MovieChat Forums > Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country (1991) Discussion > Did "Generations" ruin the ending of "Th...

Did "Generations" ruin the ending of "The Undiscovered Country"?

posted 9 years ago by TMC-4
22 replies | jump to latest

I mean, TUC seemed a well enough "series finale" for the Original Series crew. And it really isn't like they seriously needed Kirk to "pass the torch" to the Next Generation crew (only to be unceremoniously killed off by having a bridge literally be dropped on him) since his "Captain's Log" at the end subtly acknowledges Picard and company. Plus, having Kirk and whatever was left of his crew (in this case, Chekov and Scotty) show up in Generations seems rather redundant since TOS had crossed over to TNG numerous times prior to that. Hell, TUC had Michael Dorn show up as Worf's grandfather, so it isn't like the TNG connection/foreshadowing wasn't touched upon already.

[–] axeman97 9 years ago

"Star Trek: Generations is the worst movie ever made because it ruined everything. And I don't mean just Star Trek---I mean everything."

In all seriousness, everything you just mentioned is but a mere fraction of the reasons why Generations is my least favorite movie of all time. I had such high hopes for that film; instead, I walked out of the theater feeling like my trust had been violated. If there is anything good I can say about Generations, it's that, five years later, I was prepared for that other huge disappointment from that 'other' huge Star saga.

[–] Barefootconservative 9 years ago

Generations didn't ruin ST VI for me. VI was the perfect sendoff for the TOS crew and I enjoy it in its own right. But Generations ruined TNG.

Spoiler below.

I found Kirk's death to be such an unnecessary (and intentional) sharp stick in the eye (to TOS fans such as myself) that I never again watched another TNG film. In fact, it soured me so much that I barely watch TNG reruns on TV anymore.

[–] kerryedavis 9 years ago

I mean, TUC seemed a well enough "series finale" for the Original Series crew. And it really isn't like they seriously needed Kirk to "pass the torch" to the Next Generation crew since he's "Captain's Log" at the end subtly acknowledges Picard and company.

Not quite. TUC was Enterprise A. Picard et al were the Enterprise D. The Enterprise B and C came in between, over a period of at least a few decades.

[–] persen1 9 years ago

I mean, TUC seemed a well enough "series finale" for the Original Series crew. And it really isn't like they seriously needed Kirk to "pass the torch" to the Next Generation crew since he's "Captain's Log" at the end subtly acknowledges Picard and company.

I think that was only a reference to the new crew, who was going to take over the Enterprise-A.
But little did he know that the ship also would be retired once they returned to spacedock, in order to be replaced by the Enterprise-B later that year.

[–] kerryedavis 9 years ago

It would probably be best if they un-retconned that, as it doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

It seems like it would have taken a bit longer to get the bugs worked out of the Excelsior class, AND with something like 80 years between A and D, going from A to B in one year (or less) seems a bit quick.

Additional information: The Nexus ribbon travels through the galaxy every 39.1 years. That would seem to mean it's been somewhere around that long between the christening of Enterprise B at the start of Generations, and the TNG-people events depicted later at which time the ribbon is coming around again. And since it's apparently been approximately 80 years between Undiscovered Country and the later parts of Generations and the Next Generation series and movies, that would seem to suggest about 40 years between TUC and the early events of Gen. I would agree that's too long for Kirk and the others to still look that good, let alone that Sulu's daughter wouldn't still be that young. But THE SAME YEAR? Poppycock.

[–] persen1 9 years ago

It seems like it would have taken a bit longer to get the bugs worked out of the Excelsior class, AND with something like 80 years between A and D, going from A to B in one year (or less) seems a bit quick.

Hmm, i don't know. The Excelsior Class was introduced in Star Trek III, so you would think that they had a couple of years to solve the problems.
It did also not sound like as if Sulu had experienced any problems with his ship in TUC.

[–] kerryedavis 9 years ago

Hmm, i don't know. The Excelsior Class was introduced in Star Trek III, so you would think that they had a couple of years to solve the problems.
It did also not sound like as if Sulu had experienced any problems with his ship in TUC.

Maybe not, but putting just a few years between movies 5 and 6 doesn't seem to cover enough of that ground. It's pretty clear that movies 2, 3, 4, and 5 happened in fairly rapid succession, without much time between each. At most, a few months.

[–] feenix219 9 years ago

I always assumed there was another 5 year mission between 5 and 6.

[–] kerryedavis 9 years ago

Maybe not a whole 5 years, but at least a few years, considering Sulu was in command of his own ship and had already finished at least one significant mission as captain.

[–] feenix219 9 years ago

I figure a 5YM after TMP and after TFT make the most sense. I always got the impression that VI was a decent time jump after V.

[–] kerryedavis 9 years ago

I figure a 5YM after TMP and after TFT make the most sense. I always got the impression that VI was a decent time jump after V.

I still don't think it has to be 5 years, but maybe at least 3. After all, if Saavik was originally supposed to be the traitor, it probably takes some time before she gets that jaded.

[–] feenix219 9 years ago

Yeah - more reasons why a longer time jump is suspected.... plus, to realign the actors ages - 82-89 they only aged a few months, so a 5 year jump puts them closer to what they were supposed to be at that point.

It may not *have* to be 5, but its established since TOS to be the (assumed) average mission length.... Khan says 15 years from space seed, which gives time for a post TMP 5 year mission (what would have been Deckers 5YM), a few years for the refit, and the start of the training mission. Another 5YM assigned after the demotion to Captain would only make sense IMO.

[–] mtdman-90-390951 8 years ago

Maybe not, but putting just a few years between movies 5 and 6 doesn't seem to cover enough of that ground. It's pretty clear that movies 2, 3, 4, and 5 happened in fairly rapid succession, without much time between each. At most, a few months.

This is incorrect. There is a large gap between 5 and 6. Why would Star Fleet give Kirk a refit Enterprise A at the end of 4, have them go on a mission in 5, and then several months later retire the crew and ship? Doesn't make sense.

Also, at the beginning of TUC Sulu is returning from an extended mission in the Excelsior and the ship seems to be working just fine. The 'bugs' have been worked out.

[–] Capt-Cupcake 9 years ago

No, it didn't ruin the ending.

Kirk really did need to be there to pass the torch.

[–] pfr_77 9 years ago

I'm probably gonna end up pretending all the TNG movies are fanfic movies anyway. Sorta like game of thrones after season 3 or abrams trek

the kirk thing aside, the whole... sun... thing... it's just too stupid, i can't abide

[–] bozo_500 9 years ago

from another thread:

the whole passing the torch thing had been done at the 25th anniversary with VI (how peace with the klingons emerged...Worf...Kirks final log entry) & had nimoy passing the baton in Unification...They didnt really NEED to do a crossover film after that...just a full on TNG movie as TNG was popular in its own right

Anyway when they realised they wouldnt be able to get the 2 enterprises on screen with the 2 complete crews (a Star Trek Avengers type deal - the ultimate culmination of all the previous little interactions - which I guess STG was supposed to be) the crossover film should possibly have been scrapped. one of the writers of Generations even said that as soon as the crossover film was suggested the image that came into his head was a movie poster with the 2 enterprises and Kirk, Spock plus Picard and Data. instead they had to settle for the meeting of the 2 Captains which itself should've been much more of an event that it turned out - picards Xmas nexus was fine but they should've at least had Picard meeting Kirk on Kirks Enterprise (wasn't it kirks ultimate desire to be back in the chair?), and Kirks death was terrible.

that being said I sort of like Generations as it is (apart from Kirk/Picard scenes) but believe a crossover movie would only have been really great (im talking Trek II great) if it had been the 'Yesterdays Enterprise' storyline (yeah it had already been done but certain TOS eps had been ‘remade’ as movies before – TMP/TVH/TFF) so maybe the Ent D finding themselves in the 23rd century not the Ent A in an altered 24th Century

[–] kerryedavis 9 years ago

so maybe the Ent D finding themselves in the 23rd century not the Ent A in an altered 24th Century

Having the much more powerful Enterprise D turn up in the 23rd century would have been far more risky in terms of altering the timeline. Versus having the Enterprise A appear in the future, it would have been outgunned by basically EVERYTHING and especially if it was set up so that they wouldn't remember things upon returning to their time, the risks of changing the timeline would be much less.

[–] trekkie313 8 years ago

Not at all, I genuinely like Generations aside from pacing issues and Kirk getting a weak death.

Listen, do you smell something? -Ray Stantz

[–] glynis23-282-577521 8 years ago

Could solve these issues by going back in time and create an alternate timeline where Kirk doesn't die on the Enterprise B.

[–] Blueghost 8 years ago

"Generations" as a piece of high-minded crap, just the TV series from which it originated.

The thinking was that the internet was going to unify mankind, so "The Next Generation" was made with that idea in mind.

Only we've seen tensions heightened by social interconnectivity, not lessened. China is building an illegal island in waters is claims, which may require us to square off with them militarily. The 419 Advance Fee fraud scam letters from Nigeria still haven't gone away. A lot of former Eastern bloc European countries still pirate Western media; posting it on YouTube or wherever else you can get it. And we have ISIS and splinter terror groups attacking in France, Germany, the US and elsewhere. And now Russia's been bombing our Kurds as they fight ISIS, and has to square off with Turkey, which just went through an aborted coup! Did I mention Russia taking the Crimea peninsula from the Ukraine?

So, the "we're all one world" people have their collective heads up their rectums, and try to close the chapter on Kirk-era Star Trek, because New Star Trek is going to show the tech and science people how to be tolerant of lands abroad.

Only New Star Trek stinks, and blows chunks in predicting the volatile nature of the alpha male. So even though they try to close the door on "violent" Star Trek, the world dictates that it's still not a safe place, and is getting MORE DANGEROUS, not less.

So what does Trek do? They hire JJ Abrams to make action packed NEW Star Trek films to sort of resuscitate old classic Kirk and Spock era Star Trek.

I mean this goddamn morons, like a lot of producers in Hollywood who take their goddamn cues from social-psychologists, have really f'ed up this grand old lady of a TV series so many times, that it's truly a wonder that anyone remains a fan of the pure garbage they've continued to excrete for the last thirty goddamn years.

Fortunately, like Shakespeare, we've got the whole TV series on VHS, DVD, bluray and stored on various hard drives throughout the US and the world.

Now the only problem is keep these bastards from making Over-The-Top caricature trash of our beloved heroes, ship and setting therein.

So, no, is my answer.