"Jim," he said, "I have been, and will be, your friend. I am grateful for that. Live long, and prosper...."
His long fingers clenched into seared claws; the agony of the assault of radiation overcame him. He fell.
"Spock!" Jim cried. He pounded the glass with his fists. "Oh, God no...!"
McCoy tried to make him leave. Jim snarled and thrust him violently away. He hunched against the window, his mind crying denial and disbelief.
I find it singularly incredible that an author could be given a gift - a gift - of an adaptation to write, and still manage to faff it up with her own bias and preferences.
It's actually a remarkable skill, to cock up writing one of the most powerful scenes in cinema.
Good ol' Vonda has that skill though. Not only can she manage to make Spock's iconic death scene a spectacle of mediocrity she also manages to, once again make the mind numbing decision to give more thought and reflection to an 'original character' of sorts, and skip merrily past any in depth consideration of you know, an insignificant character like Admiral James T Kirk.
I swear, Star Trek - The Wrath of Khan by Vonda McIntyre could be renamed Star Trek - Biography of Lt. Saavik because that's what it is.
If you've followed my blog before, you'll know I have a particular antipathy towards a particular author (no prizes for guessing it's Vonda McIntyre), and it's not without good reason! I swear it!
Here read my other reviews, I'll wait.
Put it this way, I knew what to expect and she didn't surprise me one iota. I mean, if there's information you didn't need or want to know, Vonda will provide. If there's a female sub character / original character she can give more pages than necessary, she'll do it. If she can somehow give more page time to Sulu, he'll get it and, frankly, she hates Scotty. She adores Spock though, so I guess the depressingly badly written death scene might have been a little unexpected... but then again, shorter death scene means more time to lavish on Lt. Saavik.
Well at least after this book I only have, what, three more Vonda-cides to go?
I guess I better start at the beginning?
I don't know what your feelings are on books and film adaptations and where you draw the line between canon and not, but I think they need to be taken on a case by case basis. For example, the previous film novelisation I would call canon, it was written by Gene Roddenberry after all and I feel he added significant insight with the novelisation, the novelisation actually makes the film make sense, fills in the gaps; I reviewed it here.
This adaptation... I'd say should be in the category of don't touch it even with a stick, there's so much utter rubbish inserted, so many liberties taken I just can't accept it. I mean, I know I don't like Vonda's writing style in the first place and have very little patience for her generally, but come on! If you're going to write a film novelisation at least leave your bias at the door!
Lots of people have positively reviewed this ST:TWOK novelisation and said that it 'explains it all' and that they 'didn't enjoy TWOK because they didn't understand it and this fills in all the gaps'... no, it doesn't it makes up page count with utter trash filler that, if you've read a couple of McIntyre's ST novels you know it is just self indulgence on her part.
What kind of trash filler you ask?
I don't need to know that two of the scientists on Carol and David Marcus' team are jokers with a thing for Lewis Carol. I don't need a whole poem by Lewis Carol reproduced for me to read. I don't need to know that these two genius scientists make games in their spare time and leave that as data for Khan and co to pick up instead of the genesis project information. Why did you have me read pages of utter rubbish about nothing characters that are shortly going to die?
Is Scotty really a prissy, thin skinned uncle? Do we really need to know that his nephew has a crush on Saavik and has maths lessons with her? Do we really need that painfully written scene with Spock trying to explain a 'crush' to Saavik? Or that Saavik really doesn't like omelette because it's bland and has to use chilli on it to make it palatable, or a vegetarian diet makes (half) Romulans sick?
On that note, I know the director pretty much edited out everything to do with Saavik being a Vulcan/Romulan hybrid because she never really acts like a Romulan, so he decided to simplify it with the view of if she always acts like a Vulcan, make her Vulcan, in fact, the actress was a pretty big Spock / Vulcan fan and so she pretty much acted like a Vulcan would - as she had done in make believe as a child (she used to pretend she was Spock's daughter). So, if we keep in mind that her background in regards to Romulan heritage was edited out, a large section of the book which is dedicated to her and her tragic background is now erroneous. Why wasn't this caught and edited out? Couldn't they at least keep it consistent?
Speaking of consistency, wouldn't it be fantastic if dialogue actually in the films was accurate? Especially for the most important scenes? It probably didn't escape your notice that the dialogue quoted above does not fit with the dialogue in the film?
And really, this dialogue proves to be some of the most important when it comes to Spock / Kirk relationship analysis (doesn't matter if you think that it is a platonic or sexual relationship), as in the graphic above the scene is a reflection of Spock's response as early in the series as Amok Time.
This is how it plays out in the film:
This adaptation... I'd say should be in the category of don't touch it even with a stick, there's so much utter rubbish inserted, so many liberties taken I just can't accept it. I mean, I know I don't like Vonda's writing style in the first place and have very little patience for her generally, but come on! If you're going to write a film novelisation at least leave your bias at the door!
Lots of people have positively reviewed this ST:TWOK novelisation and said that it 'explains it all' and that they 'didn't enjoy TWOK because they didn't understand it and this fills in all the gaps'... no, it doesn't it makes up page count with utter trash filler that, if you've read a couple of McIntyre's ST novels you know it is just self indulgence on her part.
What kind of trash filler you ask?
I don't need to know that two of the scientists on Carol and David Marcus' team are jokers with a thing for Lewis Carol. I don't need a whole poem by Lewis Carol reproduced for me to read. I don't need to know that these two genius scientists make games in their spare time and leave that as data for Khan and co to pick up instead of the genesis project information. Why did you have me read pages of utter rubbish about nothing characters that are shortly going to die?
Is Scotty really a prissy, thin skinned uncle? Do we really need to know that his nephew has a crush on Saavik and has maths lessons with her? Do we really need that painfully written scene with Spock trying to explain a 'crush' to Saavik? Or that Saavik really doesn't like omelette because it's bland and has to use chilli on it to make it palatable, or a vegetarian diet makes (half) Romulans sick?
On that note, I know the director pretty much edited out everything to do with Saavik being a Vulcan/Romulan hybrid because she never really acts like a Romulan, so he decided to simplify it with the view of if she always acts like a Vulcan, make her Vulcan, in fact, the actress was a pretty big Spock / Vulcan fan and so she pretty much acted like a Vulcan would - as she had done in make believe as a child (she used to pretend she was Spock's daughter). So, if we keep in mind that her background in regards to Romulan heritage was edited out, a large section of the book which is dedicated to her and her tragic background is now erroneous. Why wasn't this caught and edited out? Couldn't they at least keep it consistent?
Speaking of consistency, wouldn't it be fantastic if dialogue actually in the films was accurate? Especially for the most important scenes? It probably didn't escape your notice that the dialogue quoted above does not fit with the dialogue in the film?
 |
| Found this wonderful comparison on facebook a while back. Sorry I don't know where it was originally from! |
And really, this dialogue proves to be some of the most important when it comes to Spock / Kirk relationship analysis (doesn't matter if you think that it is a platonic or sexual relationship), as in the graphic above the scene is a reflection of Spock's response as early in the series as Amok Time.
This is how it plays out in the film:
Ergh. Gets me right in the feels every time. Every. Single. Time.
I think what really characterises that whole scene is its quietness. Kirk's quiet agony at watching his friend die, his t'hy'la (soulmate/brother/lover) die and Spock's characteristic calmness... but with that obvious pain and distress. What really gets me is that the charismatic leader that is James T Kirk is struck virtually dumb, such is his utter despair and pain. What does he say, ever so quietly? 'Spock'. 'Spock'. 'Yes'. 'No'. Spock reaches out for contact he can't have, a contact he should have had, which was even expected by Sarek as we see in the next film. If there was ever a perfect piece of cinema, it is this scene. What does McIntyre do, well aside from mutilate it with her clumsy writing and stilted sentences? She makes it loud. Gone is the quiet despair of Kirk, instead we have outbursts. Instead of a distressing, intimate moment between two souls saying good bye, we have an interjection by... Saavik. I read it and wanted to scream, shut up Saavik! You are not in this scene, of course Kirk will not understand because you are intruding, intruding I say!
 |
| You can have a picture 'cause I aint typing it all out. |
Even if this was in the original script she saw, if that was how it was done, I don't know, an editor should have caught all this. Oh wait. Hold on. If you edited out Saavik from this section then you would have no reason to return to her for almost three solid pages as she visits Spock's coffin and comes out with zingers like 'Admiral Kirk's opinion was of no significance'. Well if his opinion is of no significance Saavik, then I don't know whose is! In comparison, Sulu (another Vonda fav.) gets about a page of shared dialogue with Chapel, while Kirk gets a page of shared dialogue with Carol Marcus. Then we are straight back to Saavik again for a paragraph before we get to Spock's funeral. Where Saavik is the first one mentioned. Again. I don't care about a character introduced for this film, I really don't. I want to know about the characters I'm invested in. And I have a real problem with those three scenes that McIntyre has inserted. They aren't in the film, that's fine, but they don't add anything either. They could have been brilliant scenes, revisiting all the old crew, but no, we get too much Saavik, we get Sulu (urgh) and a pretty rushed scene with Kirk and Marcus (double ergh). Honest to God, she loves her side characters! That is a Bones and Kirk moment, absolutely, 100%, but no, Carol Marcus it has to be, why use the original cast anyhow? Additionally, having Saavik as the 'bread' of the sandwich in these scenes makes her too important. She is used to hold the *two* scenes involving original cast together, she isn't that important, just WHY.
(╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻)
And you know, the really unfortunate thing about all this, is that it makes me really dislike Saavik, which really isn't fair on the character. In the film Saavik is enigmatic, she;s Vulcan with a little bit of extra emotion. Perhaps it's youth, perhaps it's just in comparison to Spock she's a little bit more dynamic, but she is acted superbly and the tears at Spock's funeral are poignant because as far as we know, she's Vulcan and displays of emotion like that are a faux pas. She reflects Kirk at this time, who is unable to hold it together, just about getting the words out.
And I do understand she acts as a kind of audience surrogate... oh, no she doesn't. Saavik does not work as an audience surrogate, she's new blood as Decker was in TMP, but she is not a surrogate because she is an enigma even to us. She is a very strange choice to base the much of the perspective of the book from, personally I would have gone for third person omniscient, and not focused on Saavik. Sure, she can have her exposition, but enough is enough!
Right, I think I have gone on enough about this. There are serious problems with this novelisation of ST:TWOK and frankly, unless you have some morbid curiosity about Saavik's non canon origins I don't really see the point in reading it. In contrast to the ST:TMP novelisation, McIntyre's first novel adaptation of the film series adds nothing to our understanding of the film as much of it can't be considered canon. It does highlight however a severe lack of editorial oversight.
In my opinion, a novelisation should at least be accurate to the scenes included in the film and any extra content should be relevant and add to the reader's understanding of it.
The author should also be competent and not struggle with sentence structure and flow. McIntyre never, improves on this front (at least in her Star Trek novels). I have no desire to read any of her other series to see if she actually does improve, I fear I'd feel the urge to claw my eyes out. Just these will be enough.
1/5 - Don't bother.
((McIntyre's work to me is as a red rag to a bull...))
No comments:
Post a Comment