The ears?
Just a television show...
- Thread starter Warped9
- Start date
Among other things it spawned into a franchise consisting of five spin-off TV series, eleven movies (with more on the way), an amusement park (basically), numerous novels and comic tie-ins, merchandise from nearly everything under the sun, and a fanbase that only continues to grow with each passing year.
I can't think of anything else that has reached level of fame.
A LOT of thought went int it. When Roddenberry saw the series get picked up, he & his peeps went wild. They did for SF what Tolkien did for fantasy.
I like the show as much as anyone else, but isn't comparing Roddenberry to Mozart a little over the top? He was a TV producer with many good ideas and a few bad ones, who created a show that people enjoy and that's doubtless inspired them to do all sorts of things, some of them quite positive. Isn't that enough?
If we're talking music, he's more like an A&R guy or producer like Ahmet Ertegun (Atlantic Records) than Lennon or Mozart. In some ways more influential than any individual artist, but definitely not the same thing,
Just my opinion.
If we're talking music, he's more like an A&R guy or producer like Ahmet Ertegun (Atlantic Records) than Lennon or Mozart. In some ways more influential than any individual artist, but definitely not the same thing,
Just my opinion.
Warped 9:
I agree. Oh, and as you know: beyond the imperfections, there was a lot that the Original Series brought to the table, too. Especially if someone is open to great characters, science fiction, moralistic story lines, exploration, and the like.
It is a TV show that stands the test of time because it's stories and characters are timeless and well told.
To believe in the impossible...is illogical.
It's good to believe that a great deal more is possible than we may imagine or fear, however.
That creates a conundrum for me; I really don't like the cheesy spinoffs, and I wish I could go back in time and prevent those travesties from ever occurring. But the only surefire way of doing that would be to "kill the parent" of those spinoffs, which would be TOS. And considering the fact that I see TOS as the greatest television show ever conceived in human history, I certainly would never want to do that.
But then again, I really hate those spinoffs.
Getting to the point, however, I'm not sure what else could be said (that hasn't already been said in this thread) that would support TOS as more than "just a TV show." Posters here have put forth rational, intelligent reasons for why TOS is more than just another sci-fi show from the 60's, and I really can't add more that wouldn't just be repeating what they have said.
L
Lord Garth
Guest
Okay.
Star Trek influenced or at least fore-shadowed a lot of technology and designs that came later. The personal computer, floppy disks, cell phones, screen savers (which is how I viewed the monitors on the bridge atop of all the stations), beds with bio-readers. Not strictly TOS but the navy (?) was interested in the bridge design of the TMP Enterprise.
Also, I think Star Trek set the standard for all space series that came after it. They're all compared to Star Trek, either by how they're similar or different. Yes, it's true that there were earlier science-fiction series set in space but, from what I understand, this was the first one geared towards an audience over 12 and with continuing characters. Lost In Space tried but I don't think it ever quite got there.
Say what you will about Star Trek Remastered, and I agree that '60s footage does not mesh with '00s CGI, but it says a lot to me that they'd even bother to upgrade the series for the 21st Century at all. I don't see them doing that with Lost In Space, Buck Rogers, or Space: 1999. It means that the original Star Trek managed to stay alive decades after it ended in way other sci-fi series made in the 10 years immediately surrounding it didn't.
I don't hate TNG, but I'm disappointed in it. I do see much merit in it yet I feel they missed the boat with elements of the show along the way. I really tried to like it and in some respects and individual episodes I do like it. But overall I found it stiff and boring most particularly after the fourth season.That creates a conundrum for me; I really don't like the cheesy spinoffs, and I wish I could go back in time and prevent those travesties from ever occurring. But the only surefire way of doing that would be to "kill the parent" of those spinoffs, which would be TOS. And considering the fact that I see TOS as the greatest television show ever conceived in human history, I certainly would never want to do that.
But then again, I really hate those spinoffs.
Getting to the point, however, I'm not sure what else could be said (that hasn't already been said in this thread) that would support TOS as more than "just a TV show." Posters here have put forth rational, intelligent reasons for why TOS is more than just another sci-fi show from the 60's, and I really can't add more that wouldn't just be repeating what they have said.
I feel much the same about DS9. In the beginning I quite liked it or at least certainly more than TNG. I feel DS9 got off to a better start which helped. But I felt it started going off the rails in third season and I found myself drifting. Curiously it took discovering Babylon 5 to more clearly understand what was bothering me about TNG, DS9 and contemporary Trek. I had ceased believing in the shows. I didn't think the world and the characters were credible anymore. They had become some weird zombie parody that just couldn't really come to life in a dynamic way. And it got worse with VOY being the worst aspects of TNG to the nth degree--it was just a stupid and lame thing. And while ENT was a smidgen of a notch better it was really VOY warmed over and put across as some distorted TOS restart. Four shows that got in a rut of same old same old while I was finding entertainment and value in Babylon 5 and Stargate SG-1.
But that's really another topic of discussion comparing original and spinoff. The later series were made possible because the films spun off TOS were popular enough. But nothing exists in a vacuum. If TNG had been the first Trek and still introduced in 1987 could it have had TOS' impact? And note it wouldn't have had TOS and the films to build on. Something would have had to exist that could have inspired and influenced TNG just as TOS had been influenced by what came before it. That's how creativity and novelty work, by building upon what came before.
Well, TOS was ahead of its time, that's for sure.
I dare to say that along with Twilight Zone and Outer Limits it was one of the few pre-1970 science fiction shows that were actually science fiction.... if that makes any sense.
I dare to say that along with Twilight Zone and Outer Limits it was one of the few pre-1970 science fiction shows that were actually science fiction.... if that makes any sense.
To believe in the impossible...is illogical.
It's good to believe that a great deal more is possible than we may imagine or fear, however.
There are things that exist that we cannot prove but can only believe in.
There really, really aren't.
And so pronounces the great know-it-all.
If you have something that demonstrates your assertion that Star Trek is on a higher plane than any other television show... spit it out.And so pronounces the great know-it-all.
Otherwise, vague posturing and obsessive adoration aside... it's just a television show.
Shakespeare was just a writer.
Mustang Mach-1 was just a car.
The Moon landing was just a trip.
The Terminator was just a robot.
I and others have been stating our case throughout the whole thread whereas the detractors simply reply, "No, it's not." without offering a shred of counterpoint to support that the series has been totally meaningless without any significance whatsoever.If you have something that demonstrates your assertion that Star Trek is on a higher plane than any other television show... spit it out.And so pronounces the great know-it-all.
Otherwise, vague posturing and obsessive adoration aside... it's just a television show.
Star Trek as art may be subjective. But it was influential to subsequent film and television and SF in general as well as personally to countless people. That means that, likely unwittingly, it came to be more than just a TV show.
Star Trek has become, along with several of the other movies and television shows cited, a big chunk of American mythology, mainly because it touched on some basic moral lessons, many that go back for centuries, often times putting an interesting spin on those lessons. The movies and spinoff series continued that tradition, with varying degrees of success.
ST09 had none of that. Just an exercise in empty ritual with no sense of the underpinnings of the traditions.
ST09 had none of that. Just an exercise in empty ritual with no sense of the underpinnings of the traditions.
