Zombie Cheerleader wrote:
I watched the film. I watched the TV show. It was very real, whether they mentioned it or not in the press release is irrelevant. The changes in costuming and sets are normal when reviving a property or shifting it to the big screen.
Which means what? A costume change, as it was the late 70's and the same costumes and ship designs of TOS had to reflect the advancement of years--like the actors and their characters (not to mention the production standards set by productions such as Star Wars
). Additionally, the early Phase II
production work already set that ball in motion with the genesis (no pun intended) of what would become the movie engineering deck, bridge consoles, etc. But it was the same characters and situations. There was no reimagining, and Phase II--or TMP was never said to be that.
The age of the characters still didn't match the age of the actors. A decade had passed between the end of TOS and TMP.
Timo used the Voyager dates as a means of eastablishing a fairly fixed period of 8 years between TOS and TMP:
On the other hand, "hard" onscreen facts include Voyager 6 being more than three centuries old. That pushes TMP to 2278 at least, considering Voyagers 1 and 2 date back to 1977, and forces an eight-year gap between TOS and the movie. Unless we assume the Voyager program of Star Trek was different from the real one in some details.
....so its only short a decade by 2 years
The characters/characterizations don't seem right either, especially Kirk. Decker presence/role also disrupts the character balance, even if he is doomed. If Phase II version with Decker as XO had gone into production this would be more evident. The tone of TMP is different than TOS too. Seemingly influenced by 2001 and "serious" SF. It's more sterile too and lacking the sense of fun that TOS had.
Subjective--which is no official statement that TMP was a reimagining....because it was not meant to be, and was not.
Well what followed was a half hour Saturday morning animated series, which I doubt reached the key demographics NBC coveted or appealed the Saturday morning demo either. And of course Roddenberry would "disavow" it.
Was it really NBC who "requested" TAS. I thought Filmation started the ball rolling.
One, Roddenberry's latter day rejection was an ego/vanity thing, once ST was truly a big screen creature. Notice that he was not actively saying this before TMP's debut.
Two, there was a mutual interest in Trek returning; Filmation (and another animation house) wanted to adapt it (remember, the early 1970s was a hot period of old TV series adapted into the cartoon format, such as The Addams Family, Gilligan's Island, My Favorite Martian, I Dream of Jeannie, The Partridge Family
, and specials based on Lost in Space
) but from the articles i've read, TOS' mighty syndication feat prodded NBC into wanting a return of TOS.
Who can really say what the future will bring. Perhaps someday "Berman Trek" will get it's own reboot after a groundswell of interest by a new fanbase. After all, TNG was the most successful TV series and DS9 is probably more popular around here than any other series.
"Around here" is not the general public. TOS' post network success occured because it was grabbing more than those who followed/campaigned for it while on NBC.
New fans (child and adult) discovered the series and became Trekkers by the shipload, media critics had to take a second look at what was fueling the phenomenon, which also triggered a merchandinsing boom not seen when TOS was first run. Keep in mind, this occured only a couple years after cancellation.
On the other hand, TNG and DS9 (immediately after series end) just how many swelling numbers were/are discovering the series (particluarly in a period where home video gave the shows an added
exposure advantage TOS did not have in 1970).
TNG made the leap to film, but with each new entry, the Berman project managed to dig a rather deep grave for his era. Ever notice how Paramount/CBS is not exploring the return of TNG, or a first DS9 film? If--after so much time--either series is not exactly starting a post 1st run phenomenon of its own, perhaps it is time to ask "why?"