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.
159 Reviews
You Klingon bastards! Kirk gets personal.
hitchcockthelegend4 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
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
The Mindful Physician...
Xstal1 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.
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.
This third part in cinema Star Trek turns out to be an exciting and thrilling sequel well directed by Leonard Nimoy
ma-cortes20 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 .
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 .
A watchable but disappointing search
TheLittleSongbird19 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 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
William Shatner VS Christopher Lloyd
DarthBill15 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".
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...
mentalcritic5 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.
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
davidmvining22 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.
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.
An excellent followup film
planktonrules15 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.
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.
pmtelefon31 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.
The search for script (DVD)
leplatypus25 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 !
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 !
Intelligent life in the universe....
Mister-617 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.
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-96-1380442 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.
Worst Star Trek by far!!!
Tschibo31 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
Lame but necessary entry in the series.
jckruize15 October 2002
This dull, TV-ish installment in the popular Star Trek canon was necessitated by the "death" of beloved character Spock in its immediate predecessor, THE WRATH OF KHAN. Though not the worst of the series -- a distinction almost unanimously bestowed by fans on Shatner's THE FINAL FRONTIER -- this film fails to excite, being in the main both dramatically and technically mediocre.
The best description of Harve Bennett's script is serviceable, quite a letdown from the literary allusions and dramatic spark of II's scenario (by Nicholas Meyer and Jack Sowards). In equal measure Nimoy's direction is competent, yet too stolid to rev up the plot or inspire standout performances from any of the regular cast. The Genesis planet sets are sadly reminiscent of the original TV series in their lack of verisimilitude, probably due to similar budgetary constraints. A stiff Robin Curtis makes a poor substitute for sexy Kirstie Alley in the role of Saavik. Christopher Lloyd chews the fake-looking scenery as the buffoonish Klingon commander, and whose idiotic idea was it to give him a rubbery reptilian "dog"?
In the end it matters little, because the primary mission of restoring Spock to his rightful place next to Kirk and McCoy has been thankfully achieved. Just don't expect a high entertainment quotient with this one. Luckily the next installment, THE VOYAGE HOME, gets (almost) everything right again.
The best description of Harve Bennett's script is serviceable, quite a letdown from the literary allusions and dramatic spark of II's scenario (by Nicholas Meyer and Jack Sowards). In equal measure Nimoy's direction is competent, yet too stolid to rev up the plot or inspire standout performances from any of the regular cast. The Genesis planet sets are sadly reminiscent of the original TV series in their lack of verisimilitude, probably due to similar budgetary constraints. A stiff Robin Curtis makes a poor substitute for sexy Kirstie Alley in the role of Saavik. Christopher Lloyd chews the fake-looking scenery as the buffoonish Klingon commander, and whose idiotic idea was it to give him a rubbery reptilian "dog"?
In the end it matters little, because the primary mission of restoring Spock to his rightful place next to Kirk and McCoy has been thankfully achieved. Just don't expect a high entertainment quotient with this one. Luckily the next installment, THE VOYAGE HOME, gets (almost) everything right again.
I use to really dislike it,
vonnoosh10 April 2020
But then I binge watched the original series and now I don't mind it so much. I think my original issue with the movie is how deeply it undercuts the emotional depth of the previous movie's ending with what seems like an outlandish plot twist. The original series episoes went much much further than this to the point where Spock's brain is physically removed from his body and later Kirk swaps his personality with a vengeful old lover. Spock having his essence bubbling in McCoy's brain didnt seem like such a stretch.
The crew have several good scenes together. There is the heavy prices paid for going on their quest to the Genesis planet which give the film some weight. I enjoy it much more than 2 3rds of the new movies and, 3 of the 4 TNG movies (First Contact is still fantastic). You get more insight into the type of people in the Federation than ever before. The acting is excellent. I never knew John Laroquette played a Klngon in it before this year. It's a much better film than I remembered. Maybe what gives it such a bad impression is having to follow the crown jewel film in the franchise. It doesn't move as quickly or smoothly as Wrath of Khan but on its own, it's more than respectable
The crew have several good scenes together. There is the heavy prices paid for going on their quest to the Genesis planet which give the film some weight. I enjoy it much more than 2 3rds of the new movies and, 3 of the 4 TNG movies (First Contact is still fantastic). You get more insight into the type of people in the Federation than ever before. The acting is excellent. I never knew John Laroquette played a Klngon in it before this year. It's a much better film than I remembered. Maybe what gives it such a bad impression is having to follow the crown jewel film in the franchise. It doesn't move as quickly or smoothly as Wrath of Khan but on its own, it's more than respectable
Painfully Average
wolfeE-leet16 June 2022
a cheese fest film that seems quite the antithesis of its predecessor
citizenchris29 June 2008
Cheap, If I were to asked to describe Star Trek III: The Search for Spock in one word that would have to be...cheap. I'm not just talking about production values, though they would have to be at the top of the list, but every aspect of the this film permeates a kind of cheap feel. The climax of the previous film featured the heart wrenching sacrifice of one of pop cultures more beloved characters. So what is a sequel to do....bring him back of course. So you see the very concept of TSFS is cheap as it nullifies said sacrifice. Where as TWOK shied away from Star Trek's trade mark fuzzy narrative logic and non since science. TSFS could be thought of as one long challenge of your ability to suspend disbelief. Though its not an entire waste as (like the previous film) the score provided by the wonderful James Horner is fantastic. Christopher Lloyd is wonderful as the quintessential Klingon two dimensional protagonist. At the end of the day a cheese fest film that seems quite the antithesis of its predecessor.
Code 000
jace_the_film_guy12 April 2023
Code 000... In true Star Trek form, there is plenty of bad dialogue to go around, but the story is there. While the cast is aging quickly (and it shows in this movie), the performances were still believable.
The stakes are clear, danger is present, and a question of loyalty is front and center: What would you sacrifice to get your friend back?
The Klingons were an afterthought, but the strategic out-maneuvering was strong. Though it doesn't quite live up to the brilliance of "Wrath of Khan" it is much better than "The Motion Picture".
Best Character: McCoy Best Scene: The Return Best Quote: "What you had to do, what you always do. Turn death into a fighting chance to live." - McCoy.
The stakes are clear, danger is present, and a question of loyalty is front and center: What would you sacrifice to get your friend back?
The Klingons were an afterthought, but the strategic out-maneuvering was strong. Though it doesn't quite live up to the brilliance of "Wrath of Khan" it is much better than "The Motion Picture".
Best Character: McCoy Best Scene: The Return Best Quote: "What you had to do, what you always do. Turn death into a fighting chance to live." - McCoy.
The end justifies all that is wrong
SnoopyStyle31 December 2013
This is a weak movie, but all is forgiven. Star Trek II ends with the heroic sacrifice of Spock's life. This one aims to bring him back to life. The franchise needs Spock. So even if this is a bad movie, it's justifiable as long as Spock returns.
The Genesis device has caused great consternation with the Klingons who see the device as a dangerous weapon. Klingon commander Kruge (Christopher Lloyd) is seeking the device at the newly created planet. Saavik and David are there to research the planet, but they find a Vulcan boy near Spock's final resting place.
Meanwhile the Enterprise crew returns to base to find that they have lost their ship. Spock has transferred his mind into McCoy. Now the crew must steal the Enterprise and return to the Genesis planet so that Spock's mind could be reunited with his body. The whole story of Spock's resurrection is completely hokey and clunky. I guess it's hard to avoid. Bringing back a major character from the dead will do that sometimes. But the cost is small compare to the rewards. Even the final ceremony is hokey and unbearable.
There are plenty of other problems. Not having Kirstie Alley return as Saavik is a minor disappointment. Robin Curtis is way too stiff. She's only half Vulcan after all. On the other hand, Christopher Lloyd is a great actor. The problem with his storyline is that he's so weak. His battles with Kirk are pathetic. The action is lukewarm. Stealing the Enterprise turns out to be the only fun part.
The Genesis device has caused great consternation with the Klingons who see the device as a dangerous weapon. Klingon commander Kruge (Christopher Lloyd) is seeking the device at the newly created planet. Saavik and David are there to research the planet, but they find a Vulcan boy near Spock's final resting place.
Meanwhile the Enterprise crew returns to base to find that they have lost their ship. Spock has transferred his mind into McCoy. Now the crew must steal the Enterprise and return to the Genesis planet so that Spock's mind could be reunited with his body. The whole story of Spock's resurrection is completely hokey and clunky. I guess it's hard to avoid. Bringing back a major character from the dead will do that sometimes. But the cost is small compare to the rewards. Even the final ceremony is hokey and unbearable.
There are plenty of other problems. Not having Kirstie Alley return as Saavik is a minor disappointment. Robin Curtis is way too stiff. She's only half Vulcan after all. On the other hand, Christopher Lloyd is a great actor. The problem with his storyline is that he's so weak. His battles with Kirk are pathetic. The action is lukewarm. Stealing the Enterprise turns out to be the only fun part.
Excellent Trek, especially considering the Klingons were right
bgaiv5 August 2022
It's really a fantastic Trek movie, a bit lesser mainly because it came in the shadow of Wrath of Khan, a classic of the genre.
It's also far deeper than it appears because while the Klingons are depicted as ruthless, in fact, they are absolutely justified in being terrified at the Genesis Device.
From their point of view, the Federation has developed a weapon of astonishing power that is dressed up as a terraforming device. The evidence they have is a video showing this "terraforming" device as a torpedo, and the first use of this device is the destruction of a nebula. If you were any other power in the galaxy, would you not see this as a Tsar Bomba level demonstration of force?
If North Korea developed a terraforming device that can convert a uninhabited thousand square feet of ocean into a garden, would you not be terrified? It doesn't require any known enemy to be terrifying.
Honestly, for a long time, I wished they hadn't made Kruge so apparently blood thirsty. After time I think it works perfectly. Put the shoes on the other foot and you easily have James Bond or James Kirk himself battling to defeat this weapon.
The movie itself... I think Robin Curtis does a great job but I think her lines made more sense coming out of Kirstie Alley. Curtis plays Saavik like a straight Vulcan and her judgments of David don't really make logical sense. Alley played the half Romulan thing so her emotional judgements made more sense.
It's also far deeper than it appears because while the Klingons are depicted as ruthless, in fact, they are absolutely justified in being terrified at the Genesis Device.
From their point of view, the Federation has developed a weapon of astonishing power that is dressed up as a terraforming device. The evidence they have is a video showing this "terraforming" device as a torpedo, and the first use of this device is the destruction of a nebula. If you were any other power in the galaxy, would you not see this as a Tsar Bomba level demonstration of force?
If North Korea developed a terraforming device that can convert a uninhabited thousand square feet of ocean into a garden, would you not be terrified? It doesn't require any known enemy to be terrifying.
Honestly, for a long time, I wished they hadn't made Kruge so apparently blood thirsty. After time I think it works perfectly. Put the shoes on the other foot and you easily have James Bond or James Kirk himself battling to defeat this weapon.
The movie itself... I think Robin Curtis does a great job but I think her lines made more sense coming out of Kirstie Alley. Curtis plays Saavik like a straight Vulcan and her judgments of David don't really make logical sense. Alley played the half Romulan thing so her emotional judgements made more sense.
UNDERRATED!!!!
antsap15 December 2020
Out of all the Star Trek films, this is the most "Meh"
brookesbooks16 December 2015
Over the years, the Star Trek Original Series films have varied in quality, with extreme highs and extreme lows. But all I can really say about Star Trek: The Search for Spock is that it's okay. There's nothing awful in it, but at the same time there's nothing truly great about it, either. What I'm getting at here is that this film is completely forgettable, with only two things that are memorable. Leonard Nimoy was a good director, it's too bad he didn't have a better script to make this movie a great like Wrath of Khan. The best part is the finale, which I must admit is pretty epic.
The main problem about this movie is the villain. Actually, who was the villain? Christopher Lloyd is a good actor, but he didn't bring anything to this character. There's nothing unique about him, he's more like Klingon Extra #3 from the show that somehow got his own ship.
The other major problem is that, unlike the show and other films of this series, we really don't see a whole lot of bonding between the crew. There's a few moments, but I really wish that there were more.
This is the kind of film that you really should only watch is you have a free afternoon and you have nothing else to do.
The main problem about this movie is the villain. Actually, who was the villain? Christopher Lloyd is a good actor, but he didn't bring anything to this character. There's nothing unique about him, he's more like Klingon Extra #3 from the show that somehow got his own ship.
The other major problem is that, unlike the show and other films of this series, we really don't see a whole lot of bonding between the crew. There's a few moments, but I really wish that there were more.
This is the kind of film that you really should only watch is you have a free afternoon and you have nothing else to do.
A satisfactory continuation.
filipemanuelneto2 April 2017
This film is the third of the franchise and addresses the theme of death and resurrection of Spock, something that I honestly could not understand immediately but, being an alien, did not make any knot in my head when I've got it. The script is not bad but it gets even better from the moment the Klingons, a welcome element of action, are added to the story. However, being a film that continues the story of "The Wrath of Khan," it is natural that both are similar at several points. On a technical level, they're almost identical, the sets and costumes are the same and the special effects are still what we could expect at this period. And as for the actors, this film is almost entirely of Leonard Nimoy and DeForest Kelley, actors that the script privileged and that they had the capacity to shine. In the end, we get a film that honors its predecessor without, however, being able to match it.
The equal of Star Trek II whatever others might say.
ozthegreatat4233011 April 2007
Those who whine and complain about the Star Trek movies are usually not fans of the series. This film was a logical progression from what came before. Shatner (admittedly not an Olivier) nonetheless handles the character of James T. Kirk very well, and never better than in this episode. Deforest Kelly was at his finest as McCoy. Christopher Lloyd and John Lithgow were excellent as Klingon villains. But it was the hand of Leonard Nimoy who both helped write the script and direct to bring his knowledge of this Star Trek universe together in a manner that could not be expected from someone not intimately involved with it. Paramount Studios never seem to learn their lesson. No matter how much money the Star Trek series or films rake in, they seem to be bound to try and destroy the whole concept. Always miserly with a budget, the directors of the films in particular have had to be extra creative to manage a film on a lot less than they should have been allowed. Despite this Nimoy, to my mind the best director of Star Trek, did an admirable job of directing and acting in this feature.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
