Slashdot Mirror
Ricardo Montalban Recalls Khan
phyy-nx writes "Scifi.com, in referring to the directors cut of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Kahn (coming out on DVD Aug 6), has quoted clips from an interview with Ricardo Montalban. Montalban portrayed the vengeful Kahn in one of the best perfomances in one of the best of the (almost ten) Star Trek films. He mentions how difficult it was to portray Khan after six years of Mr. Roarke of Fantasy Island and how he overcame that mold to masterfully portray his new character's controlled insanity." Or, as Kirk would say: Khaaaaaaaaaaannnnnnnnnnnnnnnn!
made of Rich corinthian leather
(-1, Raw and Uncut is the only way to read)
Really!
actually, Star Trek V, the one that Shatner wrote and directed, is by far the worst. It was so bad that some guys did a homebrew version of MST3k on it...Here's a link.
(-1, Raw and Uncut is the only way to read)
No little sidekick to holler out "Da Kirk, Bahss, da Kirk!"
I hope the Wrath of Khan DVD includes the original episode of Star Trek that it was the sequel to. That would make a great set, and the movie isn't nearly as interesting if you don't have that TV episode in memory.
"Those who have never entered upon scientific pursuits know not a tithe of the poetry by which they are surrounded."
Slashdot must have quite a backlog of article submissions.
I mean, one article about a 1961 wristwatch, now an article about a 1982 movie.
I just submitted an article about this awsome new kind of game called Castle Wolfenstein 3D, it's like the old Castle Wolfenstein game on the Apple IIe , but from the FIRST PERSON PERSPECTIVE. It's really damn cool, but it doesn't work with my 8-bit Adlib Soundcard.
"Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
That's the thing I remember most about that movie. Mr. Roarke had become a professional wrestler, or a romance novel clutch hero.
Comic Book Guy voice: Best. Trek. Ever.
I'm so happy this is coming out on DVD in Director's Cut form. Way too cool.
One of the best Treks ever. More action in one movie than there was in the whole original series, at least believable action. All I can think of is Capt Kirk in one of those badly rehearsed street fights. He falls over the way he speaks. Slow and Delayed. Shatner put on his Acting cap for this movie though. Great stuff.
Was there any real explanation for why they switched the look of the Klingons in either the Star Trek universe or the real universe (the explanation)? I remember the DS9 episode "Trials and Tribbulations" where they go back to the TOS tribble episode and that topic came up, and Worf just said something of the like "it's a complicated matter". Any ST experts have an answer?
Buying a Dell computer is equivalent to dropping the soap in a prison shower.
I was never a big Star Trek fan, but I saw many of the movies as a kid. I only really remember two of the movies.
... it went from Science Fiction to Freakin' Stupid Fiction.
Without a doubt, the best one was "Kahn". Ricardo Montalban did an amazing job, and the details of his performance are still with me 20 years later.
I remember one other Star Trek movie - the one with the whales. Now I like whales and all, but that movie totally sucked
It sucked so bad that I remember it. It would have been better if they had a role for Tattoo in there.
Weeird, I just got it yesterday from the local 7-11.
e k2.jpg
h ttp://www3.telus.net/adamonline/LOTR2.jpg
:)
Proof?
http://www3.telus.net/adamonline/StarTr
Of course, I got LOTR then too.
http://www3.telus.net/adamonline/LOTR.jpg
I'm thinking someone ****ed up in my favor..like Monopoly banks except better
"Anybody who tells me I can't use a program because it's not open source, go suck on rms. I'm not interested." (LT 2004)
Khaaaaaannnnnn!
Sub Pot()
For i = Hypocrite.Lbound to Hypocrite.Ubound
Call Kettle("Black")
Next i
End Sub
Don't believe anything I say. I crash test crack pipes for a living.
Partick Stewart had a much better variation of this joke. Here's his quote from Saturday Night Live:
"Derp de derp."
"The fact that ST II is arguably still the best Trek movie is another source of shame. "
You might enjoy the movies more if you watched them fewer than 100 times each.
"Derp de derp."
Eh the joke works better in Basic.
Like this?
10 LET POT$="black"
20 LET KETTLE$=POT$
30 PRINT POT$, KETTLE$
40 GOTO 10
~Philly
"wow, basic."
VISUAL Basic...
Shatner wrote(!?) two fairly amusing books, 1 about making the series and one about the movies. They have lots about the politics and arguments that were part of the process of making the movies and TV series. Lots of quotes and interviews as well as, somewhat self-serving. explininations, reasons why the movies weren't what they should have been.
In a time of universal lies, Telling the Truth is a revolutionary act - George Orwell
"actually, Star Trek V, the one that Shatner wrote and directed, is by far the worst."
Shatner was not to blame for STV's failure. (entirely, anyway...)
STV was filmed during an actor's guild strike of some sorts. Not only did this affect the budget of the movie, but it also affected their ability to get some talent they needed. For example, ILM wasn't around to do the visual effects this time of round.
Lots of changes had to be made to the script in order to accomodate the lack of things (like some rock creatures) showing up in the movie. It became a hobbled mess.
Is it Shatner's fault that the movie sucked? Not really, no. If the movie didn't have those problems, would it have been good? Hard to say. Probably not, from what I've read. It's probable that the first movie would be considered the worst, though. (I think it is anyway, but what do I know?)
I think it was the book 'The Art of Star Trek' that explained what happened in 5, if anybody's curious. That book's seriously cool if you're interested in all the work they did to make those movies. You'd be surprised.
I am going to put a spoiler in a followup article...
This has to be the greatest!
I know it's a bad one but it's true:
About two weeks ago in the grocery store my girlfriend and I were in the store, she was looking to get some hotdogs to grill and she was shouting down the isle which to get... so I shouted back to her:
KAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHNNNNSSSSS!
Needless to say it made my day... everyone thought I was a moron.
Get your Unix fortune now!
Oops, You're right; it was Sergio Franchi who did the Volare commercials. Well, they're both dark-haired guys with great tans. :)
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
So how would your rate this one:
Get your Unix fortune now!
Nicholas Meyer wrote and directed Trek II, (co)wrote Trek IV, and directed Trek VI. People who go on about the Moby Dick allegory in First Contact seem to forget that that was first ripped off in II, with Khan as Ahab and Captain Kirk as the great white whale -- a fitting role for Shatner if there ever was one, right? (Oh, come on, what's a Trek post without a mean jab at Shatner?) I think Meyer is half the reason that Trek movies are still getting made at all.
This is the man they should have given the reins of the badly ailing Trek franchise to. Not, for God's sake, John "The Time Machine / Gladiator / BATS!" Logan. Oh yeah, and the Nemesis director's hasn't got a great pedigree, either.
Free Nicholas Meyer!
I have it from a reliable source that Darth Vader is Luke's father.
I'm a writer, a poet, a genius, I know it. I don't buy software, I grow it.
"100 times each? Does that post make you a "shithead" too? "
Lol, no.
I've actually heard of people who have claimed to have seen each ST and SW movie at least 100 times.
"Derp de derp."
Khan or Kahn? Pick one and stick with it! Sheesh.
Okay, "Kon".
Now go home.
Table-ized A.I.
"And even if your guess was correct, your argument still doesn't hold water. How could anyone watch a movie umpteen times without finding it enjoyable? "
The basic point I was making was that some people have a way of overanalyzing the shit out of any movie until they don't like it anymore.
However, that did not really apply in your case. I think lumped your post in with somebody else's and misunderstood the point. Didn't realize that until you responded and I reread your post. I apologize, error on my part.
Cheers.
"Derp de derp."
I read through this whole page and there is not one link to a soundbite of Kirk yelling Khaaaaannnnnn.
For shame. http://www.stinsv.com/MOv/St2/khankhan.wav
If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
It was, of course, the makeup budget changing that made the change happen in the real world. But as far as the Trek Universe goes, the following items have to be explained:
1) In Enterprise, a century before TOS, Klingons were fully brow-ridged.
2) In TOS, Klingons looked like humans
3) TNG Klingons had full brow ridges
4) In DS9, we met some Klingons who had encountered Kirk. While looking like humans during TOS, they now had full ridges.
5) Trials & Tribble-ations [DS9] established that the TOS Klingons do not resemble TNG klingons.
In short, the phenotype of the Klingon race changed between 2160 and 2260; it changed back shortly after 2269 -- and this second change (at least) affected specific, individual Klingons whose appearances changed from the TOS appearance to the TNG one.
Most STU theories do not explain all five points . The hybrid and faction theories are completely refuted by #4. The argument that we're supposed to pretend that Klingons always looked like TNG Klingons is crushed by #5 making a point of it instead of ignoring it.
Alternative explanations are, of course, possible, (A Q or other superbeing making a joke/inflicting a punishment? A body-altering biological agent of some sort?) but none has been officially established.
I would honestly prefer to see these shots redone.
I have no clue what was done with the Director's Release - I haven't seen it yet - but these are the problems I had noticed with the original.
buah hah hah
like 99 bottles of beer?
(define hypocracy 100)
(define (pot call)
(if (< call hypocracy)
'()
(cons '(call kettle black) (pot (- call 1)))))
(hypocracy 2000)
; haven't checked the code though...
There is no "explanation" - they were always supposed to look like that, but they didn't have the makeup ability (or budget) when the original series was made. When they made the movie they had budget and ability and so did it.
Its doubtfull you could retcon this in any sensible and plausible way
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
Set the way back machine to 1983. Superman 3 was in the movie theatres. And there was considerable discussion of it failings on USENET. Devoted fans were criticizing this movie left, right and centre. "C'mon, there is no way Richard Pryor's character could learn enough about computers in a prison rehabilitation program to take over the entire world." Mercifully, I have forgotten the other criticisms.
One wise guy wrote:
Yeah, that was thought provoking. I feel like im in an AOL chatroom. Heh
"Derp de derp."
Walter Koenig (the actor that played Chekov) has stated that he realised this as well, but that he kept his yap shut so that he wouldn't lose screen time to George Takei (Sulu) through a rewrite.
Otherwise, as far as nitpicks go, this one is rather minor. Chekov was on the ship (no crew transfers back then, as they wanted to keep the "far from all other ships" feeling), and the meeting was simply off-screen. The end effect is that Khan's memory is even better if he can remember a name mentioned in passing.
The Wrath of Kahn is a classic collection of things to pick apart (the overly long "sixty seconds", the wandering bloodstain on Kirk's jacket, and many more), but the movie is still the best Star Trek movie made.
The change in the makeup budget is trivial. THe bigger change is that the Klingons changed from Nazi's to Norsemen along the way . . .
hawk