Search - Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (Restored) [Blu-ray] on Blu-ray

K. K. (GAMER)
Reviewed on 12/16/2018...

One of my favorite Star Trek movies!!!

1 of 1 member(s) found this review helpful.

Adam C. (i12bnmovie) from SAINT LOUIS, MO
Reviewed on 8/21/2013...

First, let me say, that the Blu-Ray restoration is AMAZING! Now, on with my review.

Well, it is clear from the opening of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan that this is going to be a different movie than its predecessor. For starters, the director, writer and story conceptualist have all been replaced. Nicholas Meyer steps in to direct from a script by Jack B. Sowards based on a story by Sowards and Harve Bennett. Even Jerry Goldsmith has been replaced by James Horner as musical composer. The only thing to remain is the super widescreen format.

The film opens on Saavik (Kirstie Alley), a Vulcan, in command of the Enterprise. Through her decisions, Spock (Leonard Nemoy), Uhura (Nichelle Nichols), Sulu (George Takei), Leonard McCoy (DeForest Kelley), and the rest of the bridge crew is killed. Then, the lights come up, and Admiral James T. Kirk (William Shatner) appears, and it is revealed to just be a simulation testing Saavik on an infamous scenario that only Kirk himself has beaten.

Across the galaxy, the USS Reliant, a Miranda class ship, finds a life reading on planet Ceti Alpha V, a planet believed to have no life. Lt. Chekov (Walter Koenig) and Captain Clark Terrell (Paul Winfield) beam down to investigate, and they find a bunker. While searching the bunker, Chekov comes across a seatbelt with the name SS Botany Bay on it. Chekov remembers where he knows the name from, but before he and Captain Terrell can beam back to the Miranda, they are confronted by Kahn Noonien Singh (Ricardo Montalban).

On Regula I Space Labratory, Dr. Carol Marcus (Bibi Besch), along with her son David (Merritt Butrick) and an entire science team have been working on Project Genesis. It can create life where there isn’t any by altering a planet on the subatomic level. The goal for it is to be able to turn inhabitable planets into habitable ones.

Under duress and suggestive implants by Khan, who has now taken command of the Reliant, Chekov tells Regula I that Admiral Kirk has authorized Project Genesis to be used on the nearby planet, and that it should be beamed aboard the Reliant. Dr. Marcus contacts Kirk, who is out on a training mission with the crew from the beginning of the film. Kirk then assumes command of the Enterprise, and they embark on a path to Regula I. Unbeknownst to them, Khan is on his way to Regula I, too.

Once there, Kirk and company realize that they are too late. Kirk, along with Dr. Marcus, David, McCoy and Saavik meet up with Capt. Terrell and Chekov. They are then stranded, as Khan attacks the Enterprise. Now, Kirk and company must find a way back up to the Enterprise and find a way to stop Khan and his cronies before they can use the Genesis.

One of my first thoughts after the conclusion of The Wrath of Khan was, “Did they film this movie at two different times?” Khan and Kirk never share a scene. As a matter of fact, the only two characters to interact with both Khan and Kirk are Capt. Terrell and Chekov. That led to my next thought, “They missed the boat on having another epic fight between Khan and Kirk, like in “Space Seed.”” I loved Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, do not get me wrong, but another fisticuffs between the two manly men would have been awesome. I still believe that “Space Seed” would be nothing more than “that episode with Ricardo Montalban” if not for this film. I would highly advise watching “Space Seed” before watching this film, to give you a frame of reference and understanding of who Khan is, and where this story picks up.

Every aspect of Star Trek II is better than TMP, with the notable exception of the score. James Horner tried to reinvent the theme, and failed. The actual score is decent, but his take on the theme is just awful. A welcome change came in the form of the uniforms. They tossed the grey drab ones from TMP, and went with a deep crimson red instead. They looked much better. The visual effects were better and smoother. The flow of the film was infinitely better. While only twenty minutes shorter than the first film, The Wrath of Khan tells more story, and gets more done. My only other complaint from this film is the lame last couple of scenes and lines about the death of a main character. Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan is not only a good Star Trek film, but is also a good film. The bar for the “even” films is now set and it is high.

Wrath of Khan Blue ray is green/cyan tint

Michael A. Mason | Kissimmee, FL | 12/25/2009

(2 out of 5 stars)

"The "Wrath of Khan" blue ray dvd is a very poor copy. The movie has a greenish/cycan tint to it. I am a professional film technician working for Disney. It appears the blu ray was copied from a second or third generation
internegative. The person doing the transfer did a very poor job correcting the grey scale from this internegative. The blue ray copy should have been done from the original negative. This copy was made from a second or third generation
internegative or possibly a release print. There is a strong greenish/cyan mask on this copy. The person doing the copy of this print did a very poor job with color correction. When copying a movie from an internegative it is important to correct
the gray scale. I saw the "Wrath of Khan" when it was released in the theatrs. In fact, I was working for a movie theatre when this movie was released. I remember the color balance, and it was perfect. The blue ray disk is not accurate in color balance, I would
not recommend buying it if you want an accurate copy of this motion picture."

Well, I think it looks good...

B. P. DiPaolo | Brooklyn, NY | 12/05/2009

(4 out of 5 stars)

"I'm relatively new to the whole Blu-ray thing; indeed, I resisted buying a Blu-ray player for a long time because I imagined that older movies (e.g., Wrath of Khan) would look grainy and dated in this format, which mercilessly exposes the flaws in older film prints.

So I was pleasantly surprised when "Wrath of Khan" ended up looking, to me, rather good on Blu-ray. It's by no means a perfect print; for example, there's usually some fuzz (or whatever the technical term is) visible on scenes with dark lighting, such as when the Enterprise bridge goes to red alert. But by and large, this print is much nicer than the previous DVD versions.

I compared some DVD scenes to Blu-ray ones to determine whether the upgrade was worth it, and I think it was. Check out the scene when Spock gives Kirk his birthday present; on Blu-ray, you can see all the fine details on that giant globe they're standing next to, whereas on the DVD print it just looks like some glass blob. Similarly, the nebula scenes look much clearer on the Blu-ray.

Some fans seem annoyed that "digital noise reduction" has been applied to the Star Trek movies. Again, I'm no technical expert, but I believe this means that the artifacting/fuzz/whatever-you-call-it has been digitally "painted out" to give the film a cleaner look. This has led some fans to complain that the ST films now look artificially painted over, or waxy, or whatever. I sympathize with this complaint, but I think there's a tough choice to be made here; either studios can digitally "paint out" flaws, resulting in a slightly artificial look, or they can leave the flaws in, resulting in a distracting grainy look. Based on my Blu-ray experiences so far, I favor the noise reduction; for example, the Star Trek Blu-rays look much nicer to me than Fargo, which looks like it was shot through a layer of gauze.

The only real disappointment is that "Wrath of Khan" is only available in its theatrical cut, not the (slightly) better extended cut. It's a shame that Paramount doesn't give you a choice between the two versions; for "Khan," I'd pick the extended cut, and for "Undiscovered Country" I'd go with the theatrical one, but so far Paramount has not released versions that offer the option of switching.

But still, I think "Khan" looks so much nicer as a Blu-ray that I'd rather watch this copy than the special edition DVD. I don't even have a problem with the much-loathed "Delta shield" menu, which may be basic, but has a certain elegance to it...

"

Darn good for how old it is

Christopher Carroll | 10/16/2009

(5 out of 5 stars)

"I didn't know this movie would look so good considering how old it is, however, since it was filmed in a format that has higher resolution than 1080, it only makes sense. All the action scenes looks really sharp. The whole movie looks great.

I thoroughly enjoy the extras, especially James Horner's explanation of his approach. It was basic, and to the point, but I'm glad I got to see him explain it from his artistic point of view.

I don't really understand why someone would give this product 1 star for it being what it is not, the directors cut. That's just stupid. It is what it is, and it's excellent."