RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,164
Posts: 5,402,983
Members: 24,753
Currently online: 452
Newest member: kev404

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: Time’s Orphan
By: Michelle on Aug 30

September-October Trek Conventions And Appearances
By: T'Bonz on Aug 29

Lee Passes
By: T'Bonz on Aug 29

Trek Merchandise Sale
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Star Trek #39 Villain Revealed
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Trek Big Bang Figures
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Star Trek Seekers Cover Art
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Fan Film Axanar Kickstarter Success
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Two New Starship Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26

Trek Actor Wins Emmy
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek Movies > Star Trek Movies XI+

Star Trek Movies XI+ Discuss J.J. Abrams' rebooted Star Trek here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old May 27 2013, 08:22 PM   #76
Admiral Buzzkill
Fleet Admiral
 
Re: Why did they bother...

Anticitizen wrote: View Post
These characters do not resemble the originals. They are one-dimensional parodies and don't even get the basic character traits right.
No, they're actually a good deal more dimensional and lively than the old versions became over the years. These kids are better actors than the old guys - for the most part - and I'm looking forward to seeing what they do in times to come.
Admiral Buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 10:17 PM   #77
YARN
Fleet Captain
 
Re: Why did they bother...

Admiral Buzzkill wrote: View Post
No, they're actually a good deal more dimensional and lively than the old versions became over the years. These kids are better actors than the old guys - for the most part - and I'm looking forward to seeing what they do in times to come.
DeForest Kelley's filmography would like to have a word with you.

William Shatner? Not a great actor, but he was great in that role. And what he did was in the style of male leads on television at that time. He owned that role.

Leonard Nimoy? Granted, it took a few episodes to find the character (kind of hard when the writers don't even know who/what you're supposed to be and they're making it up every week), but when he did, he had it locked. His character was reserved, but deep - his calm masking an intensity beneath the surface (Quinto always looks like he's about to yell).

Walter Koenig. OK, not so much.

George Takei was just fine.

Nichelle Nichols. She was OK. Many actresses could have pulled off her role.

James Doohan. A lovable, but rather two-dimensional character.

Yes, the background players were rather shallow, but they were in the background of the trio that really defined the show. It's OK for background characters to be simple, because they provide a simple reference frame for the rest of the action.

We should keep in mind as well that producing a TV show in 1960s involved getting a script slapped together and throwing it into the hands of actors who were still memorizing lines when shooting started.

If you think that anyone could have walked into those roles in the original series, I would refer you to the many fan productions of the original series. The sets usually look OK (at least as good as they did in the 60's). The stories are usually OK. The special effects are much better than the original series. And yet these productions are terrible, because the acting is terrible. Every time a watch a few minutes of one of these fan productions I am struck by how good TOS really was.

RLM ask a valid question of nuKirk and nuSpock's bromance - "Why are these two people friends?" I can't figure it out myself, apart from the fact that Shatner and Nimoy established the relationship for them and that relationship still resonates in our cultural memory.

It's not the fault of the actors in either case. I am not a fan of Pine's Kirk so far, but then again, it's not his fault that thev're written him as a womanizing jock with no regard for duty. I'm sold on Quinto's and Pegg's acting chops. I'll throw Urban in there too. The rest of the cast could be replaced with no harm done.

The talent level is comparable, but the chemistry of the original cast took it to another level. I'm not saying that the new cast isn't capable of generating that chemistry, but it's hard to do that when the characters are involved in general calisthenics and firing hand phasers.
YARN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 10:20 PM   #78
Belz...
Fleet Captain
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Location: In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
Re: Why did they bother...

Anticitizen wrote: View Post
I agree with the original poster. These characters do not resemble the originals. They are one-dimensional parodies and don't even get the basic character traits right.
First off, Vulcans, as I said before, are VERY emotional. They just have an ironclad discipline to control that nature. Second, cast new actors and hire new writers and a new director, and you get different characters. Even the original cast during TOS acted differently from one episode to the next, depending on the plot. It's nothing new. I, for one, find them fresh while being quite similar to their original selves.
__________________
And that's my opinion.

The Onmyouza Theatre: an unofficial international fanclub dedicated to the Japanese heavy metal band Onmyo-Za.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 10:21 PM   #79
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Why did they bother...

They're obviously friends for no discernible reason in Where No Man... yet I've never seen anyone complain.
__________________
"I tell you what you all need, you need to take a thirteenth step, down off your high horse." - Hank Hill, King of the Hill
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 10:24 PM   #80
Belz...
Fleet Captain
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Location: In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
Re: Why did they bother...

YARN wrote: View Post
If you think that anyone could have walked into those roles in the original series, I would refer you to the many fan productions of the original series.
Most of those guys aren't professional actors, and no one said "anyone could have". He said the new ones are better actors "for the most part".

Anticitizen wrote: View Post
I'd think that this line you passed over heavily implies that that is not the case:

LEILA: Mister Spock's feelings were never expressed to me. It is said he has none to give.
I think you are the one who missed a line, namely that this does not preclude private feelings or other shows of caring. STID makes that very clear.
__________________
And that's my opinion.

The Onmyouza Theatre: an unofficial international fanclub dedicated to the Japanese heavy metal band Onmyo-Za.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 10:38 PM   #81
YARN
Fleet Captain
 
Re: Why did they bother...

BillJ wrote: View Post
They're obviously friends for no discernible reason in Where No Man... yet I've never seen anyone complain.
Actually, they are not obviously friends in that episode. They don't even appear to know each other that well. "Ah, another one of your Earth emotions..." -- Spock does not even yet have a robust theory of mind regarding humans to interpret the moods and attitudes of humans around him.

Kirk is more chummy with his male human counterparts (chatting about Spock's oddness). Spock is a subordinate in that episode. He is an outsider in that episode and it is his alien nature that allows him to see that Gary Mitchell must be killed or stranded.
YARN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 10:42 PM   #82
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Why did they bother...

He's playing 3D chess with Kirk, calls him Jim, has the guts to tell him to strand Mitchell. They were friends.
__________________
"I tell you what you all need, you need to take a thirteenth step, down off your high horse." - Hank Hill, King of the Hill
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 10:55 PM   #83
YARN
Fleet Captain
 
Re: Why did they bother...

BillJ wrote: View Post
He's playing 3D chess with Kirk, calls him Jim,
He's genuinely surprised when he loses.

He is not familiar with Earth emotions and he is not familiar with Kirk as a player.

He's familiar enough with Kirk to call him "Jim", but no one would watch that episode and conclude that they're bros.

BillJ wrote: View Post
has the guts to tell him to strand Mitchell. They were friends.
Dude, he's the XO and Mitchell is a threat not only to the ship but all sentient life he encounters. It's his job.

Finally, are we really going to apologize for nuTrek by attacking the earliest episodes of the original series?

Keep lowering the bar kids.
YARN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 10:57 PM   #84
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Why did they bother...

Didn't realize recognizing something about the show was considered an "attack".
__________________
"I tell you what you all need, you need to take a thirteenth step, down off your high horse." - Hank Hill, King of the Hill
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 11:33 PM   #85
YARN
Fleet Captain
 
Re: Why did they bother...

BillJ wrote: View Post
Didn't realize recognizing something about the show was considered an "attack".
You're excusing the new on the basis of the old, attempting to exculpate the former by deprecating the latter. Yes, it's an attack. It's not an OMG! Heretic! sort of thing, but it fits a well-worn pattern of nuTrek apologists; NuTrek is OK, because it is no worse than OldTrek. To pull this off, you have to smear old Trek with criticisms aimed at NuTrek. You're not pulling anything up, but pulling the opposition down.
YARN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 11:35 PM   #86
Chemahkuu
Vice Admiral
 
Chemahkuu's Avatar
 
Location: United Kingdom
Send a message via Yahoo to Chemahkuu
Re: Why did they bother...

"Smear"? "attack"? it's a movie, bring the blood pressure down there a little.
Chemahkuu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 11:37 PM   #87
sj4iy
Commander
 
sj4iy's Avatar
 
Location: US
Re: Why did they bother...

YARN wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
Didn't realize recognizing something about the show was considered an "attack".
You're excusing the new on the basis of the old, attempting to exculpate the former by deprecating the latter. Yes, it's an attack. It's not an OMG! Heretic! sort of thing, but it fits a well-worn pattern of nuTrek apologists; NuTrek is OK, because it is no worse than OldTrek. To pull this off, you have to smear old Trek with criticisms aimed at NuTrek. You're not pulling anything up, but pulling the opposition down.
It's not an attack, it's an opinion. You can't "attack" a show, because it doesn't care if you like it or not.. You can attack a person's opinion, however.
sj4iy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 11:42 PM   #88
RAMA
Vice Admiral
 
RAMA's Avatar
 
Location: NJ, USA
Re: Why did they bother...

Anticitizen wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
Spock had a relationship with a human woman six years prior to season one of TOS per "This Side of Paradise".
No, he didn't. Relevant quotes:


ELIAS: You've known the Vulcanian?
LEILA: On Earth, six years ago.
ELIAS: Did you love him?
LEILA: If I did, it was important only to myself.
ELIAS: How did he feel?
LEILA: Mister Spock's feelings were never expressed to me. It is said he has none to give.

...

LEILA: I love you. I said that six years ago, and I can't seem to stop repeating myself. On Earth, you couldn't give anything of yourself. You couldn't even put your arms around me. We couldn't have anything together there. We couldn't have anything together anyplace else. We're happy here. (crying) I can't lose you now, Mister Spock. I can't.
SPOCK: I have a responsibility to this ship, to that man on the Bridge. I am what I am, Leila, and if there are self-made purgatories, then we all have to live in them. Mine can be no worse than someone else's.

Clearly it was a one-sided 'relationship' in which Leila pined after Spock, but her affections were not returned due to his Vulcan stoicism.

I agree with the original poster. These characters do not resemble the originals. They are one-dimensional parodies and don't even get the basic character traits right.
Complete opposite for me, I like them because the casting was phenomenal, and instead of devolving into popular caricatures, they actually have a fantastic life of their own.

RAMA
__________________
It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. Carl Sagan
RAMA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 11:48 PM   #89
sj4iy
Commander
 
sj4iy's Avatar
 
Location: US
Re: Why did they bother...

RAMA wrote: View Post
Complete opposite for me, I like them because the casting was phenomenal, and instead of devolving into popular caricatures, they actually have a fantastic life of their own.

RAMA
So do I. I feel like I can relate these characters better than I ever knew the other characters. There are more layers. For example, they make mistakes- even Spock. I also enjoy the unexpectedness of it all. I knew what would happen in TOS- I honestly have no idea what will happen here, there are so many possibilities.
sj4iy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 11:53 PM   #90
YARN
Fleet Captain
 
Re: Why did they bother...

sj4iy wrote: View Post
YARN wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
Didn't realize recognizing something about the show was considered an "attack".
You're excusing the new on the basis of the old, attempting to exculpate the former by deprecating the latter. Yes, it's an attack. It's not an OMG! Heretic! sort of thing, but it fits a well-worn pattern of nuTrek apologists; NuTrek is OK, because it is no worse than OldTrek. To pull this off, you have to smear old Trek with criticisms aimed at NuTrek. You're not pulling anything up, but pulling the opposition down.
It's not an attack, it's an opinion. You can't "attack" a show, because it doesn't care if you like it or not.. You can attack a person's opinion, however.
1). Attack and defense is part of reasoned discussion. It is not "bad" to attack something. It is only bad to attack something illicitly. The never-ending Tu Quoque (You're Trek was bad too!) is an illicit attack.

2). That was not simply an "opinion" but a move in a discussion.

a. I endorse RLM's claim that there is no apparent reason why Kirk and Spock are friends.

b. BillJ responds by stating that there was no apparent reason that they were friends in a very early episode of the show.

"b." is a response to "a." BillJ is leveraging his "opinion" as a "reason" challenging my perception of the film. This was not a simple random observation, but a move in an argument.

NOTE: BillJ has not been qualifying his opinions as mere opinions, but stating them as fact-assertions.

EX:

They're obviously friends for no discernible reason in Where No Man... yet I've never seen anyone complain.

He's playing 3D chess with Kirk, calls him Jim, has the guts to tell him to strand Mitchell. They were friends.

Since facts are rationally binding, this implies that his claims are also binding on anyone in a reasoned discussion. That is, he is not saying, "This is my opinion, take it or leave it," but rather challenging my point of view. And good for him for doing so. Again, my only complaint is that his reasoning is wrong, not that he is attacking or that he is attempting to use reasons. It's not just that he's factually wrong in terms of interpretation (we can argue about that), but that his reasoning pattern is illicit. Attacking my reasons - good. Attacking Old Trek to "equalize" or deflect attention from the the New? That's bad.
YARN is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:57 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.