirk is at the center of the action throughout as well as being a voice of sanity, sometimes absurdly so. Those familiar with Shatner's later Kirk-centric Star Trek novels will recognize many of the tropes here but whereas Shatner was kept in check more in those books, here he is given free reign to the detriment of the film.Which brings us to the other problem with the script: its humor. Following in the wake of the whimsical Voyage Home, it was perhaps natural to try and include that kind of humor in the next film. How it was done here though comes across largely forced from bad jokes to moments that undermine much loved characters such as Uhura or Scotty (though the infamous scene of the latter hitting his head actually works quite well in context). Once the film enters its last act, the humor goes by the wayside but it effects so much of the film that it's impossible not to notice it.Yet the film does rise above those flaws.At its heart, despite its focus on Shatner's Kirk, the film focuses on the core relationship at the heart of the series: Kirk, Spock and McCoy. Carrying on what was built in II and III, the film sees that relationship being pushed to its limits once again. This time not by a superman or by death itself but by a Vulcan seeking the answer to some of the questions we all face in our time on this planet: is there a god and where did it all start? The film features some interesting moments between the key trio that range from attempts at humor early in the film to oddly revealing as the film draws towards its finale which gives DeForest Kelly one of his strongest moments as McCoy before reaffirming it at the end. It's a film that deals with its lead characters in interesting ways when it isn't too focused on one in particular.The other thing is that its really a film about ideas. Whereas earlier films had shifted the series into more familiar action/adventure territory, Final Frontier takes it back into territory that seems like it could have been explored in the TV series potentially. The film uses the Sybok character and the quest for Sha Ka Ree raises interesting questions about the nature of belief and fundamentalism in particular that seems oddly prescient in a world dealing with religious inspired terrorism. That it also raises the question of the dangers of those beliefs while also suggesting that they are inherent part of us is also to its credit. Yet it tries to do so within the more familiar action/adventure format, something that it strives for but never quite succeeds in doing but the journey along the way is still intriguing and watchable.In the end, Star Trek V is a flawed film. It suffers from the poorest special effects of Trek's film franchise as well as a script that overplays humor and focuses too much on one central character. Yet the ideas underpinning the film from its questions about fundamentalism and about whether a god of some kind exists are intriguing more than a quarter century after its original release. It's over-ambitious to a fault but that is more easily forgivable than a film that plays it by the book while trying to claim its something greater. In a different world Star Trek V could have been an engaging sci-fi action/adventure film with heart but as it stands it remains the weakest of the Original Series based films but one still deserves to call itself a Star Trek film.