Huh? I think you may be confusing Big Barda with Maxima. Big Barda's the one married to Scott Free.

The old joke was that only the even-numbered Trek films were any good. And, yes, ST III is the best of the much-maligned "odd-numbered" films—not counting the recent reboot.

Agreed, ST III may be the neglected middle child in that trilogy ("Khan! Khan! Khan! All I ever hear is Khan!"), but it's an enjoyable film in its own right. It was the first of the Trek movies to really give the entire assemble something to, plus it brought back Mark Lenard as Sarek. It's by no means the "Worst"…

Actually, Michael Caine was in the 4th Jaws movie ("Jaws: The Revenge"), not Jaws 3-D.

Actually, it was producer Harve Bennett who watched all the old episodes and decided to bring back Khan.

He's obviously talking about the original Karloff version, not the remakes. Imhotep dies at the end of that movie and was never brought. The later (1940's) Universal films featured a different mummy.

That's because there isn't. There's also "The Holmes-Dracula Files" by Fred Saberhagen, as well as a graphic novel whose name I can't immediately recall.

Ragman, Colossal Boy, and Batwoman are Jewish. There are probably more, but those are the ones who originally came to mind.

Congrats to all the winners! (Hi, Kij!)

Nothing new here. Movie novelizations have been around since the silent era.

I remember that I loved it, but my brother hated it (probably because he was expecting something more Pythonesque). So I guess it's always been a polarizing film.

And it's based on a novel by Richard Matheson that won the World Fantasy Award way back when.

When you put the movie poster on the cover, it attracts hundreds of thousands of new readers who would have never discovered the original book otherwise. If putting Will Smith on the cover means that 500,000 new readers will discover the work of Isaac Asimov or Richard Matheson, how is that a bad thing? The purpose…

"It is not logical, but it is often true."

Glad to see "Time After Time" made the list. That's a great movie.

Or maybe he's playing a completely new character? Seriously, there's no rule that says that every actor cast in a Star Trek movie HAS to be playing some beloved old character from the original series. Chances are, he's playing some new character invented for this story.

Heck, Flint was rich enough that he could buy an entire planetoid in "Requiem for Methuselah."

The money-less economy thing is more of a TNG thing. TOS was full of shady con merchants, mail-order brides, miners hoping to strike it rich, etc. Kirk and McCoy joked about earning their paychecks. People haggled over the price of a tribble. It was the final frontier, not some sterile utopia.

I think the funniest part is the "Gluteus Maximus Actuator (GMA)". Talk about technobuttle!

But does it obey (wait for it) Assimov's Three Laws?