30 minute television shows can't be serious? I know that's a typical sitcom length, but still.
New TOS - Should we?
- Thread starter ChallengerHK
- Start date
30 minute television shows can't be serious? I know that's a typical sitcom length, but still.
Never heard of it. Tell me about it.
You make a good point. Most of the original Twilight Zones were half an hour, and I love those. They are mostly plot-based efforts with little or no character development, though.
Overall, I dont think I could squeeze a TOS story into half an hour and maintain the complexity of the storytelling and characterization evident in the better episodes. That's one of the complaints about TAS, after all.
Batman meets film noir. Link was provided. Not giving spoilers out.
Most modern Trek episodes have an A story and a B story. Just tell one of them.
The closest TOS ever had to an A story and B story was in Journey to Babel, which I loved.Most modern Trek episodes have an A story and a B story. Just tell one of them.
Kirk is a charming flirt and occasionally a lady's man, however he didn't "chat up every woman in every episode." Kirk was never the womanizer the media eventual portrayed him as.
Mudd's Women definitely, Turnabout Intruder maybe.
Of course it's depends of the individual perception of sexism. Plus most people don't talk to each other like there's a team from Human Resources monitoring every word. Kirk's dialog from Wolf in the Fold talking about knowing a place "where the women are so ..." would be a example of how normal people do talk to each other. Especially if they're in a small group who trust each other.
Do you cut it?
Strictly speaking it wasn't essential to the episode. But it would be easy to imagine that Kirk is the kind of person who engages in guy talk. It's not like women never talk about going out to a bar or club to pick up guys for sex.
If you change TOS into something it never was, then it is no longer TOS. One of my loves of TOS is it depicted real people in the future aboard a starship. In comparison the people TNG often seems "stiff."
The problem there wasn't the actor (Pine is a fair actor), the problem was the script and the direction. Pine played the character he was told to play.
You can't catch lightning in a bottle for a second time!!!
JB
JB
Agreed.You can't catch lightning in a bottle for a second time!!!
JB
I believe the actors were very critical in the "magic" of TOS. I'm doubtful you could get the same combination again no matter how good the actors.
Agreed as well...except that, by my standards, STC and STNV did it. Which goes back to it being a labor of love.
Others come close like Friday's Child and A Private Little War. They both have ship-based side stories that are intertwined but separate. If those items were handled off-screen, via dialog, the planetside stuff might fit into the 30 minute window being discussed.
I'm against using CGI to fully recreate a version any dead or retired actor for the purpose of doing a film/TV series. There's more to a performance of a character that just the person's likeness; and I think it's in a way disrespectful to the person and the work they did to entertain while alive or in their prime.
Re-makes and recasting of characters has been happening since popular stories, myths and plays first existed. As with many other popular franchises (Superman, Batman, et. al.) Kirk, Spock, Picard, Data will be recast whenever a new version /re imagining of 'Star Trek' (in whatever era they set it in) happens going forward into this century.
That's the way entertainment works.
Re-makes and recasting of characters has been happening since popular stories, myths and plays first existed. As with many other popular franchises (Superman, Batman, et. al.) Kirk, Spock, Picard, Data will be recast whenever a new version /re imagining of 'Star Trek' (in whatever era they set it in) happens going forward into this century.
That's the way entertainment works.
Forgive me but what are STC and STNV? Nope it's okay I've got it! STC was very good, my only gripe being the extras weren't very good and some of the uniforms weren't a good fit on them! The FX was brilliant, better than the remastered stuff on the original show! 
As for the other one I can't comment as I've never seen it! 
JB
As for the other one I can't comment as I've never seen it! JB
Another here who wants to know what STC and STNV are
I think you make some good point and some compelling points. Whether we should, morally and ethically, recreate a performance style is very compelling. I would point out in rebuttal that 1) It's already happening; see Leia in Rogue One and Tarkin in Revenge of the Sith, and 2) by my standards, if we decided to forbid, or ignore, the possibility oof recreating an actor's performance style, we're essentially saying "No more TOS." And maybe that has to be what we do. I think that Trek fandom is largely (but not completely) in agreement that the Kelvinverse is not TOS, and thhat the Disco Pike and Spock are not Pike and Spock as we know them, so they don't really count as TOS. Maybe we could call them TOS adjacent.
But I'm NOT saying "no more TOS" as remakes happen all the time (and IMO the JJ Abrams 2009 series was a fun and enjoyable remake/reboot - and I AM someone who saw TOS first run on NBC). Until we're in the 23rd century (and who knows as time moves forward, if the concept of the original Star Trek is still popular, in the 23rd century, they'll move it forward again as come on we all know ACTUAL space travel will be nothing like what's depicted in Star Trek, even by then 23rd century.)
TOS isn't just one set of actors as we've already seen with Kirk and McCoy being recast once, and Spock twice.
We disagree on terms. For me TOS is original actors, sets, story types, music, camera work, lighting, etc. Kelvinverse is by definition not TOS. The performances and story types in STC and STNV are close enough that they satisfy my sweet tooth for TOS. The apple-esque bridge of the Kelvinverse, the faux lens flares, the over reliance on set pieces, and more, combine to make it TOS-lite at best.
Similar threads
