Talk: Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country/archive

The first two items in Background Information sound like they belong in Star Trek IV not Star Trek VI. Could this be a mistake by the person who placed it in the article? --TOSrules 07:30, 16 Jul 2005 (UTC)

I've roughly figured out the time of of the month for Star Trek VI. It takes place between the 18th to the 23ed of an unnamed month. The president can be thanked for this little tidbit, in his speech he said "As I imagine this work will occupy us threw out most of the week, it is my hope that the delegations can return to there capitols by the First of Next month". Tracking back a literal week the movie would have ended on the 23ed, give or take a day. Tracking within the movie would suggest that it may have begun on the 18th, Minus the Opening scene. TOSrules | Talk 12:58, 23 Aug 2004 (PST)

There's no point in including it without a month. I have removed it. And your logic is flawed. The full quote is "As I imagine this work will occupy us throughout most of the week, it is my hope that the delegations can return to their capitals to implement the conditions of Phase One (italics mine) no later than the first of next month". Phase One is preparation for evacuation of Qo'nos, so those conditions are to be met by the 1st of the following month. Doesn't mean that that date is a week away. -- Michael Warren | Talk 22:07, Aug 23, 2004 (CEST)

"return to there capitol to BEGIN implementing the previsions of Phase 1" You are not going to wait a week or two to BEGIN to implement the previsions of Phase 1. TOSrules | Talk 13:13, 23 Aug 2004 (PST)

There is no "begin" in the line. I've just checked. The point stands. -- Michael Warren | Talk 22:18, Aug 23, 2004 (CEST)

Besides, the movie spans a few months (something they missed in VOY:"Flashback").. Spock states Excelsior monitored Praxis exploding a matter of months before the command briefing, Flashback places it immediately concurrent. So if its any consolation, ST6 probably occupies the 18th through 23rd of two or three months--Captain Mike K. Bartel 23:17, 23 Aug 2004 (CEST)

See, I forgot that too... "Two months ago, a Federation starship monitored a large explosion on the Klingon moon, Praxis." Ta for reminding me. -- Michael Warren | Talk 23:23, Aug 23, 2004 (CEST)

Brass tacks, President says this work will occupy them threw out the most of the week, He also says he hopes they will be able to return to there capitols by the first of next month so they can implement the prevision of Phase 1. This is basic cannon, The Presidents Estimate for returning to the capitol by the first of next month is based off his idea that the work should a week. ALL Cannon, and exacting. Basically a small margin for Error. TOSrules | Talk 02:18, 23 Aug 2004 (PST)

Backround Information

As well as Nichelle Nichols, DeForest Kelley also makes his last Trek appearance here. Tough Little Ship 19:16, 8 Jul 2005 (UTC)

Leonard Nimoy would also have made his last appearances here as well, as Unification was filmed before Trek VI wasn't it? Tough Little Ship 20:25, 8 Jul 2005 (UTC)

Ooh, good catch... --Shran 20:47, 8 Jul 2005 (UTC)

Trek VI finished filming in July, 1991. "Unification" was filmed after that. (September 1991, I believe.) The page here for "Unification II" says that it was Leonard Nimoy's final appearance as Spock. - Adambomb1701 16:25, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Thats the reason why there are all those signatures of the actors........because its the last movie of the "TOS" crew --D47h0r 17:54, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

It may have been the last planned, but three of them made an appearance in Star Trek Generations. --OuroborosCobra 18:11, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Wrong Film.

In Background Information, you say:

Chang's description of Kirk, during his trial, as "the quintessential devil in these matters"....

This line was from Star Trek IV and spoken by John Shuck's Kingon Ambassador.

I changed it and added a pna because the background info is overwhelming with all of that info and no subsections. It needs to be organized further I think. --Vedek Dukat (Talk) 02:52, 3 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Costume errors

It appears by the time this film was made new actors and extras got whatever uniform pieces fit - whether they matched or not. Tunics and jacket straps don't match and rank pins don't match the ranks for the characters wearing them. Why, for example, is Valeris wearing red "trainee" tunic under her sciences uniform?--GreatBear 09:25, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)

well William Shatner kind of confused the issue with Trek V, where the colored tunics disappear all together, and they're all just white tunics, under red jackets.. with the occasioanl trainee red for good measure, but no pale greens, or yellows. My guess is that Shatner probably never even noticed they were tinted different colors in the first place. You're lucky they're wearing uniforms at all {-: by the time they got to number VI--205.188.116.10 06:34, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
- odd that you ascribe this mistake to shatner -- he wasn't in charge of art or wardrobe! actually, mccoy wore his standard medical green, sulu his standard helm gold and chekov and uhura wore ops gray, just as called for. i think Kirks adjutant, played by melanie shatner, wore gray also. there was even a new color introduced for ST5, dark blue for the troopers. the only person who switched to white for ST5 was scotty, because he had been promoted to captain (sulu would make the same change in the next movie). -- Captain M.K.B. 15:54, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
  - That's odd, I honestly couldn't tell, the only copy I have of V is an old VHS recording from back when it first showed up on cable TV, I guess it's too washed out for the colors to show up--205.188.116.10 17:49, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Summary

I deleted the summary as it was taken from Wikipedia (though with a few edits since). I'll tackle it a little later, though if anyone else wants to start, go right ahead. 9er 22:34, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

I made a bit research in the version history, it seems the summary was copied from the Wikipedia article on 14. July 2005. I can't believe that a key page was plagarised and went unnoticed for almost a year! -- Kobi 18:32, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Not only that, but somoene put back the plagarised summary a few days later, and it had to be removed again. --OuroborosCobra ^talk

18:36, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Is a bit shocking. (Well, maybe not that shocking.) I did the history research that Kobi also did before I removed MA's summary. Before anyone takes the drastic step of removing something from MA because of a copyvio, they need to be sure that the plagiarism is on our side. Particularly when the source is another wiki, it's possible that we had the original and they plagiarized us. But, as they edit histories show, that's clearly not what happened in this article. 9er 19:10, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Paper?

I could be wrong, but I'm fairly certain that VI is fairly unique in its use of paper. I'd write a background entry myself, but I wanted to check about how paper was treated in past films. But watching VI today, I had to say that there's a lot of "antequated" notions in the film that don't seem to fit into Trek. One is paper - the Prison Rescue plan Colonel West presents is printed on a large flippable pad of paper, the bridge crew stumbles through a number of paper books to translate Klingon over the translator, Scotty inspects some paper plans of the ship near the end of the film, and several other uses including a number of books, and a number of things that should be computerized. It seemed quite abnormal watching today. I thought a few other things seemed antiquated but now I can't remember what they were, but at very least the use of Paper seemed excessive (considering most other Trek doesn't even show paper).

Also, I forget if the sensors were damaged while the incident occured, but if they have "footage" of the torpedos firing, and they know where on the ship the "camera source" is, I'd think they could do some mathematics and tell if the torpedo could have come from the Enterprise by the angle it travels at. They do it all the time on CSI or Law and Order ;) TheHYPO 20:30, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

As far as the films go, I don't remember any paper used. In the series, paper came into use several times. Karidian's voiceprints in "The Conscience of the King" was one. And, Spock's library-computer spewed out a sheet of paper with info on Talos IV in "The Cage". -- Adambomb1701 15:19, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Its not Klingon Writing on the bolts

It was not Klingon writing on the bolt heads, it was the Klingon Tri-point Crest, and they where infact molded onto each bolt head it's self when the rubber was poured. A making-of documentary that was around during the movie's release made it very clear what it was and actually showed the creation of the bolts themselves.

I have made the edits to reflect what was really on the bolt-heads. While the poster may have had writing on each one, it was very clearly the crest thanks to the behind the scenes documentary.

Added PNA

The Summary only goes up to the dinner party. Needs to be completed. --Captain MAJ ^=/\=|**** 15:43, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Removed nitpick

The following was removed as per a Ten Forward discussion where it was decided not to include nitpicks. Also, it doesn't really make much sense since the Enterprise, being a vessel of scientific exploration like the Excelsior, would also carry equipment for such activities as well. --From Andoria with Love 05:57, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Toward the end of the film, Uhura mentions "All that equipment we're carrying to catalogue gaseous anomolies." This seems to bring the story full-circle from the opening scene but for the fact that it was Captain Sulu and the crew of the Excelsior, not the Enterprise, that was on a mission to "catalogue gaseous anomolies." Big, big OOPS!

I'm guessing that the Excelsior didn't have a monopoly on interstellar fart-mapping. I'm sure Starfleet could afford to put long-range sensor whiffer-sniffers on Constitution class and larger wessels. Kojiro Vance | Talk 20:03, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Differences between theatrical release and vhs/dvd releases

I remember being surprised at the differences in the ending between the theatrical release and the VHS release in 1992 ("It's Colonel West!", and the whole "Operation: Retrieve" skit). I'm surprised the differences aren't mentioned here.

I don't know why, either. Maybe someone could...I would guess those scenes were cut for time, although that extra footage adds only three or four minutes to the original 109 minute running time. Incidentally, when HBO first ran this film in January of 1993, it was the video version. For its most recent HBO runs, in late 2005, the theatrical version was used. -- Adambomb1701 20:41, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Spock's lineage

After the mention of Spock quoting Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's axiom, I added the quip "It may also jokingly suggest that Spock is a descendant of Holmes himself.". It was removed, with the criteria being that Holmes has been established as being fictional in ST canon. I understand this, and it's quite obvious that in any fictional universe, you likely would either have to establish that Conan Doyle is real, or Holmes, but not both. This is why I said "jokingly". Spock is a quirky sense of humour, as evidenced by claiming that there is an "old Vulcan proverb" regarding Nixon's visit to China. The idea that Spock might consider Holmes an ancestor in spirit, despite being a fictional character, is not unthinkable, nor is the possibility that the writers may have wanted it to be interpreted this way. For the record, the Holmes character stated this rule of thumb several times throughout the stories, but there doesn't appear to be any evidence that Conan Doyle said it outside of the Holmes stories (it sometimes appears as a quote attributed to him, but it is a quote from the stories). I may or may not restore the theory to the article, but I am starting to get tired of having nearly everything I do dismissed on what I consider to be very flimsy grounds. - Ugliness Man 18:09, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

But it doesn't jokingly suggest that Spoke has some literary character in his ancestry. It could be a wry joke ... Spock had clearly developed a sense of humor in his elder years. -- Keep trying, man, the canon dweebs can't keep an airtight vigil forever, and your next contribution could be golden. Remember the Five Pillars, and be bold. Kojiro Vance | Talk 03:11, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Let's not forget, one can refer to one's ancestor and not be related. Ancestor can simply refer to fellow members of the same race.--TOSrules 03:25, 6 February 2007 (UTC)