I stumbled upon "Star Trek VI" on HBO the other day. It was the 2nd or 3rd time I noticed it had been on. I guess someone there must not like conspiracy therories, even in the 23rd century. At Kitomer during the botched assasination, we all know, Scotty kills the "Klingon" who falls through the plate glass down onto the floor. A scene or two later, Worf, & the Admiral notice that "This is not Klingon blood.", upon which they notice & pull of a facial prosthetic, uncovering Major West. Well that whole scene has been edited out! I wasn't sure the first time or so, thinking I may have just missed seeing it, but this time I'm positive. Unbelievable. I'm almost certain HBO showed it maybe a year or so ago, around the time of the release of the special edition, & that scene was intact. I don't know if anyone else has noticed any "unpatriotic" deletions from any other movies or not, just thought everyone might like to know.

sadly typical of this time and place.

This is an old edit, I'm pretty sure. Like the Scotty plotline from The Wrath of Khan, the West plotline could be easily excised for time. Seems like someond DOES like conspiracy theories. :)

That's the way it was released in the theaters originally.

man , things get soooo confuzzing what with director's editions , unrated versions , theatrical releases yadda yadda .
hb

That's the way it was released in the theaters originally.

You sure about that? I could have sworn that the scene was there when I saw it on opening night. Of course, that's been a long time back, now...

Nope, I remember it not being in the theater, too. The scene with West in the Fed pres' office with the map, and a dialogue bit with Spock, Scotty and Valeris as they're climbing thru the Jeffries tubes were also not in the theater but added to the video release.

Just so I understand (I'm not a Trek fan and have never seen the movie) how is this supposed deletion "unpatriotic"? And number two, I very seriously doubt that HBO engages in editing the studio produced movies it buys.

Benedict Arnold Who?

Nope, I remember it not being in the theater, too. The scene with West in the Fed pres' office with the map, and a dialogue bit with Spock, Scotty and Valeris as they're climbing thru the Jeffries tubes were also not in the theater but added to the video release.

Count me in this group. I did not see those scenes until the movie was released on video.

José

Well, your mind can play tricks on you. I had vivid memories of a couple scenes being in ST: Generations that never were. I think I probably imagined them from reading the novelization.

While I am prone to wild feats of the imagination, this wasn't one of them. I was studying in Britain at the time. I was pretty isolated from any news about Trek since I had no TV, couldn't afford novelizations of the story, had no contact from my usual sources of Trek stuff *and* my British friends revelled in making fun of me as a Trek fan. You couldn't create a better environment for a blank slate and a better movie viewer with no expectations when I went to see the movie in "Blitish" theaters (had to ride the bus for an hour to get to the nearest theater, too).

Besides, the only things in going on in my imagination at the time were of my girlfriend (now wife) and they had nothing to do with Trek. :D

José

Yeah, that scene definitely WAS NOT in the original theatrical release. I read it in the novelization and was glad to finally see it in the SE DVD release.

HBO may have shown the SE DVD version at some point in the past and may have aired the theatrical version the other night. Don't read a big conspiracy into it.

I believe the DVD audio commentary notes that the scene was not in the theatrical release.

Anyway, whether it does mention it or not, the scene was definitely not in the original release.

Qapla'

SSB

Just so I understand (I'm not a Trek fan and have never seen the movie) how is this supposed deletion "unpatriotic"?Probably because it serves to show members of the "good guys" --Starfleet -- in a bad light ... although I think that doesn't really wash, because we've just seen Admiral Cartwright and Valeris revealed as traitors, so what's one more?

On the other hand, Zorro, you admit to not being a Trek fan, which means the Department of Homeland Security should probably keep an eye on you ... ;)

Qapla'

SSB

Maybe it was in some international releases, I can't say it wasn't in the British version.

I'm trying to remember when I first saw the West scenes. It was before I got it on DVD, I know...it might have been added for television, just like scenes from TWOK were added for television.

Maybe it was in some international releases, I can't say it wasn't in the British version.

I'm trying to remember when I first saw the West scenes. It was before I got it on DVD, I know...it might have been added for television, just like scenes from TWOK were added for television.

It was added to the original VHS release. That is when I first saw it.

There are a couple different stories about why these scenes were cut from the theatrical version. One has to do with Gr's notes (he saw the film and then died about a day later), which indicated he wanted lots of stuff removed.
The cuts DO reflect his areas of complaint (making us seem as bad or worse than the klingons), but why anybody would give a shit what he thought (especially after he was dead), I don't know.

What blows my mind is that they thought this stuff was important enough to shoot, and so important that before shooting they dropped other better stuff in order to keep this stuff that fell out of the theatrical cut. Namely, the alternate way for the E to get to Penthe, which would have avoided the terrible dictionary scene, and substituted some boarded fx of the E hiding in a highway of asteroids. I interviewed Meyer very briefly the day after the film was greenlit, early in 91, and at that time he said that the script was the only thing that wasn't a casualty of the budget. he indicated that they might not have money for many of the needed sets, but that they'd be able to shoot the script w/o losing anything major. I guess some of these alterations weren't important to him (and keep in mind, there's stuff that was getting added fxwise all the way up through November 91, like the establishing shot of Starfleet at night and several battle and pre-battle shots.)

Yes, it wasn't in the theatrical release, my bad. But neither was the scene in the Federation President's office where Col. West outlined his plan to rescue Kirk & McCoy, which was on HBO. Since there are other scenes that are on the VHS version (ex. Spock, Scotty, & Valeris in the torpedo gangway) that were shown, and others that are on the SE version (ex. The total redo of the mind meld interrogation sequence) that were not. I just found it weird. It would make this another version. See http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0102975/alternateversions
The "unpatriotic" line was meant to be somewhat tounge-in-cheek, but why that cut? Just seemed odd to me. :confused:

I would guess that the reason the scene was not included in the original cut was that it really is an unneccessary twist that adds nothing to the story and inserts an extra "beat" into the denouement (sp?). Also, the earler Colonel West scene is needed to set this up, so essentially, we have an extra 3 or 4 minutes that add nothing to the movie except length. Personally, I could do without that scene.

Of course, I could also do without the English-Klingon dictionary scene. And the phasers in the galley scene. And the "let's assume Valeris is so stupid she'll walk into an obvious trap" scene.

Let's face it, there are a lot of holes and sillinesses in both this and Wrath of Khan, but the overall films are so good, we overlook them.

I would guess that the reason the scene was not included in the original cut was that it really is an unneccessary twist that adds nothing to the story and inserts an extra "beat" into the denouement (sp?).

I agree.

Inserting a political subtext into the story is one thing, but the Colonel West/ Oliver North correlation is downright farcical (the film is on thin ice already with the Gorcon/ Gorbochev business).

I'm glad to have been able to see the deleted scenes, but I think they detract from the film. I suspect the filmmakers came to the same conclusion, and that's why the cuts were made.

I also preferred the theatrical release version. The additions didn't really do anything for me, and they changed the entire character of the film - and not really in a good way.

In fact, I think I would have probably cut the dictionary translation scene altogether. I think it was awkward, and worked against the film, as others have said.

With all those officers and crew on the ship, no one speaks Klingon? That would be like having no Russian-speaking crewmen on a cold war US nuke sub that border patrolled the USSR and monitored transmissions.

While I agree that the dictionary scene is ridiculous, in all fairness the reality is that we're in Iraq and Afghanistan without enough people who can speak Arabic or Pashtu fluently... either here in CIA headquarters or on the ground.

José

I'd like to think Star Fleet is a little more competent than the current administration.

What I find objectionable about the dictionary scene is the fact that it worked. Imagine you were patroling the waters off the coast of Florida. A ship approaches from the direction of Cuba. When you contact them, they reply in heavily accented, broken English that they're a fishing boat returning to Miami. Are you going to just let them pass?

^ Well, avoiding a potentially sensitive topic about Miami's demographics... let me steer the conversation in this direction: Current immigration policy is that anyone from Cuba gets automatic asylum. So in that case, yes, it would be allowed to pass. Your example would work better if the ship came from the direction of other countries that don't get the same favorable treatment, like Haiti, Mexico or Russia.

José

^ Well, avoiding a potentially sensitive topic about Miami's demographics... let me steer the conversation in this direction: Current immigration policy is that anyone from Cuba gets automatic asylum. So in that case, yes, it would be allowed to pass. Your example would work better if the ship came from the direction of other countries that don't get the same favorable treatment, like Haiti, Mexico or Russia.

José

Umm, not quite correct. We're still doing the "feet wet/feet dry" policy, as far as I know. If they make it to dry land, they can stay. If we catch them on the water, they go back. So BEBruns' analogy isn't that far off.

"Where do you keep de nuclear wessels?"

"Oh, right over there, sir!"

there are a lot of holes and sillinesses in both this and Wrath of Khan, but the overall films are so good, we overlook them.I can't overlook the silliness in Trek VI. It has almost as many moments that literally make me wince as did its immediate predecessor, which is saying something.

Qapla'

SSB

Umm, not quite correct. We're still doing the "feet wet/feet dry" policy, as far as I know. If they make it to dry land, they can stay. If we catch them on the water, they go back. So BEBruns' analogy isn't that far off.

Thanks for clearing that up. I stand happily corrected. :)

José

With all those officers and crew on the ship, no one speaks Klingon? That would be like having no Russian-speaking crewmen on a cold war US nuke sub that border patrolled the USSR and monitored transmissions.

What for? They have a universal translator. They're going to send someone off for Klingon immersion courses because they think someone's going to recognize the translator? To me, that was the stupid part of the scene. If I was trying to fake a conversation in a foreign language, I wouldn't use a dictionary or phrase books, I'd use an online translator and read the text I typed in. With a universal translator, you presumably wouldn't have to contend with bad grammar either. So that's the what always got me. Just because you don't want to transmit the translated speech, doesn't mean you can't use it to give you the words to say yourself.

richard, i think its because its a lot easier for us to understand what they were doing visually by having them sit there with the books than typing and reading off of a screen. on the other hand, it points to a huge problem with films 3 through 6, when nimoy took control. rather than stories of the star trek universe (in other words science fiction), they became character pieces. instead of thinking about on continuity and speculating about how things would work with the technology they have, they concentrated on giving us entertaining moments with "our gang", and subsequently a lot of stuff got dumb, dorky, and very self indulgent. (on the third hand, there were occasional moments that i enjoyed that showed that some things probably wont change much even in 300 years, like valaris saying "it was on the news".)

i dont know about anybody else, but im getting pretty tired of films having 2 or 3 different edits floating around out there

i dont know about anybody else, but im getting pretty tired of films having 2 or 3 different edits floating around out there

Which is ultimately, the main issue I have about that in general. SOMEONE made the edit. Who? The original director, producer, (currrent) studio head? Or some one who just "felt like it"? As a Graphic Designer, I know how it could be annoying to see something you created, or at least, had a decision in producing being altered for one reason or another. Especially when there is no rhyme or reason for it. Now there are different "versions" out there that could be drastically different in thematic content, effects, etc.

Which is ultimately, the main issue I have about that in general. SOMEONE made the edit. Who? The original director, producer, (currrent) studio head? Or some one who just "felt like it"? As a Graphic Designer, I know how it could be annoying to see something you created, or at least, had a decision in producing being altered for one reason or another. Especially when there is no rhyme or reason for it. Now there are different "versions" out there that could be drastically different in thematic content, effects, etc.

What about something like "The Abyss" where Cameron couldn't finish the film the way he wanted due to the limitations of effects technology...a few years later when CGI was much improved, he was able to add a major portion of the plot back into the movie so that it was finally complete the way he originally envisioned.

What about something like "The Abyss" where Cameron couldn't finish the film the way he wanted due to the limitations of effects technology...a few years later when CGI was much improved, he was able to add a major portion of the plot back into the movie so that it was finally complete the way he originally envisioned.

Actually, I think those sequences were already done. They had been cut for time because the studio demanded the movie be much shorter than 3 hours. Cameron just cut them back in for the laserdisk release.

You might be thinking of Robert Wise's recent recut of Star Trek: the Motion Picture?

John, I distinctly remember an interview with Cameron where he said that ILM couldn't get the "wall of water" tsunami effects to look right - the footage was shot, but the effects weren't ever finished. The fact that the studio wasn't enamored of the three-hour running time sealed the deletion of about half of the plot. The film is MUCH better with that half-hour of footage restored.

I know some people have complained, but I like Wise's work on TMP. It doesn't really do anything with the story, but some of the imagery is much more vibrant. :thumbsup:

...ILM couldn't get the "wall of water" tsunami effects to look right - the footage was shot, but the effects weren't ever finished.

The effects weren't finished because the picture ran way over schedule and over budget and Fox pulled the plug. The success of Aliens and T-2 afforded Cameron the clout he needed go back and put the finishing touches on The Abyss.

I agree that this is one of the rare instances where the "longer version" is actually better than the shorter version. The Abyss is a seriously flawed film, but the parts that work do so beautifully.

At the time the movie came out Cameron claimed that the wall of water was cut for time, but mainly because it made the aliens look too hostile. He was afraid that it would have the audiences rooting for the nuke to go off. :lol: Everything that had happened up to that point was a misunderstanding, the wall of water was an overt threat and did away with the nice ETs image in the rest of the film. Lets face it, in real life it would have the governments of the world ploting the aliens demise out of a sense of self-preservation.

"The Abyss" is a strange film for me. I watched it at the show, and loved it. I thought that it was a very beautiful, and impressive movie. But, I have absolutely no desire to ever watch it again, it just doesn't interest me. I have no idea why that is so.

David.

The effects weren't finished because the picture ran way over schedule and over budget and Fox pulled the plug. The success of Aliens and T-2 afforded Cameron the clout he needed go back and put the finishing touches on The Abyss.

I think your chronology is a little off.

Aliens was '86. Abyss was '89. T2 was '91.

So, Aliens got him the chance to make Abyss, but T2 gave him the clout to go back and fix it.

"My mind is going... I can feel it... I can feel it..."

Thanks for setting the record straight.

Ok, I must have heard things wrong...it's still one of my favorite movies, and the SE blows the theatrical version away.

Maybe I need to clarify what I said. Someone other than the original director altered the film, even just slightly. Cameron, or Lucas "Reinventing" their own work is one thing, but Jackson reshooting a cut scene from "King Kong" (as noted on another thread), just because he's an aficianado of the movie & has the technology to do so is OK? Even though the poweres that be stated they don't believe in placing it back in, you know eventually it will be. What if, in 40 years, Joe Schmo decides to "redo" scenes from the "Lord of the Rings" Trilogy because he read the books, & doesn't like the way the films "Feel"? I'd bet ol' Peter would be ticked off.

There's a story that someone smashed a Salvador Dali sculpture in a museum. They nabbed the guy, and called Dali in to examine the damage. When they asked Dali if he wanted to press charges, he answered "No! He finished the scuplture for me!" :)

Maybe I need to clarify what I said. Someone other than the original director altered the film, even just slightly. Cameron, or Lucas "Reinventing" their own work is one thing, but Jackson reshooting a cut scene from "King Kong" (as noted on another thread), just because he's an aficianado of the movie & has the technology to do so is OK? Even though the poweres that be stated they don't believe in placing it back in, you know eventually it will be. What if, in 40 years, Joe Schmo decides to "redo" scenes from the "Lord of the Rings" Trilogy because he read the books, & doesn't like the way the films "Feel"? I'd bet ol' Peter would be ticked off.

It was Nick Meyer who did the re-edits for the SE DVD release of ST VI (he talks about it in the commentary track). Presumably he cut the "Colonel West" scenes from the original and restored them for the video release (even if he didn't do that himself, he shot the scenes). So if the director is responsible for the cuts, and the restoration, where's the problem?

... but Jackson reshooting a cut scene from "King Kong" (as noted on another thread), just because he's an aficianado of the movie & has the technology to do so is OK? Even though the poweres that be stated they don't believe in placing it back in, you know eventually it will be.

Yes to the first part. No to the second part - I don't believe nor do I think there is reason to believe that it will eventually be cut into the original film - not in any "official" manner at least.

What for? They have a universal translator. They're going to send someone off for Klingon immersion courses because they think someone's going to recognize the translator? To me, that was the stupid part of the scene. If I was trying to fake a conversation in a foreign language, I wouldn't use a dictionary or phrase books, I'd use an online translator and read the text I typed in. With a universal translator, you presumably wouldn't have to contend with bad grammar either. So that's the what always got me. Just because you don't want to transmit the translated speech, doesn't mean you can't use it to give you the words to say yourself.

I think a plot point in the movie was that the Klingons would have detected a response using the universal translator, and the jig would have been up.

I think a plot point in the movie was that the Klingons would have detected a response using the universal translator, and the jig would have been up.

As opposed to a woman speaking in stuttering, human-accented, poorly-pronounced broken phrases, using incorrect words, incorrect grammar, and with sounds of pages flipping in the background?

So, if you were an American military airspace controller in Alaska in the 1960s, and you detected a large aircraft approaching a military base, and the response to your IFF challenge was: "Da! Er - yais. Ve are being American cargo somyolet - er aero-plane. Ve are being on route to be giving supplies onto you at base in, er, Elle-mens-dorfer .... nyet, eh, no, Elmen-dorf .... da, Elmendorf base of Air Forces. Plizz to clear landing for us?"

You'd roll your eyes, figure they were drunk, and let them pass. Right? ;)

Really stupid scene.

Exactly.

BTW, I was only clarifying the scene. I never said I thought it was a good scene. :)

I agree, the scene doesn't work too well...however, look at Pearl Harbor in 1941...a flight of planes shows up on radar...to early, the wrong number, and from the wrong direction to be the scheduled flight of B-17s. Get some drunk and bored Klingons at an out-of-the-way border station with substandard tracking technology and bad subspace receivers, and I can almost see it working.

I agree, the scene doesn't work too well...however, look at Pearl Harbor in 1941...a flight of planes shows up on radar...to early, the wrong number, and from the wrong direction to be the scheduled flight of B-17s.
Yeah, but that was real life. That would never work in a movie.