Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!mgnetp!ihnp4!mhuxl!houxm!houxz!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!sri-unix!BALZAC%YKTVMZ.BITNET@Berkeley From: BALZAC%YKTVMZ.BITNET%Berkeley@sri-unix.UUCP Newsgroups: net.sf-lovers Subject: ST III Message-ID: <2095@sri-arpa.UUCP> Date: Tue, 17-Jul-84 12:51:20 EDT Article-I.D.: sri-arpa.2095 Posted: Tue Jul 17 12:51:20 1984 Date-Received: Fri, 20-Jul-84 03:59:48 EDT Lines: 61 From: Stephen R. Balzac >From a friend of mine not on the network: If you could, how about piping this into the net. Regarding comments about Kirk's fate as will be determined by Starfleet (no doubt). First of all, Kirk will not be executed. As we know from the episode, "The Menagerie," there is just one death penalty left on Starfleet's books: General Order Number Seven--visitation of Talos IV. So Kirk will not be executed. But, what then? The problem is, the producers of Trek have put viewers on an emotional roller coaster which--in all fairness and in all likelihood--will stop with the upcoming movie(s). I mean, first Spock is cold and heartless (apparently) in STTMP and Kirk can not command as he used to. Then Kirk meets his son and Spock dies in STII. But wait. Miracle of miracles, Spock has been (in some sense, and no comments, please, because I am generalizing terribly) brought back to life. Come on. Enough already. I mean, I haven't even mentioned David's seemingly unnecessary death, or Enterprise's demise. Let's stabilize, if only just for one movie. But if we stabilize events to quickly in STIV, the movie will probably be awful. Witness: "Oh hi, Jim. How's it going? By the way, nice job out at Genesis. 'Preciate it. Oh, one more thing. Would you like another ship? Yes? Sure, no problem, here are the keys." Of course, under (almost) no circumstances will it be that bad, but it could be close. So, will Kirk hang (figuratively) or not? If he does, Trek suffers and we are back on the roller coaster. If not, Trek might suffer because of complete and utter lack of realism. Question for the person on the net with the naval knowledge: If Kirk were to, say, go on an incredibly dangerous and important mission (Starfleet having absolutely no recourse but to use Kirk), and he succeeded, could there realistically be some lesser sentence levied against Kirk? Say a year or two in prison, or some such punishment? With any luck at all, by the way, Excelsior will blow up on its first trial run. (My apologies to those of you who found the ship beautiful and exciting.) I loved Enterprise and was sorry to see it go. But I have accepted her demise now, and I think it was good because it was drastic and unexpected, and that made for good drama. But Excelsior represents the cause of NCC 1701's demise, in my imagination--gotta blame it on something, don't you? Also, it was obvious to me that Enterprise was decommissioned so as not to add to Kirk's charges. I mean, at least he destroyed a ship which was to be decommissioned, not one that was going out again. Of course, I also found it hard to swallow that Starfleet would decommission Enterprise. It just didn't seem to make sense, But it has been suggested that Fleet has been attempting to break up the Enterprise crew; this could be their way of doing just that. And maybe, just maybe, Enterprise would have ended up being REcommissioned instead. Get Kirk out of the way, and then make a spontaneous (planned) decision to put Enterprise back in space. Star Trek IV already has a great responsibilty: it must answer the many questions raised in ST III. If ST IV fails--and it might--then ST III might be classified a waste of time and money, and the cause of Trek's eventual decommissioning. And knowing Paramount, and some others involved in production, ST IV has a very good chance of failing, and failing badly. Let's hope it all works out. ST can die, or it can live. There's no telling what its fate will be. I am not optimistic, but I am hopeful. May the wind be at our backs, and at the backs of the producers, writers, et. al.