RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,699
Posts: 5,431,336
Members: 24,830
Currently online: 467
Newest member: honeybadger


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 TV Series > Star Trek - Original Series

Star Trek - Original Series The one that started it all...

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old February 20 2014, 04:48 PM   #16
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: Can TOS be appreciated by younger viewers?

I started watching TOS when I was 11. In those early years it was the cool spaceships, costumes, weird aliens and adventure that drew me in, as well as the straightforward delivery. I didn't consciously appreciate the deeper aspects of the show until I started to grow in experience and perspective. Now I appreciate the show in ways I couldn't imagine when I was a kid.

A kid today could be hard pressed to see what was cool in TOS given the slick productions they've likely been exposed to today. You need to be more perseptive to pick up on the other things going on and that comes with some age and experience.

What could happen is what happened to a lot of us over the years. There were other things I thought were cool back in the day, but as I grew older very little besides TOS still managed to interest me. All the other stuff revealed itself to be mostly shallow beyond the cool visual stuff. Today I see lots of stuff that kids can be gaga over now, but I can pretty much guarantee they will see as silly when they get older. It happened to us and it will happen to the kids of today.

They might also come to appreciate things they overlook now. There are a lot of older films I ignored when I was young, but now I can appreciate them. It happens.

The thought, "I was a kid. What the hell did I know?' is a recurring one across the generations.
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old February 20 2014, 04:52 PM   #17
CrazyMatt
Commander
 
CrazyMatt's Avatar
 
Location: Paradise
Re: Can TOS be appreciated by younger viewers?

I suspect that viewers that are influenced more by 'esoterics' (special effects, realism of sets, etc.) will be distracted by those factors while those who are interested in STORY will like TOS.
__________________
"You are speaking to a senior officer, Kirk!"
CrazyMatt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 20 2014, 05:01 PM   #18
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: Can TOS be appreciated by younger viewers?

CrazyMatt wrote: View Post
I suspect that viewers that are influenced more by 'esoterics' (special effects, realism of sets, etc.) will be distracted by those factors while those who are interested in STORY will like TOS.
I think that's true in any era, but in terms of visual appeal the bar has been moved or raised. What was once accepted as state-of-the-art and then tolerated for several years is no longer acceptable anymore for the broader audience.

Today it's rare that something visual on the screen will wow me simply because I know that there's very little they can't bring to life onscreen. From that standpoint I need story and characterization and ideas to engage me. If those aren't there then no amount of eye candy will hold me.
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old February 20 2014, 07:23 PM   #19
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Can TOS be appreciated by younger viewers?

I actually find TOS faster paced than the modern Trek series.
__________________
"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 February 20 2014, 07:30 PM   #20
Shat Happens
Captain
 
Shat Happens's Avatar
 
Re: Can TOS be appreciated by younger viewers?

Since TNG (made in the 1990s), and due to the perceived need to stick to canon (I mean, who cares if transport works thru shields or not?), scripts and characters became terribly "bureaucractic".

New Star Trek (up to JJ's) is that. Consistent, but specially distinguishable from TOS.
Shat Happens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 20 2014, 07:32 PM   #21
Galileo7
Fleet Captain
 
Galileo7's Avatar
 
Location: U.S.A.
Re: Can TOS be appreciated by younger viewers?

CrazyMatt wrote: View Post
I suspect that viewers that are influenced more by 'esoterics' (special effects, realism of sets, etc.) will be distracted by those factors while those who are interested in STORY will like TOS.
Agree.



BillJ wrote: View Post
I actually find TOS faster paced than the modern Trek series.
Agree.
Galileo7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 20 2014, 08:46 PM   #22
Noname Given
Vice Admiral
 
Location: None Given
Re: Can TOS be appreciated by younger viewers?

Plomeek Broth wrote: View Post
The remastered blurays.

I have seen most of season one which is pretty good.

I think since the other series came along as technology improved and filmmaking as a whole grew some of the things like for example fight scenes are super corny and certain alien costumes.

If I watched it back in the 60s I bet I wouldn't feel this way and would absolutely love it.

I'm still determined to become a huge TOS lover and watch every episode eventually.
Trust me, as someone who watched it (well at least the third season) first run; and the rest as soon as it hit syndication a few months after the end of the network run; even for its time, some of the fight sequences were bad in terms of stunt doubles and continuity (IE the principal actor having a ripped shirt in close ups, yet when they get back to the longer shot with the stunt doubles, the rip/Tear is CLEARLY not there. )

Also, while I agree Star Trek is a product of its time on TV (IE the 1960ies); I DISAGREE that the pacing/structure was so different/unique from the other shows of the period (especially other genre shows like 'Time Tunnel', 'Lost In Space', 'Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea', 'The Invaders', etc.
^^^
All the above had similar pacing, recurring crewmen/characters (even 'The Invaders' starting with its second season .)

IMO - GR's claim that 'Star Trek' was 'so new/different' or 'ahead of it's time' was just pandering to the already on board fanbase. Make no mistake it was a good show, and a good science fiction show, and still to date my absolute favorite series in what is now 'The Star Trek Franchise' -- but overall it was no better or worse than the other great genre shows of the period like the original (1960ies) 'Outer Limits' or 'The Twilight Zone'.

Believe me even back in the day, you had discussions of 'yeh, I like some of the moves inn the fight sequence between 'not-Kirk' and 'not-Khan'.

One thing I will say is that the first season was really filmed with a more feature film quality (again for the 1960ies) with regard to the sets in that (IMO) they were MUCH better lit to make them look more real then the plywood and cardboard they were.

Also, the Blu-Rays really do bring out UNWANTED detail that the director of photography NEVER expected would be visible to audiences. They were indeed on a budget (every show is, even today); and you have to remember when they were shooting the show, they KNEW where the end result would end up - on a 13" - 17" diagonal consumer TV using an aerial antenna and WAY lower resolution then even TVs made 20 years later. (if you still own an old style VHS VCR - put in an off cable or off the air recorded episode of TOS <--- That is probably the closest approximation of 1960ies era over the air TV resolution as even professionally transferred VHS tapes will look better.)

Many younger TOS fans laugh at the idea that in 'The Doomsday Machine' the producers made its registry 1017 (and not say '1710'), because they were concerned audiences might confuse it as being the actual Enterprise; but if you watched TV in the 1960ies over the air, you'd know that was in fact a valid concern at the time.

As to the 'why' someone may not like it; in the end, I think it comes down to personal tastes. I was born in 1963; but I still as a kid/teenager/young adult, found there were 'older' films (science fiction and otherwise) whose execution and effects looked VERY dated compared to what was 'modern' at the time (like Star Trek or Space 1999); but it still didn't detract from my enjoyment of them and really liking them at the time or to this day.
Noname Given is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 20 2014, 09:23 PM   #23
QuarkforNagus
Lieutenant
 
QuarkforNagus's Avatar
 
Re: Can TOS be appreciated by younger viewers?

I had the same problem when i watched tos.

I feel like the storylines were purile compared to the more politically-based ds9.

And it didn't help that I hated the captain.
QuarkforNagus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 20 2014, 10:59 PM   #24
Shat Happens
Captain
 
Shat Happens's Avatar
 
Re: Can TOS be appreciated by younger viewers?

QuarkforNagus wrote: View Post
I had the same problem when i watched tos.

I feel like the storylines were purile compared to the more politically-based ds9.

And it didn't help that I hated the captain.
You *hated* Kirk? that's a new one for me.
Shat Happens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 20 2014, 11:14 PM   #25
QuarkforNagus
Lieutenant
 
QuarkforNagus's Avatar
 
Re: Can TOS be appreciated by younger viewers?

Shat Happens wrote: View Post
You *hated* Kirk? that's a new one for me.
Yeah. I sometimes feel complex emotions for fictional characters.

It didn't make sense to me that he was always taking Spock and McCoy away with him on ground expeditions. Its irresponsible.
QuarkforNagus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 21 2014, 12:21 AM   #26
Maurice
Vice Admiral
 
Maurice's Avatar
 
Location: Maurice in San Francisco
Re: Can TOS be appreciated by younger viewers?

If you can appreciate older fims and TV shows period, you can probably appreciate it. If not, likely not.

If you're hung up on Kirk going out on landing parties, then 60s TV isn't for you. The leads always put themselves in danger. It's true of Captain Crane on Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea, too.
__________________
* * *
"If you wanted to get a good meeting... just go in and
say 'darker, grittier, sexier' and whatever."
—Glen Larson, 2010
Maurice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 21 2014, 12:25 AM   #27
plynch
Commodore
 
plynch's Avatar
 
Location: Outer Graceland
View plynch's Twitter Profile
Re: Can TOS be appreciated by younger viewers?

Apparently, since my kids love it.
__________________
Author of Live Like Louis! Inspirational Stories from the Life of Louis Armstrong, http://livelikelouis.com
plynch is online now   Reply With Quote
Old February 21 2014, 01:11 AM   #28
Lubitsch
Cadet
 
Re: Can TOS be appreciated by younger viewers?

Galileo7 wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
I actually find TOS faster paced than the modern Trek series.
Agree.
And statistically you're both right. On average TOS is cut a second faster per season than TNG and DS9. I haven't enough TV series comparison data to check if TOS is particularily fast for its time or TNG and DS9 slow, but both series rarely resort to the rapid cutting from actor to actor TOS used.
About the datedness ... ANY artistic product is dated by the time specific influences, just wait a few decades and then look back at the current production. It's just that most people are so completely caught up in the predominant current aesthetic that they find diverging styles odd and dated or campy. Basically there's no reason to prefer one mode of expression to another, slower or faster speed, expressive or minimal acting, lots of camera movement and variation or very little of it, all of them have their legitimation. Contrary to popular perception film language hasn't changed that much since the mid20s.
Generally TOS benefits from some clever stories and ideas, some may be blunt but that's quite fine in the Jonathan Swift tradition. There's mostly an excellent pacing and the series has an excellent dynamic lead actor in William Shatner who manages to make a rather conventional character believable and multi-dimensional. The direction ranges from average to inspired, the effects partly could have been better which is mostly due to the too low budget.
Nevertheless I don't see any need to find excuses for the series on most artistic grounds. It's however unfortunate that there were somy trashy episodes which merge a sexist attitude towards women, silly TV action fistfight plotting and similar vices.
Lubitsch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 21 2014, 02:55 AM   #29
CommishSleer
Fleet Captain
 
CommishSleer's Avatar
 
Location: At the After Party Still...
View CommishSleer's Twitter Profile
Re: Can TOS be appreciated by younger viewers?

QuarkforNagus wrote: View Post
I had the same problem when i watched tos.

I feel like the storylines were purile compared to the more politically-based ds9.

And it didn't help that I hated the captain.
See I find the politically-based DS9 plots a bit boring myself. Current political machinations are idiotic enough but the politics of imaginary future civilisations are even more tedious to me.

I suppose the DS9/TNG episodes I like don't involve those complex stories of the internal politics of the Klingon/Cardassian/Bajor worlds.

If you say that the TOS plots are all puerile perhaps you are not 'getting' them.
CommishSleer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 21 2014, 07:09 AM   #30
Lance
Commodore
 
Lance's Avatar
 
Location: The Enterprise's Restroom
Re: Can TOS be appreciated by younger viewers?

I've always considered myself blessed to be able to place myself in the mindset of an era before watching a piece of older media. Whether it's a silent movie, a piece of 1960s TV or even newsreels, I find it very easier to put aside the differences in culture and age and watch them with a free mind.

I do understand why there is this kind of "barrier" there for some younger viewers though. Not everybody can make that "leap of faith", and look at things in the context of their era, even when they are activiely *trying* to do so. This is getting especially harder with how far drama has moved in the last ten years alone. The dissonance is getting larger all the time.

I think ultimately it's a personal taste thing. Some people just can't get their head around old stuff, while others find modern drama baffling, and a third group can watch both. No shame in any of it.
Lance 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 03:00 AM.

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