Jammer's Review

"Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home"


Theatrical release: 11/26/1986
DVD special edition release: 3/4/2003
PG; 1 hr. 58 min.
Screenplay by Steve Meerson & Peter Krikes and Harve Bennett & Nicholas Meyer
Story by Leonard Nimoy & Harve Bennett
Produced by Harve Bennett
Directed by Leonard Nimoy

Review by Jamahl Epsicokhan

April 9, 2003

On Thanksgiving Day, 1986, at the impressionable but cognizant age of 10, I saw Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home at the Cinema I-II-III at Eastland Mall in Bloomington, Illinois (is there such thing as a cineplex with only three screens anymore?). It was my first Star Trek movie as a sentient human being (my parents had apparently dragged me along as a very young observer to either — and possibly both, but I'm not sure — Star Trek: The Motion Picture and Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, but I certainly hadn't by that point approached an intellectual stage of awareness that I can recall).

I still clearly remember standing in line for that movie. I remember thinking how odd it was standing in a mall where every store was closed and the lights were off, except for the movie theater. (Movie theaters are, of course, open every holiday of the year, since that's when people go to movies.) Funny thing how the memory works and images fade. I remember that image of a closed mall, which stands out more than anything else. I also remember a story about whales and time travel and an odd Mr. Spock, who was for whatever reason not quite himself and who also could not successfully use the word "hell" in a sentence — a word that, by the way, I was still too young to say, lest the parents give me looks of disapproval.

I guess you could call that the official day I became a follower of Star Trek, having the tradition of watching these movies and TV shows passed down to me from my Trek-watching parents, who had been teenagers back in the days of The Original Series on TV. Star Trek: The Next Generation would be on the air a little less than a year later, and I officially found myself on the Trek bandwagon. That was some 16 1/2 years ago. Eastland Cinemas is itself long gone; it was shuttered in 1993 while I was still in high school. I look back now while completely separate instances of "gee, that was a long time ago" cascade upon each other.

It's probably safe to conclude that I didn't completely "get" Star Trek at that time. I wasn't really familiar with the characters or the history, and I probably wasn't sure why these people were on the planet Vulcan in a Klingon ship that was apparently not even theirs (thank goodness for the Klingon ambassador's recap on the Federation Council floor). But I did understand the concepts and paradoxes of sci-fi and time travel. After all, Back to the Future had just been a big hit that was one of the more memorable movies from my youth.

Anyway, perhaps I can pull myself out of nostalgia long enough to actually review this movie.

I'm older and wiser now, and more cynical. I know Star Trek forward and backwards, and for some time I haven't seen Trek without also looking at it from the viewpoint of "Trek critic" (and sometimes even "jaded Trek critic"). Watching Star Trek IV is like turning back the clock to simpler times. It's the Star Trek movie that somehow brings Star Trek to its most understandable and down-to-Earth terms. It does this by bringing it to our own world, namely San Francisco, Earth, in 1986.

Of the 10 Star Trek movies, probably three count in my book as the "standouts" — all for different reasons. Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan is the best of the series and serves as the true emotional and philosophical core of the film franchise. Next comes Star Trek: First Contact, which is the best example of technical sci-fi action storytelling combined with a poignant self-reflection on Trek history and lore.

After that, ranked at No. 3, would be Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home, which is not a particularly deep or significant film but delivers an unforced, breezy story that works well and is simply entertaining. If Wrath is the philosophical/emotional piece and First Contact is the technical/historical piece, then Voyage Home is the character/charisma piece. No Trek movie feels less forced and more natural than The Voyage Home. Everything about the movie feels like it was achieved effortlessly — an effect which requires great effort, care, and insight to achieve.

The Voyage Home might also be appropriately labeled The Mainstream Trek. It's the one movie in the series that achieved unexpected popular commercial success and existed more or less on its own terms. It did this, quite simply, by existing in a more recognizable world. It's a broader, lighter, and perhaps safer picture. There are no villains, there is no violence. But there is a threat in the form of Earth's own past. The concept is simple: Earth's future is to be destroyed by something that happened centuries earlier. The story is a parable for the unseen consequences any given action could have.

The massive probe at the story's outset comes looking to talk to humpback whales. There are none for it to talk to. Notable is how this mysterious probe is one of Trek's larger-than-life sci-fi elements, an object of seemingly infinite power and holding mysteries that are not to be solved by the story — permissible in the 1980s but not anymore, it would seem. Modern Star Trek deals more comfortably with at least vaguely tangible and limited objects rather than all-powerful forces hiding grand mysteries.

In order to save Earth from the probe, our crew must retrieve humpback whales from Earth's past. As the object in the movie, the whales work well. On the new DVD commentary track, Leonard Nimoy talks about the difficulty of coming up with an object that was adequate for our crew to retrieve through time. There was discussion during the script-development stages, for example, of making the object an extinct plant that would cure a disease in the 23rd century. But the problem with that idea was the lack of theatrical scale. What would seem grand enough to center the adventure on? The concept of whales, with their size and scope and mysterious songs, proved to be a good choice.

The movie should not be seen as a polemic. There are no politics in the film, and it does not excessively preach about the evils of the whaling industry but simply looks at it from a standpoint of humanity: Why kill intelligent and wonderful creatures merely because you can? It is an interesting human trait that we do many things because we can, rather than because it's good for us or anyone else.

The main guest character is a whale expert named Gillian Taylor, played by Catherine Hicks in a performance that at times has a little too much insistence and perk for my tastes but works in the context of the story. For Kirk and Spock's mission to find humpback whales, she represents their entry point to the 20th century, as well as an obstacle who must be convinced of what must be done to save the future.

Always evident here is an effortless flow to the characterization and dialog. Broad humor in the Trek universe has sometimes come across as an unnatural foray, but not here. When you consider how Star Trek: Insurrection tried with all its might to make detours to the lighter side, but could not get there — or look at Star Trek V's sorry attempts at humor — you can see just how well-oiled The Voyage Home manages to come off. The movie's best laugh comes not by its words but in its notes, after Gillian asks, "You guys like Italian?" — which sets off a priceless verbal collision between Kirk and Spock that is pointless to explain and must instead be witnessed.

Of course, Spock's incompetent attempts to fit in by swearing is good for some chuckles, as he inserts "hell" where it does not belong. Later, the use of "colorful metaphors" (a great term) has turned into a running gag, delivered deadpan style: "Spock, where the hell's the power you promised me?" "One damn minute, admiral." It is a measure of our affection for these characters that they can get so much mileage from such cheerful goofiness.

Plot details? I don't think I need to go much into it. There's the construction of the whale tank, the trespass into the nuclear "wessel," etc. The key here is to give everyone a small mission, which they carry out with relative ease and often with some sort of comic payoff. There's of course Scotty's encounter with a 1980s Macintosh, and the story's wink-wink attitude toward time travel when he gives away the formula to "transparent aluminum" (Kirk's earlier bit of selling his antique glasses from Star Trek II to an antique dealer is an even better gag because it's also an in-joke). And, of course, there's Chekov being captured by the U.S. Navy aboard the USS Enterprise — which is fish-out-of-water plotting at simultaneously its most obvious and most fun. It goes without saying that in the course of the plot there will be some light jeopardy, a successful rescue of the whales, and a triumphant return to the 23rd century where Earth will be saved by whale song.

The tech aspects are limited and the film does not dwell upon them, all the better for playing to the mainstream audience. Beyond the plot itself involving time travel and warp speed, this movie steers as clear as possible of tech and stays the course for character interaction. Special effects are more restrained and earthy, particularly (and for obvious reasons) in the 20th century.

I've never been a big fan of the Leonard Rosenman score for the film. It's adequate but not memorable, apart from the main theme, which is memorable but doesn't quite feel like Star Trek ... which perhaps may be the point given the film's Earth-bound premise. Still, after the magnificence of James Horner for Treks II and III and Jerry Goldsmith for ST:TMP, Rosenman comes across as junior varsity.

What I especially like about the TOS feature franchise is how Treks II, III, and IV create a story arc for the crew of the Enterprise — a trilogy of chapters that coexist and belong together, despite their differences in tone and subject (most especially with Trek IV's lighter touch). Kirk and his crew face the music at the end of this film for their crimes in the previous installment. The charges are forgiven, of course, and the crew is reassigned to a new ship (Kirk's demotion to captain and the "A" tacked onto the new Enterprise are nice touches), but the way the opening and closing scenes deal with the consequences stemming from the previous film ensures that the audience knows this continues the story — even if half the movie's running time exists in its own storytelling universe.

There's a feeling of continuity to the TOS movies that's too often lacking in the TNG features. The Voyage Home accomplishes its goal of continuing story threads while at the same time being the Trek movie that most exists outside the Trek universe. It would stand as the oddest entry to the film franchise ... if it weren't the most accepted and mainstream of them all.

In taking the characters as far away from the Star Trek context as the series tends to get, it actually ends up revealing them as exactly who they are in their purest form — at their most human, most natural, most restrained, and most believable.

Previous: Star Trek III: The Search for Spock
Next: Star Trek V: The Final Frontier

Section Index

29 comments on this review

Jake - Wed, Dec 5, 2007 - 1:36pm (USA Central)
This is a beautiful wrap-up to the extended storyline which began with "Space Seed." It may have also influenced the eventual directions taken by both TNG & DS9.
How I wish the TNG films could've followed this example.
Scotty's niece - Mon, Jan 12, 2009 - 6:42pm (USA Central)
The best Star Trek movie EVER!!! You've just got to love it, "A keyboard! How quaint!" Gotta Love The Voyage Home, gotta love Scotty. <3
Jay - Sun, Sep 6, 2009 - 10:24am (USA Central)
I couldn't get past the cluelessness of Uhura and Chekov as to where Alameda was. Even if it's no longer a base in their time, presumably it would still be a city.
Nic - Tue, Oct 13, 2009 - 8:50am (USA Central)
Definitely my favorite of all the films (very closely followed by First Contact, VI and TMP), it made me forgive the ridiculousness of Spock's resurrection in the previous film. It was also the first TOS feature I saw, though not in the theater (I would have been six months old at the time) but on VHS.
David - Tue, Mar 9, 2010 - 8:18am (USA Central)
Very entertaining movie. My only beef with it is that the Enterprise, with all it's equipment, could not find the frequency of the radio signals on the whales -- and this was used as a gimmick to get the whale doctor aboard and to the future.
MikeS - Fri, Apr 1, 2011 - 5:20pm (USA Central)
^ The Enterprise?!
Jay - Sat, Sep 17, 2011 - 9:02pm (USA Central)
Yeah, what MikeS said. They were on the "Bounty", not the Enterprise.
Cogitation - Thu, Dec 15, 2011 - 10:05pm (USA Central)
"...could not find the frequency of the radio signals on the whales..."

A ridiculous objection. Even if they were onboard the Enterprise-E, that plot point would have made sense.

All the radio transmitter for the whales was doing was emitting a locator ping, not a message saying "Hi, we're the whales you're looking for." You think there are no other transmitters broadcasting a ping from the ocean? There are tens of millions of radio frequencies in use. You'd *have* to know the right frequency for it be useful.
beavis - Wed, Nov 7, 2012 - 6:45pm (USA Central)
giant space doodoo turd log with a dangling pingpong ball = this films villain haha
Peremensoe - Sun, Nov 18, 2012 - 10:41pm (USA Central)
"I couldn't get past the cluelessness of Uhura and Chekov as to where Alameda was. Even if it's no longer a base in their time, presumably it would still be a city."

Why would you presume that? In 1986, the city of Alameda had only existed for 133 years; the time of our heroes is more than twice as far in the future.
Jack - Thu, Jul 18, 2013 - 12:23am (USA Central)
^^ what's that have to do with anything? Unless the city was destroyed it would still be around.

Phoenix is even younger, but if no one in the time setting of Star Trek II timeline had heard of the city, it would raise eyebrows.
Chris - Sat, Aug 24, 2013 - 5:25pm (USA Central)
Scotty: "How do we know he didn't invent the thing?"

Um...because somewhere some historic scientific journal would show who really did, and now they're screwed. So much for not altering history...
Paul - Mon, Aug 26, 2013 - 11:04am (USA Central)
@Chris: FWIW, the novelization is different. Scotty hears the guy's name and remembers that he DID invent transparent aluminum. So, essentially, Scotty just helped him invent it earlier (in the novel).
T'Paul - Tue, Sep 10, 2013 - 5:27pm (USA Central)
This was one of my first too. I saw VI, III and IV all more or less at the same time, and between them they hooked me on Trek for good, and then a few years later I started watching TNG, every Friday evening in good old NZ!

Definitely a classic, the most relaxed, laid-back, real humour of the all the movies, good story, good characterisation, almost flawless. The greatest moment of the original crew IMO, although VI is up there too, but I think the difference is, as Jammer says, seeing them in the 20th century lets us appreciate them in a different way.

Oh, and re. the Alameda issue above, hello, it's Alameda, not New York, London or Paris... I'm sure that it's feasible for them not to have heard of it, especially Chekhov!

Moonie - Thu, Sep 19, 2013 - 3:32am (USA Central)
Hm, I did not enjoy this movie as much as most of the commenters did.

I thought the humor was cringeworthy and Kirk looked like Tom Jones!! (*shudders*)

They all act like complete idiots in the "streets of San Francisco". I was embarrassed! Kirk does neither look, nor act like an "Admiral".

Then again, I've only seen the dubbed (into German) version so far (because I accidentally bought the VS instead of the DVD!!! Stupid me!) and I know how much the German dubbing dumbed down the humor in TOS and how cheesy many scenes came across and how much is lost in translation... so I'll certainly give it another chance in English. Maybe it'll be less awkward in the original language.
Ian - Sun, Sep 22, 2013 - 4:51pm (USA Central)
Totally agree about the score, and it's unfortunate that they couldn't have gotten Horner for this movie as well. Just watched IV it for the second time in the last year, and the score is the big weakness. It makes whole scenes feel incredibly goofy, like we've entered a three stooges movie or one of the later episodes of "Jeeves and Wooster" (where they're running around in New York being shot at by the police). The composer is not bad (in fact, some of his writing is quite good), he's just wrong for this film. There' plenty of Navy and slap-stick, but there's not enough magic.

In contrast, the Horner scores from II and III are perfectly balanced between the military elements ("sea-faring" as he calls it) of Trek and the magic of sci-fi, outer space, and discovery. They also have very specific ideas of how to further the story and its human relationships. The score from IV misses that entirely. It's a great blah.

Doesn't kill the film though. It's still an incredibly charming and often touching film. I find the contemplation on the fate of the whales quite affecting, and the stakes feel appropriately high through. I just wish the music helped me get there more or had added that extra layer of meaning from the prior two films.
Chris - Mon, Nov 18, 2013 - 6:49pm (USA Central)
"@Chris: FWIW, the novelization is different. Scotty hears the guy's name and remembers that he DID invent transparent aluminum. So, essentially, Scotty just helped him invent it earlier (in the novel). "

Wow...that's, if anything, even more absurd. And way too convenient.
Latex Zebra - Wed, Nov 20, 2013 - 10:06am (USA Central)
So once the parents die, there will be one whale and maybe a brother or sister. Regardless of how many, they can't breed.
So what happens when they Cetacean Probe returns because of a lack of signal again because there are no whales.

All they've done is delay another meeting. What is needed is Crewman Daniels to sort out a little breeding program.
Eli - Fri, Feb 28, 2014 - 7:29pm (USA Central)
For me, this is Star Trek's finest moment.
Jack - Sat, Apr 5, 2014 - 7:02pm (USA Central)
It was rather presumptuous of Gillian to jump in Kirk's arms just as he was beaming up. We usually hear one to beam up or two to beam up or three, etc. If the transporter is set for a certain number (here, one), then for all she (and for that matter, Kirk) knew her and Kirk would get Tuvix'd together.
Peremensoe - Fri, Aug 1, 2014 - 9:06am (USA Central)
Jack, the point about Alameda: the time frame is more than long enough for the city'so circumstances to completely change. It might well have been destroyed (perhaps in one of the two cataclysmic wars Earth is due for in that span). It could easily have been depopulated, and/or renamed. Any number of things could quite reasonably have happened in the intervening centuries. For the characters to know of it would be an odder note than if they did not. (I wouldn'the bet on the long-term survival of thirsty Phoenix either.)
Josh - Mon, Sep 1, 2014 - 9:57pm (USA Central)
I really the scene in the restaurant where Kirk is finally cornered into telling some semblance of the truth. Shatner's delivery - and the pause he makes before saying that the goal is "to repopulate the species" - cracks me up.
James - Wed, Oct 15, 2014 - 7:25am (USA Central)
Didn't it strike anyone as a little bit trigger-happy to land a cloaked ship in San Francisco's central park? Did they think it was impossible to see the lowered grass or walk into it?
Thelia - Thu, Oct 16, 2014 - 11:04am (USA Central)
This is absolutely, 100%, by far the best Trek movie of all time!! When Scotty says "Captain there be whales here!" it absolutely makes me grin every time. And who doesn't grin every time Spock says "They are not the hell your whales." No doubt about it best EVER!
Yanks - Thu, Oct 16, 2014 - 12:50pm (USA Central)
"Star Trek is fun again" ....

... if I remember the reviews of the time period correctly ...
Gordon, Edinburgh - Tue, Oct 28, 2014 - 5:35am (USA Central)
I'm so glad they didn't follow the original plan of having Eddie Murphy in this film. It could well have been another 'Superman III', which was effectively a Richard Pryor film in which Superman happens to appear.

But I love the whole trial scene at the end, when Kirk is busted back to Captain but then assigned the command of a starship, and then the dramatic reveal of the Enterprise-A...
Yanks - Tue, Oct 28, 2014 - 8:13am (USA Central)
Gordon, Edinburgh,

That's crying territory... :-)
Jack Bauer - Sat, Jan 10, 2015 - 1:28am (USA Central)
"Scotty: "How do we know he didn't invent the thing?"

Um...because somewhere some historic scientific journal would show who really did, and now they're screwed. So much for not altering history... "

I didnt read the novel and I thought the movie made this fairly clear.
Brian S. - Mon, Feb 23, 2015 - 4:03pm (USA Central)
To be fair to Uhura and Chekov, my wife is 35 years old, has lived here in the Bay Area her entire life....and SHE doesn't know where Alameda is either.

And even if you know where Alameda is, that doesn't mean you necessarily know where the naval base is or how to get there without a car. Which is why they were asking for directions on where it is and how to get there.

The bigger moron in that scene was the clueless lady who "helped" them. Chekov asked where the Naval Base in Alameda was, and her response was to say, "I think it's across the Bay, in Alameda." That's like someone asking me where Golden Gate Park in San Francisco is, and me telling them "I think it's in San Francisco."

Submit a comment

Above, type the last name of the captain on Star Trek: TNG
Notify me about new comments on this page
Hide my e-mail on my post

Section Index

Copyright © 1994-2015, Jamahl Epsicokhan. All rights reserved. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of any review or article on this site is prohibited. Star Trek (in all its myriad forms), Battlestar Galactica, and Gene Roddenberry's Andromeda are trademarks of CBS Studios Inc., NBC Universal, and Tribune Entertainment, respectively. This site is in no way affiliated with or authorized by any of those companies. | Copyright & Disclaimer