Talk:Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Film Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Films. This project is a central gathering of editors working to build comprehensive and detailed articles for film topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start
This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
High
This article has been rated as High-importance on the priority scale.
Star Trek Portal
This article is part of WikiProject Star Trek, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to all Star Trek-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article. Feel free to add your name to the participants list and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Pizza Parlor

Does anyone know what the actual name of the Pizza parlor is that Kirk and Gillian visit? If so, is it still standing? For the record, the hospital and glass factory are both still active buildings in San Francisco, in case anyone is planning a visit. -Husnock 07:53, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

For the record, no longer an active question. Apparently the pizzia parlor was a set built on a sound stage. -Husnock 03:45, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

Regarding the trivia tidbit claiming that the people on the street in the "nuclear wessels" bit are actually random passersby in SF, and not actors: Though ST was not yet the cultural juggernaut it is in 2005, wouldn't Koenig and Nichols be recognized in their twentieth year as Chekov & Uhura? -Troy McClure SF

Well, the thing is, under SAG (Screen Actors' Guild) rules, anyone who speaks on camera has to be paid for their time as an actor. Anyone crossing in front of the camera was probably asked not to speak. The story goes that the brunette lady who tried to be "helpful" ("it's across the bay, in Alameda"), was a stranger whose response was considered so worthwhile that she was paid for her speaking role.
Nevermind, I found it! From IMDB:
The scene with Chekov and Uhura asking passerby where Alameda and the U.S. Enterprise were was completely unscripted, as was the young lady's clueless response, "Ooh, I don't think I know the answer to that one - I think it's in the bay, in Alameda." Crew had to chase her down after the shot was taken to get her to sign a SAG waiver and permission to use her in the film.
-Kasreyn 07:19, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
I could have sworn they were all extras except for the woman who actually answered the question... Oh well..--03:29, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lexan

Can someone verify that the molecule is one of Lexan? DBBell 20:57, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Nuclear Wessels

The scenes in which Uhura and Chekov asked passersby (including a police officer) where the "nuclear wessels" were located were filmed via hidden camera. The passersby were not actors and were unaware that they were being filmed. It was intended that Chekov's Russian accent combined with the unusual nature of his request would dissuade people from offering assistance. In the end, when a young woman does stop and offer some directions, the directors felt it was so comical that they decided it had to be included.

This isn't exactly true. If I remember correctly, the people were all extras, with the exception of the one who actually gave them an answer, who just happened to be passing by because she lived in the area.--Vercalos 06:17, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

The number of permutations of this myth makes it very difficult to figure out the truth. William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy recount a different version of this tale in the commentary on the DVD release. In their version, the woman was an extra who was determined to use this piece of dialogue which she had made up herself and so it was decided to sign her up as an actor and keep her dialogue in. I think it is doubtful these scenes were filmed with hidden camera as they also state that the policeman on the motorbike was a real policeman assigned to facilitate the filming that day and that he was drafted in as an extra.IP 23:52, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Swearing in the future?

This part of the Trivia makes no sense. How many times during the original series did we hear "dammit" come out of Bones' mouth? I call that a swear. Swearing is clearly alive and well in the 23rd century. I'm thinking of deleting that paragraph from the trivia. (Even though the "double dumb ass on YOU!" line was hilarious) -Kasreyn 05:50, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

The only time anyone swore in the original series was Kirk's "Let's get the hell out of here" in "City on the Edge of Forever". McCoy's well-known "Dammit, Jim" didn't come into existence until the feature films.

I think that swearing is probably more the scatalogical and vulgar swearing of today, not such harsh epithets as hell and damnit WookMuff 05:13, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

"The film marks the first use of the word 'ass' in a Star Trek production." True, but isn't it more significant that the film marks the first use of the word shit in a Star Trek production? While Kirk and Spock are riding in Gillian Taylor's truck, she wants to know if they are with the military and if perhaps they want to teach aquatic mammals to "retrieve torpedoes or some dipshit stuff like that?" and Kirk replies, "No, ma'am, no dipshit." As far as I know, shit was not uttered in a Star Trek production again until Star Trek Generations, when Data, seeing the Enterprise-D's saucer section about to hit the atmosphere of Veridian III, says, "Oh, shit." I don't recall ass being used again until the premier episode of Enterprise ("Broken Bow"), when Captain Archer, fed up with T'Pol's prattling on about how humans can't control their emotions, asks her rhetorically if she has any idea how much he'd "like to knock [her] on [her] ass." User:24.168.150.118 00:52, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

  • One thing Star Trek has always done is to inspire intellectual discourse. Like dis. Wahkeenah 01:05, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
    • Um, just to point out, I think this needs to be removed. I distinctly remember both Kirk and Scotty calling Harry Mudd a jackass in "Mudd's Women". Who came up with this anyway? I say we either edit it to say that it is the first time the word is said in a movie or get rid of it altogether. - Defunctzombie 01:58, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
      • A jackass is a donkey, and maybe terms like "smartass" and "dumbass" have more to do with donkeys than with anatomy. In any case, it's kind of silly. Now, when Kirk told his crew in The City on the Edge of Forever, "Let's get the hell out of here!" that was something, by mid-1960s TV standards. Wahkeenah 02:19, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
Actually, the animal is an ass- the male is a 'jack', the female is a 'jenny'. ("Donkey' is a relatively late invention and comes from 'dun', referring to the animal's color.) The anatomical word is unrelated to the animal; it's an American corruption of the British 'arse'. Terms like "you're an ass" refer to the animal's reputation for stubborness and have no origin in anatomy. 'Asshole' as an insult is probably a convergent term, not of direct origin. CFLeon 06:17, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

"Sounds like the goddamned Spanish Inquisition to me." -- McCoy to Kirk in the hospital elevator, on their way to save Chekov. -Radioflux 23:45, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Trial? What trial?

"It is evident that a number of months must elapse between the crew returning to Earth and later taking command of the NCC-1701-A, in order to allow for a trial ..."

There should have been no lengthy trial after Kirk and crew returned to Earth. Almost immediately upon entering the council chambers, Kirk pleads guilty to the charges, on behalf of himself and the crew". Trials take place after the entering of a plea (of not guilty) - not before. Upon entering a guilty plea, a court moves to sentencing, much as happened in the film.

  • right, because this only takes place a mere 300 years in the future, I can't imagine that they would ever make any changes to the US criminal justice system in a mere 3 centuries.. It's a movie! for all we know they don't enter pleas at all, and they're judged by flipping a tribble, heads you're guilty, tails it's a mistrial, no pesky juries getting in the way--205.188.116.195 23:12, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

hehe ""The justice system works swiftly in the future now that they've abolished all lawyers." Not the right sci fi series, but probably accurate. I mean, star trek doesn't have money do they? and without money, what would lawyers do it for? WookMuff 09:56, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, the question remains, what would anyone do anything for? For love of doing it, I suppose. The concept of a money-less society is a very complicated idea which I don't think the show's creators ever really thought much about. Especially since sometimes they mention "credits", which sure sounds like a form of money to me! My guess is that it's possible that "credits" are a form of money issued to Federation citizens who are coming into contact with members of societies that still use money (like the Ferengi); they give the others the credits, which can be redeemed for certain set goods by the Federation itself. Ie., they're a government-backed security used for trade with less-developed societies.
As for the moneyless society, my guess is that they probably have a lot less need for lawyers. The reason we need lawyers in our society is that the laws are deliberately made to be incomprehensible without specialized training (by using archaic forms of language, for instance). The only logical reason to make the laws incomprehensible to the public is to provide a reason for lawyers to exist. After all, if you could understand the law yourself, why would you need a lawyer? It's the most brilliant, and obvious, scam in our society. The Federation, though, seems to me to be a society that would be pretty intolerant of large-scale scams. My guess is that the laws in the Federation are understood by the citizens, so no one needs lawyers. If accused, they defend themselves. Kasreyn 01:06, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
I suppose. I was mostly thinking of personal injury, contract law, corporate law, and divorce attorneys. I don't think that laws would be all that simple, after all contact with the various alien species, with complex societal, cultural, and legal differences differences from humanity, both inside and outside the federation, would be such that lawyers would surely be more like cultural experts for various societies. No one person could know all the rules and regs for any given situation, not even spock. WookMuff 01:38, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
Well, yes, but if you were going to be involved in a case, all you would have to do would be to do some basic research on the applicable laws. The laws wouldn't be written in today's deliberately-incomprehensible lawyerese code, and it's already been demonstrated that Federation citizens are far more literate than people are today. I think it'd be no problem at all for people to do a little research and then competently defend themselves. It'd be no harder than compiling a master's degree thesis at a modern university, and plenty of total idiots can manage that. Now, I'm not saying there wouldn't still be experts on law and even law specialists. But the current system, where the law as a system is closed to outsiders, where buying a lawyer's services isn't a free choice but is forced upon you, would definitely not be allowed to exist in the liberalized society depicted in Trek. Kasreyn 02:24, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
I suppose you are correct :) WookMuff 05:13, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Whalers' language

I am almost, (but not absolutely) certain that the whalers do NOT speak finnish. it sounds to me like swedish. this is approximately what I hear as the harpoon is deflected in "mid air"

           <clunk> - "vilket helvetes tull..." - <sound of ship decloaking>
       approximate meaning:  "what the hell is this nonsense..."

I am unable to make out the next comments.

are any scandinavians able to confirm or reject this?

Edgjerp 17:54, 8 May 2006 (UTC)


I'm Swedish, and listening to the two whaler-phraces I found: I can tell you it does not sound like any Swedish I've ever heard :) And besides... the geographic location of Sweden has provided for a very small population of whalers.

And "vilket helvetes tull..." is 1. Not pronounced that way. 2. Total gibberish :)

If I would have to guess (without any real linguistic knowledge), I'd say it sounds like Icelandic. This could be way off, though. But I can rather confidently say that it is not Swedish. Not the words, pronounciation, nor "speech melody" fits into it.

Hopefully I was of some help.

85.225.27.109 19:32, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I happen to be Finnish and can confirm that the whaler's DO speak Finnish. The whalers are deffenitely yelling "Mitä helvettiä!" (What the hell?) when the Bird of Pray turns off its cloaking device. Additionally when the harpoon hits the ship one of the men clearly says "Mitä hittoa tuo on?" (What the heck is that?). Finally the guy on the crow's nest actually says "Siellä se puhaltaa!" which would literally translate as "There it/she blows!" which sounds rather ridiculous in Finnish, but the over-all pronounciation seems to indicate that the whaler's were not professional actors. -TheHande 20:38, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] leningrad

Not really a gaffe. Many Starfleet ships are named after battles, such as Saratoga and Yorktown (well, they're really named after famous warships, usually USN, but that's a detail). It's not out of the question that the Leningrad was named after the siege of the city during the second world war. Another thing Star Trek is good for is coming up with lame explanations.

  • If you can accept the concepts of the matter transporter and of backwards time travel, nothing else presents any serious logic problems. Wahkeenah 14:24, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

By the way, are there any names for Saint Petersburg that do not revere the icons of an authoritarian repressive regime?

  • For about a week after the October-but-it-was-really-November Revolution, the city was called "Libertyville". Wahkeenah 02:50, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
I think they serve 'freedom fries'.

-G —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.117.158.83 (talk) 01:55, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Trivia

Twice now I have posted up an item in the Trivia section talking about a particular scene. The scene in question is where the Klingon ambassador says, "Remember this well! There shall be no peace as long as Kirk lives!". As he storms out a voice, Leonard Nimoy, calls out "You pompous ass!" This is verified in the subtitles.

Twice posted, twice removed. What is unacceptable about this most trival bit of trivia? Wilybadger 02:41, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

  • That it sounds bogus. Wahkeenah 03:31, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
  • One basic problem with it is that at the time the Klingon ambassador says it, to the Federation leaders, Spock is on Vulcan being picked up by the rest of the crew, who are flying a Klingon vessel and heading back to earth. Maybe somebody yells it, but it's not Spock. Wahkeenah 03:50, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh, it's not bogus. Listen closely to the dialogue. Once you know what it is, you can't help but hear it. Plus, as I said, it's verified in the subtitles on the DVD version.

Additionally, I said it was Leonard Nimoy who said it. I didn't say it was Spock. An important distinction. Nimoy said it while directing the scene, and the sound folks left it in, either as a joke or cause they didn't notice it.

I assure you, it's there. Go listen. :) Wilybadger 03:54, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

  • It's there, it's just unlikely that it's Nimoy unless he's effecting a different voice. I just put on my DVD (I don't have closed captioning). Obviously it's not Spock, who in the very next scene is still on Vulcan, nor does it sound like Leonard Nimoy to me. Nimoy was directing, so maybe he decided to alter his voice and throw that line out. But I don't think it's him. Wahkeenah 04:05, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Sounded to me like it was him, I've been told by people it was him. But even if it's not, the mere fact that someone's shouting "You pompous ass!" at an ambassador is trivial enough to be trivia. :) Wilybadger 23:32, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Massive blanking

Why was the entire trivia section blanked? Maybe send it to a separate article, but not blank the entire thing. -Husnock 09:43, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

  • It wasn't. Those items which could be sourced or which were relevant were integrated with the rest of the article. Paragraphs are good. Furthermore, Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, and we're especially not a carbon copy of IMDb, nor Memory Alpha. Mackensen (talk) 15:36, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Continuity

I'm surprised to see no discussion of the drastic change in appearance of interior of the Bird of Prey between Search For Spock and this movie. Is there anything out there about the reasons for this? --129.74.161.50 20:27, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] TNG

The article states

The popularity of this film with the general public, the highest grossing Star Trek movie to date, prompted the decision to make a new spinoff series, which became Star Trek: The Next Generation. A teaser for Star Trek: The Next Generation was played before the film in some theaters.

If the sucess of this film prompted TNG, surely the film would have finished its run before they would have a chance to develop trailers, and therefore couldnt have put them in before the film! The Fashion Icon 10:43, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "The one with the whales"

Perhaps not an appropriate source to fill in the cite that's left wanting, but nevertheless an amusing one: Everything2 node titled "I liked the one with the whales". And yes, it is in popular use.

Andrew Rodland 04:30, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

And Superman 3 is "the one with Richard Pryor in it"... yet its just not apropiate or encyclopedic to place it here. Though when there are 10 or so Star Trek movies and numerous episodes, "the one with whales" seems to be a good way to recognize it from the bunch. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.83.56.249 (talk) 05:01, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I was going to bring this up. More specifically, I was going to ask if its referred to as 'the one with the whales' outside the UK. However, where should this piece of info be included in the article? WikiReaderer 18:45, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Also, I've never heard anybody refer to Superman 3 as "the one with Richard Pryor in." It may just be me, it may be that he's slightly less of a celebrity in the UK, I don't know. And as you say, SineBot, given the number of Trek movies, it may be a good way to distinguish it from the bunch. Surely we could have a note somewhere in the article - not necessarily in the leading paragraph - but somewhere on the page, that ST:IV is often referred to popularly as "the one with the whales". WikiReaderer 22:42, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

The article refers to whales as a major plot element; that is enough, in the article itself, to confirm once a reader has found it that this is "the one...". The other thing required is a redirect; enter the one with the whales in the Search box and click Go - this was set up a year ago. - Fayenatic (talk) 12:20, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Aliens conacting Whales

What did the aliens contact the whales even want? Arthurian Legend 18:26, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

If you read the novel version, you can find part of the answer. it appears that they simply wanted to converse with the whales, but that the whales alkso performed some sort of role as story-tellers, and perhaps philosophers. --Steve, Sm8900 18:38, 9 October 2007 (UTC)