Crazy Eddie wrote:
TOS was always known for strong characters, not strong storylines.
First off, citing Garth is cherry-picking. Whom Gods Destroy is a so-so 3rd season episode at a time when things were teetering on camp.
Also, anyone who looks back on the history of SF cites TOS as intelligent, certainly more intelligent than Irwin Allen's stuff or what came before like Rocky Jones Space Ranger. The writers that were brought in to work on it saw it as an attempt to finally do justice to science fiction, which had been seen as primarily "kiddie fare". That it doesn't measure up to the gravitas of, let's say, the BSG reboot, takes nothing away from what TOS successfully accomplished. And yes, it did that at the same time it allowed Kirk to bed aliens and get into fisticuffs.
It's the same way the Beatles could be seen as mindless bubblegum pop by looking at part of their catalog, or psychadelic trailblazers with another. Trek was not just one thing across those 79 episodes. It was a very broad concept and it adopted a wide range of styles. Too often in threads like this there is an attempt to kind of box TOS into this almost Belushi-SNL-skit satirical caricature, and it really just feels like a cheap attempt to bash TOS to make JJ Abrams look better in comparison.
You defeat your own argument with the Beatles analogy. No one is saying that ALL of TOS is of a kind (in terms of themes and attitudes) with the Abrams films. But they are of a kind with a significant portion of TOS. As such, it becomes rather disingenuous to argue that Abrams Trek is "not real Trek" (as many do) just because it fails to be "of a kind" with the specific subset of characteristics that defined some, though not all, of TOS--particularly when it very much succeeds at being "of a kind" of another specific subset.